Skip to main content

Search

Moana, Oceania

Misria

Remember the arrivals of Mā’ohi ancestors who traversed the sea and surged upon the shores. Over generations, many groups explored and peopled te fenua, travelling around the archipelagos by va’a and on bare foot. Te nūna’a Mā’ohi built up the land, and the land built up te nūna’a, with fare, fa’apū, tumu, marae, and stories. Te fenua and te nūna’a shared experiences and developed knowledges, year in, year out, together. 

In other worlds, those we call popa’āwere knowing and being in very different ways. Over time, te popa’ābuilt physical, spiritual, and epistemic walls to imagine a separation between themselves and the land. They dreamed of knowing without relation, and called it “objectivity.” Adrift in the violent nightmares of their mindless fantasies, te popa’ābecame ungrounded. They tried to fill this existential void through stories of supremacism, which they acted out through projects of transoceanic conquest. In their empty confusion, te popa’ācame to te fenua Mā’ohi with greed, envy, arrogance, disease, and weapons of mass destruction. 

Whether through deliberate genocide or oblivious indifference, popa’āarrivals decimated Mā’ohi communities, as local populations fell by 80% to 90%. This formative trauma foreshadowed disasters to come. Te popa’āstole te fenua’s physical wealth on a massive scale, and then imposed a nuclear weapons testing program, bringing radioactive waste, cancer, and other illness. Te popa’ātimed the introduction of mass tourism with atomic testing, to obscure the social, economic, and environmental impacts of the nuclear program. They deceived ta’ata Mā’ohi with empty stories, progressively luring many ta’ata into a modern nuclear-tourism future of individualism, wage labor, cash economies, consumer advertising, broadcast entertainment, artificial scarcity, and nuclear family subdivisions. Te popa’āsought to break the bond between te ta’ata and te fenua. They did not know, this bond cannot be broken. 

The popa’āproject of supremacist colonial modernization is ongoing. But so is the Mā’ohi project of knowing and growing with the land. 

Tahitian language glossary

fare house(s), building(s)

feafea (i) thinking (of, about)

fenua land(s), territory(ies), world(s)

fa’apū garden(s); place(s) for growing crops

nūna’a people, peoples, nation(s)

Mā’ohi Indigenous to French Polynesia

marae ceremonial pavilion(s)

miti salt water; sea(s)

o of

popa’ā the people who think they are white

te the, a, an, some

ta’ata person, people, human(s)

tumu tree(s); root(s)

va’a canoe(s); sailing canoe(s)

Photo: Maupiti lagoon. Text, photo and layout by Teo Akande Wickland. Made with Mā’ohi, Black American, Latinx, queer, feminist and modern/colonial knowledges.

Wickland, Teo Akande. "Feafea i te miti o te fenua ." In 4S Paraconference X EiJ: Building a Global Record, curated by Misria Shaik Ali, Kim Fortun, Phillip Baum and Prerna Srigyan. Annual Meeting of the Society of Social Studies of Science. Honolulu, Hawai'i, Nov 8-11, 2023

NIEHS Dashboard Data Sources

tschuetz

GitHub Repository

“To empower additional modeling efforts, the complete time series of all daily PVI scores and data are available at https://github.com/COVID19PVI/data. “

12 Key Indicators

“[The authors] assembled U.S. county- and state-level datasets into 12 key indicators across four major domains: current infection rates (infection prevalence, rate of increase), baseline population concentration (daytime density/traffic, residential density), current interventions (social distancing, testing rates), and health and environmental vulnerabilities (susceptible populations, air pollution, age distribution, comorbidities, health disparities, and hospital beds).”

Three types of modeling

“Our modeling efforts directly address the discussion in [6], by contextualizing factors such as racial differences with corrections for socioeconomic factors, health resource allocation, and co-morbidities, plus highlighting place- based risks and resource deficits that might explain spatial distributions. Specifically, three types of modeling efforts were performed and are regularly updated. First, epidemiological modeling on cumulative case- and death-related outcomes provides insights into the epidemiology of the pandemic. Second, dynamic time-dependent modeling provides similar outcome estimates as national-level models, but with county-level resolution. Finally, a Bayesian machine learning approach provides data-driven, short-term forecasts. “

Blackness and PM 2.5

“With respect to factors affecting COVID-19 related mortality, we find that the proportion of Black residents and the PM2.5 index of small-particulate air pollution are the most significant predictors among those included, reinforcing conclusions from previous reports[7]. An increase of one percentage point of Black residents is associated with a 3.3% increase in the COVID-19 death rate. The effect of a 1 g/m3 increase in PM2.5 is associated with an approximately 16% increase in the COVID-19 death rate, a value at the high end of a previously reported confidence interval from a report in late April 2020[7] when deaths had reached 38% of the current total.”

