Search

 In 1991, the Public Health Service articulated a vision for primary prevention in Strategic Plan for the Elimination of Childhood Lead Poisoning, a departure from previous federal policy focused on finding and treating lead-poisoned children. This publication detailed a 15-year strategy for primary prevention and offered a cost-benefit analysis to demonstrate the monetized benefits of this approach. A strong national effort to follow this strategy developed but was eventually abandoned.

The organized campaign against universal screening began in California, where letters questioning the reported prevalence of elevated BLL began appearing in pediatric journals and newspapers. These letters acknowledged receiving editorial assistance from Kaiser Permanente Foundation Hospitals and argued that money spent on screening, treatment and abatement would be harmful to more worthy public health efforts. The AAP president took up this attack on universal screening as well, and efforts for universal screening were gradually eroded. 

Needleman identifies racism and the belief that lead poisoning “is a product of poor mothering, not of environmental pollution” as a driving factor shaping lead detection and prevention efforts (or the lack thereof) … “this weighting of personal choice or behavior over environment is a tool used to shift responsibility away from health authorities or polluters and onto the victim” (1875).

"Infrastructure is material (roads, pipes, sewers, and grids); it is social (institutions, economic systems, and media forms); and it is philosophical (intellectual trajectories: dreamt up by human ingenuity and nailed down in concrete forms). Infrastructure has a capaciousness and scope that makes it both an infinitely useful concept and a concept that is open to facile misinterpretation or to being encumbered by overuse."

Infrastructure as paradox

• Infrastructures, paradoxically, both mitigate and magnify precarity in the Anthropocene.

• The overtly human-centered orientation of infrastructure led us to our third paradox: the purpose of infrastructure is to mitigate risk, yet it also introduces new risks. 

The article talks about improving pollution in industrial neighbourhood but they forget to realize that there is water contamination in Newark and also the fact that what can be done to improve pollution rather than just stating to improve pollution but they forget about the pollution thats already been emitted, what can be done regarding that. 

The vulnerability mentioned in this article is about pollution occurred due to port traffic, waste facilities, and industrial plants which cause increased risk of cancer. 

Despite air pollution being a problem for every group, this article specifies children as the victims. For example, the author quotes Congressmen Donald M. Payne, Jr saying, "Every single day, children in Newark are exposed to harmful levels of pollution from the port and other sources that rob them of their health, just because of where they live" (Adams). Adams most likely did this to show the severity of this problem by shedding light onto the victims. Air pollution also increases the chances for children developing asthma. Adams writes, "one in four Newark children suffers from asthma, and the hospitalization rate is 150 percent greater for kids living in the city than in the rest of the state, and more than thirty times the rate nationwide."

Air pollution in Newark that is caused by port traffic, waste facilities, industrial plants, and trucks. Some of the air pollution in New Jersey is also caused by air pollution drifting in from Pennsylvania.