I have been involved in some medical research in the past, v. distant past, but it was nothing like the effort that gave the MediClim Index its statistical footing. About eighteen months ago weather/health was on a back burner. Then Denis called me up and asked if I'd like to join a research team he was putting together to apply for one of the grants the Federal Govt of the day was offering to groups who wished to study climate change and associated environmental effects on people.... and to try and make some predictions that would help government decision making in the future... Now, I've heard a lot of critiscism about Canadian governments of every stripe not doing enough for environmental research. For my part I'd like to say that the money offered for each group in 2006/7 was considerable, and valuable, and a far sighted effort. In the field of weather and health it was a Canadian government initiative that funded an international conference back in 1992 on the subject, at which speakers from around the world gathered to present their ideas. That was back in the day when climate change was not even thought of. I think that showed a lot of moxy and foresight on the part of politicians and civil servants... Back to the present: Denis Bourque is meteorologist and we've been looking at weather and health together since 1986. He's very good at organizing, good at detail, and far better than me at counting. (I think the majority of docs are like me and are 'fuzzy logic' people. When you deal with disease and patients it's better that way, is my guess. "Could it be that? Is that what he really means?" goes through my mind at least once a working day.) The research team was to be headed by Prof Gordon McBean, who's a geography prof at University of Western Ontario. In the end there were eight of us, two docs, five scientists (including meteorologists) and a statistician. Along the way others joined and left the group as we made our way through a process of comparing disease presentations at the e.r. dept of several Ontario hospitals with weather perameters. The grant was applied for (Denis supervised that) and when the money was promised we got to work. Work... for my part it was that I had to get e.r. presentation statistics for two hospitals in T.O. (relax, the info was all anonymous) and offer suggestions at the three or four meetings the group had, and the numerous emails we wrote. About the quality of the info, about timing details, about weather stats and how they should be interpreted, how and when the results were to be sent out, who the statistician should be etc etc. Somewhere in the middle of all that it became clear that if you look at e.r. presentations in Ontario and match them with weather perameters (temp, pressure, humidity, wind direction) there was NO correlation unless you put them together in synoptic weather analysis... which is what the MediClim Index is all about. (I hasten to add that it was very good of the group to let us compare the stats collected with MediClim values for each hospital for each period of time. They took us...Denis and I... at our word that there was something important to be found, but it was their decision that let MediClim in.) I remember Denis emailing me and saying "It worked! The stats prove out MediClim!" and the feeling of relief and elation that twenty years+ of effort had come to fruition. So, we have statistical backing for the concept that weather analysis, in the fashion of our MediClim Index, has bearing on human health. The door is open... Next blog I'll talk about what that means.