On Sunday, an independent pan-European commission on climate and health issued a clear call: Europe and the World Health Organization must strengthen their health response to global warming. The group, chaired by former Icelandic Prime Minister Katrín Jakobsdóttir, comprises thirteen scientists and former ministers. The tone is measured, almost bureaucratic, but the message is resounding: current measures are not keeping pace with the already visible damage.
Because the commission isn't just talking about soaring temperatures or rising curves. It's listing very concrete impacts on health, food, water, energy, and safety, as if everything were now linked by a single taut thread. Behind the words lies a simple idea: what was once treated as an environmental issue is increasingly taking on the form of a full-fledged health crisis, with its deaths, its crises, and its costs.
The figures presented are undeniably stark. Air pollution linked to fossil fuels causes more than 600.000 deaths each year in the WHO European Region. The commission also cites approximately 63.000 deaths attributed to heat-related causes in Europe in 2024, and estimates that climate change will account for nearly 70% of deaths during summer heatwaves in 854 European cities in 2025. This is no longer theory; it's concrete data.
When the heatwave becomes a safety issue
On the eve of the 79th World Health Assembly, the commission is pushing the WHO to its limits. It is demanding that climate change be officially declared a "public health emergency of international concern." If this designation is not granted, the group is calling for at least a more politically motivated recognition: the current framework of the International Health Regulations is deemed "no longer adequate" to address the scale of the phenomenon. The tools designed for epidemics and isolated shocks are proving ineffective in the face of a crisis that is becoming entrenched and spiraling out of control.
European leaders are also in the crosshairs. The Commission is calling on heads of government to put climate change on the agenda of national security councils, a sign that the issue is moving beyond purely technical ministries to the level of sovereign decision-making. It also proposes ceasing to treat gross domestic product as the primary indicator and replacing it with indicators that integrate health, equity, and environmental sustainability. In a Europe attached to reassuring figures, the idea seems like a fundamental shift in approach.
Katrin Jakobsdottir sums up the political angle in one sentence: "The climate crisis poses a threat to our security, social cohesion, human rights, and health," and she demands a response "now." The very European question remains: how to translate words into action? Between summits, national agendas, and budgetary constraints, who will be willing to treat climate health as a government priority rather than a chapter in an annual report, with all that this implies for future energy choices and public policies?
Community
Comments
Comments are open, but protected against spam. Initial posts and comments containing links undergo manual review.
Be the first to comment on this article.