13 August 2011 | NewScientist | 27

Dean is a rebel without a car.Meanwhile, use of everything

else, from bikes and buses to trains and trams, is still going up. But even that trend may reverse. Schipper says we may be approaching a point of “peak travel” of all sorts. People just won’t see the need to move around so much.

Of course, environmentalists shouldn’t get carried away. In the developing world, the car boom is only now getting under way, despite gridlock in cities from Shanghai to São Paulo. That trend makes any claim of an impending global peak car far-fetched.

The industrialised world still has plenty of less-green trends too. Falling car occupancy is one. In the US, the average car on the average journey carries 1.7 people, half a person less than in 1970. So even if we individually travel less, our cars may travel just as much. Likewise, the continuing trend for bigger and more powerful cars is wiping out the gains from more fuel-efficient vehicles. And sometimes we simply replace driving with flying.

But the good news is that those straight lines on the planners’ graphs predicting ever rising car-kilometres and ever-worsening carbon emissions from internal combustion engines are being proved wrong.

Planners need to take note. And, if they have any sense, they will start to reinforce these trends with improved public transport, an end to urban sprawl and more investment in inner cities.

Some think car use will revive if and when economies recover. But it looks like something more profound is going on. Florida calls it a “great reset” in society that will have profound consequences – not least for the environment. Even our most treasured consumer aspirations can have a peak. Enough can be enough. n

Fred Pearce is New Scientist ’s environment consultant

Comment on these stories at newscientist.com/opinion

Tell me about your libel nightmare with the US medical-device maker NMT Medical.I was a principal cardiologist in a clinical trial to test whether using an artificial device to close a hole in the heart could help reduce migraines. NMT Medical made the device and sponsored the trial. During analysis of the trial results, I was concerned that important data were being omitted from the papers being prepared for publication, and that the data presented were inaccurate and skewed in favour of the device. I complained to the trial steering committee but important changes were not made. I decided to speak out and the company threatened to sue me.

But you went public regardless?Yes, I gave a speech about my concerns at a big cardiology conference in the US in 2007. A journalist from the US cardiology news website, theheart.org, heard my speech and wrote a report about it. NMT Medical started legal action against me.

The way NMT Medical behaved was scandalous in my view. They tried to bully me into silence. For the first year, my salary went straight to lawyers. After that my lawyers accepted a no-win, no-fee agreement. Had it gone to trial it would have cost £3.5 million. I didn’t have that sort of money, so had I Iost I would have been financially ruined.

But it never went to trial…No. In April this year the company announced it was going bankrupt. It was a huge relief. The liquidators decided not to pursue the case, and on 29 July a judge formally closed the case.

How does it feel now the case has ended?I’m pleased it’s over, but I’m also annoyed that English and Welsh law allows this sort of bullying and attempts to silence legitimate scientific debate. How many times has it been used to silence other people who have genuine concerns? I know from personal experience that, in this case, it stopped a number of people from speaking out.

You took a big risk in fighting the case. Why? Because I am a doctor. It’s as simple as that. This is

One minute with…

Peter Wilmshurst

a cardiac device and two came loose when implanted during the trial, and that is potentially lethal. The original paper did not say that. The question is: why were other doctors not speaking out?

What must happen now so that others won’t have to go through the same ordeal as you?The most important thing is to establish a public-interest defence in English and Welsh libel law, so that doctors and scientists can present their data without being sued.

An American company was suing you for something published on an American website, for an American audience. How could they accuse you of defamation in the UK?Good question! They argued that they wanted to protect their reputation in the UK, when their device was used by fewer than 25 cardiologists here. It’s doubtful whether anyone in the UK who used the device would have read the article before NMT Medical started to sue me. It’s madness. Interview by David Cohen

English libel law was used to threaten me, but I had to speak out, says the cardiologist sued for voicing safety concerns

IAN

ro

TH/r

oYA

l SH

rEW

SBU

rY H

oSP

ITA

l

ProfilePeter Wilmshurst is a consultant cardiologist at the royal Shrewsbury Hospital in the UK. In 2003 he won the HealthWatch Award in recognition of his exposure of misconduct in research

110813_Op_Comment.indd 27 8/8/11 12:04:29