2015年9月5日 星期六

鉛水事件學習簿

如果每團烏雲也是有光明的銀邊,那麼麻麻煩煩的鉛水事件也有銀邊嗎?
處理鉛水事件很複雜,在醫管局已是跨醫院跨部門跨專科,再從醫管局跨到私家醫院,政府層面更是跨局跨署聯手應對。我在一個往來穿梭位置,見到好些用心處事的人,為免「鱔稿」之嫌,具體故事不能說,但風波裡見到好人好事,總也算是陽光的銀邊了。
這又是很好的學習機會。不是泛泛而言,甚麼「經一事長一智」。每個複雜環節都有知識在內,每一個難解之謎底下也藏有城市的一片真面貌。
原來建築界的大判二判運作是這樣難梳理;政治互動的攻防是如此複雜;關心居民與「消費」居民恐慌的分界線如此微妙,這些全都有學問,雖然不是我的那杯茶。
我學習發掘空間,讓相對理性和客觀的觀點能夠呈現出來,並且得到應有的尊重。這不容易。舉一個例:為鉛水超標的居民驗血是責無旁貸,幾個星期下來,化驗結果的數據累積了不少,能否分析一下,從中尋找啓示,再制訂下一階段的對策?
一項分析是,在已化驗的二千多個血樣本之中,少數超標,程度全屬非常輕微,血鉛水平最高的個案只有14.2 (幼童每百毫升血液含鉛44微克以上才在臨床疾病風險範圍,成人界線是50微克以上) 。現有的驗血模式有如大海撈針,可能並非最合理有效。是否應考慮集中力量,為生活居所食水受鉛污染較嚴重、接觸時間較長的居民檢驗?
這樣提出時,相反的意見可能是:驗血可不單是作為篩查,為尋找臨床病例,它也是讓可能受影響的居民安心。即使一萬人驗血有九千五百個結果完全正常,有臨床意義的病例沒幾個,起碼也是讓這九千多名居民和他們的家人安心啊。這就要學習在「醫學理性」和「安心理論」之間尋找平衡點。
香港應對鉛水污染也許偏於神經緊張,但這樣緊張也可以令壞事變好事:廣東省一些鄉村食水嚴重受污染致兒童發病,現在有新聞關注了。污染到那樣子,村鎮領導應要從速各備一本特大的鉛污染學習簿,以免丟官!

原載 《信報》「醫三百」專欄,201595日,經修節

2 則留言:

匿名 提到...

你是處長級的層次 , 鍾唔鍾意都好 , 政治都會拍門的 , 只要不是學「民望高」回應「講完」, 「理性醫官」回應「拉勻一世」等等 , 會少好多麻煩。

匿名 提到...

I have a question.
I'm in the US. I filter drinking water at home, using filter in a pitcher.
(Why I do that is not the point here. I used to use filter attached to a faucet before.)
It costs me (my family) about US$5 a month here. That is around HK$40.
If I use a generic brand it will costs even less, like 20% less.
I am not saying that all families in Hong Kong can afford it, but I imagine most can.
But I could be wrong. Some article in the media seems to imply (maybe I read it wrong)
that water filters are too expensive for an average family.
Is it the case? Can someone shed some light on it?
Are they talking about some other filters? Like some expensive filtration systems?
Or is it because people in Hong Kong eat out so much,
filtering water at home (the way I do it) isn't a solution or even part of a solution?

P.S. Just for comparison: I also have a small distillation machine.
I rarely use it though.
I guess (but I'm not too sure) that 3 gallons of distilled water
costs about US$1 (mostly cost of electricity).
Buying it from the store costs about 3 times as much.