I think that this is interestingly written and an interesting comparison between your own experiences in Singapore and the Naluwan grandma. What do you think can be applied to your final piece of work from this fieldnote? Do you think that your experiences in Singapore has shaped you to think differently and feel differently from an Amis person living in Naluwan?
I am particularly interested in comparative approaches on how different sites (and academics in those places or studying them) are thinking about COVID in their localities. How are people dealing with issues of trust and information in an era when entire archives are in danger (like the police archives in Guatemala which had been rescued in the past decade and are now in danger). This question expands beyond COVID but has become crucial in the context of Ecuador where reliable data is hard to come by. Another important aspect for us is how indigenous communities are fairing amid the pandemic (here a fabulous article on the terrible situation in Brazil—which is not so different to Ecuador's). This touches on issues of communication, infrastructure, language, systemic racism, and more. Finally, I am also interested in ways in which we might be a able to contribute to some of these issues from our academic spaces. Collaborators (which can take many forms) are certainly welcomed.
I'm a co-founder of Kaleidos - Center for Interdisciplinary Ethnography, a space for academic experimentations supported by two top ranked universities in Ecuador (University of Cuenca and FLACSO-Ecuador). We are located in Cuenca, where I am assistant professor of medical anthropology. Together with a team of researchers we have been tracking covid19 with a specific focus on Latin America through Spanish language podcasts, collective texts, webinars, and online forums.
My current ethnographic interest is on documenting data distrust networks from the neighborhood scale to the national level in Ecuador, and how these networks have produced distinctive approaches (and failures) to the current pandemic.
I was interested in learning about how air pollution has been talked/researched in the New Orleans area. Mainly, the need to highlight local specificities and historical analysis. A 1950s study on air pollution in New Orleans (Air Pollution and New Orleans Asthma), for instance, documented asthma incidence among black communities (sadly the article still uses the N word), and its relationship to underground fire burning in nearby dumps. The study is more comprehensive and did a census in part of the city as well as a number of medical tests on 84 individuals.
A second study, this one from 2007, documented asthma in children (Prevalence of Indoor Allergen Exposures among New Orleans Children with Asthma). It has a relevant focus of the differences between document indoor allergen exposure in different areas of the US and how subtropical weather in NOLA plays an important role in the kinds of allergies that children with asthma face. One of the main findings of the study can be summarized in the following quote “our data show that asthmatic children in New Orleans may be exposed to a greater number of allergens at moderate to high levels compared to asthmatic children living in other inner cities and to the general population.”
Finally, a third reference, the book Race, Place, and Environmental Justice After Hurricane Katrina: Struggles to Reclaim, Rebuild, and Revitalize New Orleans and the Gulf Coast talks about something, others have already pointed out (@Omar Perez Figueroa for instance) regarding areas that undergo dramatic change and hardship after natural disasters like hurricane Katrina and Rita. This book, particularly chapter 5 (though I can’t access the full text) explains the highly toxic environment that resulted (and remains) in the New Orleans area due to little clean-up action following the disasters. Lack of funding, deference to poorly resourced local authorities, and policy-failure all affect New Orleans (and many of our sites of research) particularly the fate of vulnerable communities.
The report encompasses reports on the proceedings of the UN Scientific Comittee during its 60th session, May 2013. The UN report presents an unbiased plethora of data surmising Fukushima radiation exposure to both human an biological life. It primarily focuses on 2 reports detailing aspects of radiation exposure during the 2011 nuclear accident. The first report gives estimated levels of radiation experienced by individuals and non-human biota. Human individuals estimates are based on age and ongoing proximity to the accident. Evacuated adult citizens had an estimated exposure <10 mSv, while workers experienced doses >10mSv, with the highest exposure an estimated 100 mSv. It places these values within the context of lifelong anticipated exposure and international expected exposures. This first report also briefly discusses effects beyond radiation, including the adverse outcomes thousands faced by evacuating. The second report concentrates on radiation exposure of children during the accident. While it concludes longer epidemological studies are needed to accurately assess the prevailing biolgogical effects, several important facts are highlighted. At a given radiation dose, children are more at risk of tumor induction than adults. In addition to this increased radiosensitivity (partially due to physical factors such as size), children also demonstrate increased prevalence of several cancers. These include leaukemia, brain, and thyroid cancers, all of which show radiosensitivity. The report also suggests narrowing the scope of inquiry, as radiation-induced cancers can be influenced by factors such as age and gender.
The agency itself is an illustration of emergency response; before BSVAC ambulance response time averaged around thirty minutes-- a far cry from the standard eight minutes aimed for by ambulatory agencies around the Capital region. The original goal of BSVAC was to cut down these times, thereby increasing patient outcomes and creating a sense of safety in a community rippling with gang and drug violence. In addition to this initial goal, BSVAC also reaches out to the surrounding community, teaching CPR, first-aid, and BLS to Bed-Stuy residents. This aids in emergency response, as CPR and first-aid measures can be delivered quickly to a patient even before the ambulance arrives.
The latter part of the piece addresses current plans to combat the cholera epidemic sparked during relief efforts post-quake. However, due to many of the factors discussed earlier in the article, donors are hesitant to put money towards efforts. Moreover, the UN's plan worked on a 10-year timeline given the appropriate funding; stalling finances have pushed that timeline out to almost 40 years. Currently a lawsuit is being put forth by the Haitian government to obtain the promised money and support from the UN.
1) Definition of humanitarian crisis: This article denotes a multitude of situations, all of which seem to have a drastic effect on human health and well-being. That being said, some crisis or armed conflicts are not deemed a humanitarian crisis. According to several sources, the definition is incredibly subjective, and must be event(s) which harm the health, safety, or well-being of a community or large group of people.
2) Humanitarian worker protections: At this time, there does not seem to be a true movement to legally prosecute those who harm humanitarian or aid workers. However, within the Geneva Convention and later Protocols, there are legal protections for non-combatants during armed conflicts; this is in addition to a UN Security Council Resolution (1502) which gives greater protection to aid workers, classifying attacks on them as a war crime.
3) Non-combatants: This is where definitions of humanitarian aid workers and their protections under both the Geneva Convention and UN Resolution fall apart. The current climate and disregard for international sanctions has left many aid workers at the mercy of those who do not recognize the UN or global entities. As such, they are faced with the choice to remain non-combatants (those who do not carry or use a weapon during a conflict) and most likely be harmed; or to carry defensive arms and proclaim themselves a combatant, and thus be a target. Hence, the difficulty in being a health care worker in an age of general militarization. This is also a topic heavily discussed in the book Trauma by Dr. James Cole. As a member of the special operations, Dr. Cole was always well within danger; he discusses the choice to carry or not carry a weapon, and how discharging the weapon (even in self-defense) changes the nature of the health care provider and their position in an armed conflict.
The policy does not make any specific mentions of how to deal with vulnerable populations. However, if one were to consider the nature of New York, it can be argued that the city's entire population is vulnerable to outbreak. As a hub of trade, finance, travel, and business, New York is at a considerably higher risk than a city without this high metropolitan activity. The policy does include measures on how to treat individuals who show signs and symptoms in public locations, but does not mandate testing or health checks for individuals involved in transport, travel, or who have limited access to health care (the homeless).