Machine learning and prediction

“To accurately predict future cases and mortality, it is necessary to account for the fluid nature of the data. Accordingly, we developed a Bayesian spatiotemporal random-effects model that jointly describes the log-observed and log-death counts to build local forecasts. Log-observed cases for a given day are predicted using known covariates (e.g., population density, social distancing metrics), a spatiotemporal random-effect smoothing component, and the time- weighted average number of cases for these counts. This smoothed time-weighted average is related to a Euler approximation of a differential equation; it provides modeling flexibility while approximating potential mechanistic models of disease spread. The smoothed case estimates are used in a similar spatiotemporal model predicting future log-death counts based on a geometric mean estimate of the estimated number of observed cases for the previous seven days as well as the other data streams. The resulting county-level predictions and corresponding confidence intervals are shown (Fig. 1)."

Source: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343642027_The_COVID-19_Pandemi…

US NIEHS Dashboard Creators and Curators

tschuetz

Skylar W. Marvel1, John S. House2, Matthew Wheeler2, Kuncheng Song1, Yihui Zhou1, Fred A. Wright1,3, Weihsueh A. Chiu4, Ivan Rusyn4, Alison Motsinger-Reif2*, David M. Reif1*

Affiliations:

1 Bioinformatics Research Center, Department of Biological Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA.

2 Biostatistics and Computational Biology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709, USA.

3 Department of Statistics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA

4 Veterinary Integrative Biosciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77845, USA.

US NIEHS Dashboard Types of Data

tschuetz

“Data sources in the current model (version 11.2.1) include the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for emergency response and hazard mitigation planning (Horney et al. 2017), testing rates from the COVID Tracking Project (Atlantic Monthly Group 2020), social distancing metrics from mobile device data ( https://www.unacast.com/covid19/social-distancing-scoreboard), and dynamic measures of disease spread and case numbers ( https://usafacts.org/issues/coronavirus/). Methodological details concerning the integration of data streams—plus the complete, daily time series of all source data since February 2020 and resultant PVI scores—are maintained on the public Github project page (COVID19PVI 2020). Over this period, the PVI has been strongly associated with key vulnerability-related outcome metrics (by rank-correlation), with updates of its performance assessment posted with model updates alongside data at the Github project page (COVID19PVI 2020).”

Source: https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/EHP8690

US NIEHS Dashboard Motivations

tschuetz

Empowering local actoors

“We present the PVI Dashboard as a dynamic container for contextualizing these disparities. It is a modular tool that will evolve to incorporate new data sources and analytics as they emerge (e.g., concurrent flu infections, school and business reopening statistics, heterogeneous public health practices). This flexibility positions it well as a resource for integrated prioritization of eventual vaccine distribution and monitoring its local impact. The PVI Dashboard can empower local and state officials to take informed action to combat the pandemic by communicating interactive, visual profiles of vulnerability atop an underlying statistical framework that enables the comparison of counties and the evaluation of the PVI’s component data.”

US NIEHS Dashboard Visualization

tschuetz

Built with toxicology knowledge

“The software used to generate PVI scores and profiles from these data is freely available at https://toxpi.org

General visualization capabilities

“The interactive visualization within the PVI Dashboard is intended to communicate factors underlying vulnerability and empower community action [...] The visualization and quantification of county-level vulnerability indicators are displayed by a radar chart, where each of the 12 indicators comprises a “slice” of the overall PVI profile. On loading, the Dashboard displays the top 250 PVI profiles (by rank) for the current day. The data, PVI scores, and predictions are updated daily, and users can scroll through historical PVI and county outcome data. Individual profiles are an interactive map layer with numerous display options/filters that include sorting by overall score, filtering by combinations of slice scores, clustering by profile similarity (i.e. vulnerability “shape”), and searching for counties by name or state (Additional functionality is detailed in the Supplement). User selection of any county overlays the summary Scorecard and populates surrounding panels with county- specific information (Figure 1). The scrollable panels at left include plots of vulnerability drivers relative to the nation-wide distribution across all U.S. counties, with the location of the selected county delineated. The panels across the bottom of the Dashboard report cumulative county numbers of cases and deaths; timelines of cumulative cases, deaths, PVI score, and PVI rank; daily changes in cases and deaths for the most recent 14-day period (commonly used in reopening guidelines[6]; and predicted cases and deaths for a 7-day forecast horizon.”

