Philip Jong

Tomorrow Justice John Gomery will release his official report from the nine-month public inquiry which he chaired on the scandalous Canadian Sponsorship Program. Launched in 1996, the Sponsorship Program was created to promote federalism and unity across Canada, particularly within the province of Quebec that had past carried sentiments of separatism. When the auditor-general’s report in 2004 detailed questionable practices and gross mismanagement of the program fund, it sparked a national outcry that eventually forced the Government of Canada to announce a public inquiry. In the wake of this federal scandal, political alliances got divided, politicians fell in disgrace, and our nation became the unwanted center stage of political backstabbing, public mistrust, and backdoor illegal dealings. The Gomery Inquiry was equally scandalous, often befalling to the level of a public sideshow of personal ego and political hand-washing. Notwithstanding the monetary price tag Canada has already paid with this national fiasco, the Gomery Report will only serve to remind Canadians the other unmeasured price tag Canada will have to pay for years to come—the loss of our trust of our government to do what is best in our interest. 

For the past weeks the medical, political, and economic threats stemmed from the avian flu virus had grown on a global scale. Of particular concern is the H5N1 strain of the bird flu virus that exhibits marked homology to the deadly H1N1 strain which caused the Spanish flu of 1918 and infected an estimated 20-40 percent of the world’s population. First reported in 1997, the reemergence (or more properly, redetection) of this virus in the wild in both Asia and Europe has now created panics among the public health officials around the world, fearing that human-to-human transition of this virus will create an unstoppable pandemic.

While human deaths have been reported from the avian flu, current mode of transmission is still restricted from only birds to human. Still, European Health Commission was quick to declare last week the spread of bird flu from Asia into Europe to be a “global threat” requiring immediate international action. A less specific declaration had also been made previously by the World Health Organization which warned of a substantial risk of an influenza pandemic in the near future, most probably from the H5N1 strain. In Ottawa, health ministers from around the world will convene this week with the intent to strengthen the global response to this potential influenza pandemic in the making. If this effort is successful, it will stand in history as a precedent of a unified global cooperative effort in the prevention rather than treatment of a global disease.

In recent months reports of natural disasters have continuously dominated the news media. From Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in the US to the Tsunami and Earthquake in South Asia, the endless string of natural disasters this year has captured the world’s sympathy. Every day, sights and sounds of human suffering in the affected areas are recorded on film and broadcasted over the airwaves. The constant bombardment of humanitarian catastrophes has left all of us with little else but an utter sense of helplessness. We are fast experiencing disaster overload and tragedy fatigue, choosing instead to shelter ourselves from the world to protect our own sanity. Rather, in these times we must remind ourselves not to withhold our compassion for others who have been afflicted by such calamities, for they are tragic reminders that all things which we hold so dearly may be so easily taken away.

On September 25, an outbreak of respiratory illness began in a nursing home in Toronto, Canada. When neither the source nor the etiology of the outbreak could initially be identified by public health officials, media and public attention quickly grew on the developing outbreak. News agencies in the US and worldwide began to compare the virulent outbreak to that of SARS in 2003, despite no medical evidence existed to suggest the pathogen was that causing SARS. As the death toll from this outbreak rose, public fear was further heightened by the suggestion that a new or mutated virus might be the cause. A disconnect began to grow between the “real” truth and the “perceived” truth of the outbreak.

When the cause was finally identified to be due to Legionnaires’ disease, a known and not uncommon respiratory illness, the gap between these two versions of truth had grown so large that many of the public could no longer tell apart the factual and frictional elements of the outbreak. Proper delivery of public health must involve more than the prevention and treatment of diseases, but the education of the public (and the media) so that unjustified speculation and fear will not run rampant as they had during this public health crisis.

Last week Adrienne Clarkson stepped down and Michaelle Jean stepped in as the Governor General of Canada. Notwithstanding the polarized political sentiment carried by this new office, Canadians are again questioning the need to continue honoring our vestigial monarchial past with an appointed head of state. Proponents who favor abolishing this office cite the need for Canadians to finalize our political independence from Britain in today’s post-Elizabethan era. Other critics are dissatisfied with the unnecessary expenses incurred by such office that functions only to promote our continual subservient tie to the aging monarchial system.

As a Canadian, I feel that the symbol of Governor General can serve not only to honor our colonial past but to promote patriotism in Canada by being an ambassador of Canadians for Canadians. Bridging the relationship between the Governor General and Canadians on a grassroots level will not only silence its opponents but make all citizens in Canada proud of their colonial heritage.

