Search

As a researcher, I’m interested in the political, ecological, and cultural debates around mosquito-borne diseases and the solutions proposed to mitigate them.

When we received the task, my first impulse was to investigate about the contemporary effects of anthropogenic climate change in mosquito-borne diseases in New Orleans. But I was afraid to make the same mistake that I did in my PhD research. I wrote my PhD proposal while based in the US, more specifically in New England, during the Zika epidemic, and proposed to understand how scientists were studying ecological climate change and mosquitoes in Brazil. However, once I arrived in the country the political climate was a much more pressing issue, with the dismantling of health and scientific institutions.

Thus, after our meeting yesterday, and Jason Ludwig’s reminder that the theme of our Field Campus is the plantation, I decided to focus on how it related to mosquitoes in New Orleans.

The Aedes aegypti mosquito and the yellow fever virus it can transmit are imbricated in the violent histories of settler-colonialism and slavery that define the plantation economy. The mosquito and the virus arrived in the Americas in the same ships that brought enslaved peoples from Africa. The city of New Orleans had its first yellow fever epidemic in 1796, with frequent epidemics happening between 1817 and 1905. What caused New Orleans to be the “City of the Dead,” as Kristin Gupta has indicated, was yellow fever. However, as historian Urmi Engineer Willoughby points out, the slave trade cannot explain alone the spread and persistance of the disease in the region: "Alterations to the landscape, combined with demographic changes resulting from the rise of sugar production, slavery, and urban growth all contributed to the region’s development as a yellow fever zone." For example, sugar cultivation created ideal conditions for mosquito proliferation because of the extensive landscape alteration and ecological instabilities, including heavy deforestation and the construction of drainage ditches and canals.

Historian Kathryn Olivarius examines how for whites "acclimatization" to the disease played a role in hierarchies with “acclimated” (immune) people at the top and a great mass of “unacclimated” (non-immune) people and how for black enslaved people "who were embodied capital, immunity enhanced the value and safety of that capital for their white owners, strengthening the set of racialized assumptions about the black body bolstering racial slavery."

As I continue to think through these topics, I wonder how both the historical materialities of the plantation and the contemporary anthropogenic changes might be influencing mosquito-borne diseases in New Orleans nowadays? And more, how the regions’ histories of race and class might still be shaping the effects of these diseases and how debates about them are framed?

1) early on the article, Dr. Good discuses how individuals would use the word "fainting" to described their tonic-clonic seizure episodes. This was quite divergent from the word "epilepsy" in Turkish, thus allowing the patient to distance themselves from the well-stigmatized diagnosis of epilepsy. It also served as a point of reference for what linguistic nuances could be expected during the course of the interview, as these can play a great deal into the narrative.

2) Dr. Good also discusses the work of Dr. Evelyn Early, who interviewed members of the Turkish female population. His description of Dr. Early's work states these narratives “allow the women she studied to develop an interpretation of the illness in relation to a local explanatory logic and the biographic context of the illness, to negotiate right action in the face of uncertainty, and to justify actions taken, thus embedding the illness and therapeutic efforts within local moral norms".

3) Dr. Good includes the story of Zeki Bey, an individual with generalized seizures for 15 years at the time of interaction. Dr. Good describes his narrative of his illness as being "[told with] immediacy, drama, and poignancy... His illness had a powerful and meaningful beginning, which gave shape and coherence to the larger narrative."

The main arguement of this article is that a large number of factors, such as demographic changes, economic development, gobal travel and commerce and conflict have heightened the risk of international disease outbreaks and international organizations like the WHO and national public health organizations are struggling to develop and adopt new and innovative protocols to cope with new threats.

1) Fukushima's nuclear safe guards followed the current accepted nuclear regulations. In addition to having back-up generators and short-term batteries to support the reactors during power failure, ownership had extensive emergency plans for tsunamis. These were executed and creative solutions were utilized with necessary. This then begs the question as to how such a well-prepared facility experience massive devastation.

2) Japan is known to be a first-world nation constantly innovating and exploring new technology, with an advanced economy and high emphasis on education. Dr. Schmid refers to members of the Japanese government as "scientifically trained, technologically savvy elites." While Dr. Schmid acknowledges nuclear energy to still be a murku field, Japanese officials represent the individuals most capable of making informed, knowledgeable decisions about nuclear facilities. This only further emphasizes her assertion that a set, elite organization needs to be created to handle nuclear emergencies.

3) While several organizations exist to discuss nuclear power on an international level, there is no entity which serves as a governing body over nuclear facilities. Nuclear emergencies very quickly spread from single-nation disasters to international events. Although there are many internationally recognized policies and guidelines, there is no body to ensure these are followed. Moreover, no single nation or organization at the present time has the fiscal capabilities or specialized knowledge to aid during nuclear disasters. 

Emergency response itself is not particularly addressed; the article, instead, focuses on the humanitarian efforts that typically spawn from multi-week and month long conflicts. These are not necessarily the first-line individuals, but rather the workers (such as MSF) which come in to provide aid in the middle, late, or final stages of a conflict. The report delves into the responsibilities and hurdles of dealing with sexual violence in humanitarian efforts, which includes both emergent and non-emergent care.  

This article is entirely about the shortcomings of emergency response, and how the history and traditions of the FDNY and NYPD got in the way of an effective response, resulting in communication barriers, an uncoordinated response, unknown and unaccounted responders, and even possibly avoidable deaths. Public health was not explicitly mentioned, as this article focused more on the efficacy of the multi-agency response itself.

When administering healthcare or combating epidemics, there's often an unaddressed social factor. Far more often, the focus remains on the scientific and biological aspects of the disease without delving into the social circumstances surrounding its prevalence. Healthcare typically narrows the scope to just medical intervention, instead of looking at the overarching conditions. Farmer and his colleagues give several examples of successful bio-social interventions; these methods allow physicians and healthcare workers to successfully treat patients in all aspects of the disease. Moreover, they contend that treating epidemics in this way helps to prevent the manifestation of social inequalities in healthcare.

This article examines the gaps in research concerning health care workers in "complex security environments". These work areas contain some sort of conflict, poverty or environmental issues, particularly those that are humanitarian or crisis settings, and are characterized by civil unrest. This, in turn, leads to an involvement of aid personnel-- this report primarily focuses on violence towards health care workers within these settings and the lack of information on this issue. It pays particular attention to discrepancies between peer-reviewed, academic research and general media commentary or articles.  

The distribution of scarce resources, specifically with healthcare, is a struggle faced by all institutions and how it is acted upon is heavily dependent on the culture and values of the people making the allocations. In France, a relatively wealthy country with a high standard of medical care available, the government has elected to make advanced medical care available to people who would not be able to obtain it in their respective countries of origin by granting them residence rights on a health basis. The article discusses the social factors behind this, the adaptation of the policy over time to meet new demands, and how a balance between ethical and moral obligations, overall public health interests, and equal opportunity of immigrants applying was developed.

The authors are Stephen Collier, PhD and Andrew Lakoff, PhD. Both hold associate professor positions-- the former at New University in NYC and the latter at USC Dornsife. Lakoff's research and publications seem to focus primarily on public health, global medicine, and medical anthropology. Collier, conversely, seems to primarily work on projects pertaining to government structure and its effects on human life. These include publications on economics, environment, historical, and biopolitics.