Abstract
Drawing from ethnographic research on lead poisoning in Uruguay and secondary literature from lead poisoning cases around the world, the commentary argues that public health policy guided by pragmatism presents multiple dangers to effective health intervention.
Highlights
Drawing from ethnographic research on lead poisoning in Uruguay and secondary literature from lead poisoning cases around the world, the commentary argues that public health policy guided by pragmatism presents multiple dangers to effective health intervention
Its contours were shaped by a political climate of fiscal austerity and the structurally disproportionate exposure to harm experienced by urban minorities and the poor [2]
In the aftermath of Flint, a Reuters investigative report revealed over 3000 U.S community “hot spots” with even graver cases of lead poisoning than those found during the peak of Flint’s water crisis [3]
Summary
Drawing from ethnographic research on lead poisoning in Uruguay and secondary literature from lead poisoning cases around the world, the commentary argues that public health policy guided by pragmatism presents multiple dangers to effective health intervention.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