Visualizing comparison and "peer counties"

“the multi-criteria filtering capabilities in the Dashboard were used to find a “peer county” for comparison. “

Source: https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/EHP8690 and https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343642027_The_COVID-19_Pandemi…

NIEHS Dashboard Data Sources

tschuetz

GitHub Repository

“To empower additional modeling efforts, the complete time series of all daily PVI scores and data are available at https://github.com/COVID19PVI/data. “

12 Key Indicators

“[The authors] assembled U.S. county- and state-level datasets into 12 key indicators across four major domains: current infection rates (infection prevalence, rate of increase), baseline population concentration (daytime density/traffic, residential density), current interventions (social distancing, testing rates), and health and environmental vulnerabilities (susceptible populations, air pollution, age distribution, comorbidities, health disparities, and hospital beds).”

Three types of modeling

“Our modeling efforts directly address the discussion in [6], by contextualizing factors such as racial differences with corrections for socioeconomic factors, health resource allocation, and co-morbidities, plus highlighting place- based risks and resource deficits that might explain spatial distributions. Specifically, three types of modeling efforts were performed and are regularly updated. First, epidemiological modeling on cumulative case- and death-related outcomes provides insights into the epidemiology of the pandemic. Second, dynamic time-dependent modeling provides similar outcome estimates as national-level models, but with county-level resolution. Finally, a Bayesian machine learning approach provides data-driven, short-term forecasts. “

Blackness and PM 2.5

“With respect to factors affecting COVID-19 related mortality, we find that the proportion of Black residents and the PM2.5 index of small-particulate air pollution are the most significant predictors among those included, reinforcing conclusions from previous reports[7]. An increase of one percentage point of Black residents is associated with a 3.3% increase in the COVID-19 death rate. The effect of a 1 g/m3 increase in PM2.5 is associated with an approximately 16% increase in the COVID-19 death rate, a value at the high end of a previously reported confidence interval from a report in late April 2020[7] when deaths had reached 38% of the current total.”

Machine learning and prediction

“To accurately predict future cases and mortality, it is necessary to account for the fluid nature of the data. Accordingly, we developed a Bayesian spatiotemporal random-effects model that jointly describes the log-observed and log-death counts to build local forecasts. Log-observed cases for a given day are predicted using known covariates (e.g., population density, social distancing metrics), a spatiotemporal random-effect smoothing component, and the time- weighted average number of cases for these counts. This smoothed time-weighted average is related to a Euler approximation of a differential equation; it provides modeling flexibility while approximating potential mechanistic models of disease spread. The smoothed case estimates are used in a similar spatiotemporal model predicting future log-death counts based on a geometric mean estimate of the estimated number of observed cases for the previous seven days as well as the other data streams. The resulting county-level predictions and corresponding confidence intervals are shown (Fig. 1)."

Source: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343642027_The_COVID-19_Pandemi…

US NIEHS Dashboard Creators and Curators

tschuetz

Skylar W. Marvel1, John S. House2, Matthew Wheeler2, Kuncheng Song1, Yihui Zhou1, Fred A. Wright1,3, Weihsueh A. Chiu4, Ivan Rusyn4, Alison Motsinger-Reif2*, David M. Reif1*

Affiliations:

1 Bioinformatics Research Center, Department of Biological Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA.

2 Biostatistics and Computational Biology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709, USA.

3 Department of Statistics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA

4 Veterinary Integrative Biosciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77845, USA.

pece_annotation_1524490823

rumil.rana

In this article, it is comparing how polluted Newark is compared to the country mentioning facts such as Newark residents face the nation's second greatest risk due to diesel emissions, the city being the nation's largest trash incinerator in the Northeast, and 25% of the school children in Newark face asthma which is double compared to the nation's average rate.