Notwithstanding the human costs of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the long-term economic and social costs will be equally devastating and wide-reaching. In Canada, oil prices had risen dramatically since the disasters hit the US. Consumers had seen unparalleled increases in gasoline and diesel prices. Yet, many of the economic downfalls to come will be more pervasive and indirect. This is because, in today’s materialistic society driven by a resource-heavy economy, oils are essential in both the manufacturing of virtually all consumable products and the transportation of these manufactured products to markets. Business sectors, such as agricultural, energy, manufacturing, and transport industries among others that are heavy consumers of “non-green” fuels, will be severely stressed by the economic impacts of the US disasters. In turn, consumers will see prices rise over time in products and services provided by these sectors. Moreover, jobs from these industries will need to be relocated away from the affected regions, resulting in further unemployment and diversion of human resources in these areas. In the end, such economic and social costs are likely to be as immeasurable as the costs of human lives, and we will bear the consequences of such costs for years to come.

Last week, the Toronto District School Board was publicly cited for considering the establishment of a black-only school in the city. The motive was to improve public education for minorities by fostering an ethnic-sensitive learning environment with black teachers and Afro-centric curriculum. The public reaction towards this recommendation had been swift and polarized. The formal institution of racial segregation in schools had never been done in Canada. In United States, racial segregation in public schools existed until 1954 when the US Supreme Court ruled against the “separate but equal” doctrine of public education and required the desegregation of all schools across America. Today, racial divide and tension still prevail in our educational system that supposedly teaches tolerance, diversity, and multiculturalism. Regardless of the motive behind the decision, the establishment of a black-only school is simply a form of racial segregation in disguise. It will neither provide a more nurturing environment to minorities nor improve tolerance between different ethnic groups in the community. As an immigrant of Chinese descent myself, I have greatly benefited from a multicultural educational system that promotes ethnic diversity and racial tolerance. As Winston Churchill once said, “Those that fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it.” Enforcing segregation is not the answer; teaching tolerance is.

These days I see many infomercials and ads on television selling “miracle” pills that promise to cure a wide variety of ailments. Among the common health miracles made by these advertisements are promises such as weight loss, hair growth, and pain relief. These pills are sold as nutritional or dietary supplements in order to avoid the strict regulations existed in many countries that forbid false health claims and advertisements of pharmaceutics to the public. While government agencies had been successful in prosecuting many unscrupulous vendors and removing these offended products, the legal process was often slow and could not protect the public from the next “false” drug or “miracle” cure. Moreover, special interest groups in many countries had successfully lobbied their governments against the need for these supplements to provide the same level of scientific proofs to support their health claims as traditional pharmaceutics.

As a health professional myself, I see little difference between traditional drugs and so-called supplements. Any substance that is given outside of its natural form or concentration or extracted for the purpose of consumption for a health problem is a pharmaceutic, regardless of the origin and nature of the active ingredient. Even water can be toxic to the body in non-physiologic amount. In other words, there should only be one dividing line for all health products—ones that work and ones that do not work. Any other divide serves little to protect the public’s health.

Is truth simply the way we may explain most easily what we observe of the world around us? My work as a scientist demands that I continually question the perception of truth. Long ago, the Catholic Church hailed Ptolemy’s geocentric view of the universe as the truth to explain God’s creation of our world. When Copernicus proposed a simpler heliocentric model to predict the motion of planets in our solar system, his view was quickly scorned as a challenge to the biblical truth. Today, we know that the heliocentric view of the universe explains not only the motion of our planets but also the motion of planetary bodies in other galaxies. Yet, it will be wrong of us to choose the heliocentric view over the geocentric view just because it provides a simpler explanation of our universe. This is because while Occam’s Razor may dictate the principle of parsimony when selecting a theory to explain our world, the same principle may not guarantee that the chosen theory indeed represents the truth. In other words, truth is not simply the way we may explain most easily of the world around us. Truth does not stand alone. It stands besides all other truths of the universe. The only way to pursue truth is to continue to challenge existing belief with other truths, rather than accepting it in isolation.

Seeing the human tragedy brought on by Hurricane Katrina in the US has made me question my own readiness to survive in a similar disaster. We live in a structured society that is maintained by the laws of our land. These laws protect our liberty rights and uphold civil orders in our community. When our own survival is threatened, we quickly cast aside these laws and create our own. We ignore other individuals’ rights and place our own needs above others. Civil disobedience ensures and chaos runs rampant. The destruction by Hurricane Katrina extends beyond that of properties and human lives. It has destroyed our civil conducts and moral values that define us.