This week's Calgary Herald column from yours truly looks at two controversial resolutions recently passed by delegates at the annual conference of the Canadian Medical Association:
In a conflict between evidence-based policy and emotion-based policy, one would expect physicians to be clearly on the side of the former.
So it is therefore disheartening to see Canadian doctors embracing policies that seem devoid of evidence and instead rely primarily on empty emotional rhetoric. If the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) cannot be counted on as a defender of evidence-based policy, then the cause will suffer immensely.
At their annual conference earlier this month, CMA delegates voted 84 per cent in favour of a ban on mixed martial arts (MMA), a sport which now commands a huge following across North America.
A press release quoted a CMA past-president as saying, “this so-called 'sport' is savage and brutal and its aim is the disability of the opponent completely.”
Words like “savage” and “brutal” might be effective in appealing to emotion, but where’s the evidence?
For so many members of such a prestigious organization to advocate the criminalization of what’s now become a major sport in North America, surely they must have some evidence to back up their position?
Well, when asked by the Vancouver Province about ring deaths in MMA, the BC doctor behind the resolution said, “I actually don’t know.”
In fact, there have been a total of two documented deaths in MMA – none at all in UFC, the main MMA promotion. UFC has taken steps to improve safety for its fighters, and it would seem much more productive for the medical profession to contribute to that, rather than pushing for a ban.
Has the CMA given any consideration whatsoever to the dangers of pushing this sport underground? What these sports need is regulation and oversight – not criminalization.
Where does it all end? The CMA is already on record in calling for a ban on boxing.
Professional wrestling, scripted though it is, certainly has its share of concussions and other head injuries – and the tragic consequences those can lead to.
Should we ban professional football? We are getting a clearer picture of just how serious the concussion problem is in that sport. Moreover, we’re learning more about the long-term impacts on the brain of such injuries.
Merits aside, the participants in MMA are consenting adults who are well aware of the risks. It is the height of arrogance for the CMA to make decisions on their behalf.
It’s especially ironic that as the CMA scolded the news media for “singling out” the MMA policy, the CMA is guilty of the same offense: “singling out” MMA and “singling out” energy drinks.
CMA delegates also voted in favour of stricter government regulation of energy drinks, including mandatory listing of caffeine content.
However, caffeine content already is listed on the vast majority of energy drinks sold in Canada. Also included on most cans are warnings about caffeine consumption and a fairly plain warning that the product “is not recommended for children”.
This particular policy comes on the heels of a July editorial published in the prestigious Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ).
The editorial correctly notes that most energy drinks contain anywhere from 80 – 140 mg of caffeine – some are slightly higher.
The editorial fails to note, however, that similar or higher caffeine levels are found in many popular offerings at the major coffee chains: iced cappuccinos, café lattes, and “Frappuccinos”, just to name a few.
You won’t find caffeine content listed on the sides of those products, nor will you find any suggestion that children avoid them.
Beyond anecdotes and assumptions, where’s the evidence on caffeine consumption amongst Canadian children? Where’s the evidence showing that energy drinks are a disproportionate part of the problem?
There’s no missing the parallel between MMA and energy drinks: both appeal largely to young men, both are relatively new phenomena, both seem strange and overly aggressive to outsiders, and therefore both are vilified by those prone to knee-jerk and visceral reactions.
If the Canadian Medical Association wishes to raise awareness about these and other potential health risks, then simply present us with the evidence.
For a group like the CMA, the dramatics and hyperbole are most unbecoming.
No comments:
Post a Comment