Introduction
Vulnerable communities in the United States face many avoidable challenges. Limited access to healthcare services compounds the effects of disease and exposure to toxic chemicals. It is important that regulatory agencies implement policies that are outlined in legal frameworks to protect the rights of individuals who are susceptible to the adverse effects of marginalization. The application of sound scientific principles is essential for the formulation of solutions designed to address the needs of powerless members of society.
Article Summary
Rayasam et al. (2022) highlight the fact that exposure to industrial chemicals is a serious problem that significantly heightens the risk of adverse health conditions such as developmental problems, respiratory illnesses, and cancer. The article further stipulates that the amended Toxic Substances Control Act sets guidelines that are to be used by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to assess the risks chemicals pose in commercial endeavors and evaluate the level of risk and exposure in vulnerable populations. In addition, the article highlights the fact that the EPA is tasked with oversight over mitigation efforts designed to eliminate chemicals that pose a significant risk to the environment and the population’s health. The authors analyze the EPA’s first ten chemical risk assessments under the amended Toxic Substances Control Act using the most recent scientific risk assessment evaluation techniques.
The authors surmise that the EPA’s risk assessments underestimated the threat chemicals pose to human health for specific reasons. First, the EPA did not include exposure pathways and conditions of use in their evaluations. In addition, the organization failed to factor in cumulative risk as well as aggregate exposures. It also failed to correctly identify all vulnerable or potentially exposed sub-populations, thus failing to quantify the differences in risk for vulnerable communities. The article further emphasizes the fact that the EPA did not comprehensively address data gaps in its final report, which included scientifically inconsistent systematic review methodologies in its assessment of pertinent evidence. The authors provide a series of recommendations that the EPA should consider when applying the guidelines stipulated in the amended Toxic Substances Control Act. The authors conclude that failure to apply the proposed changes will facilitate the continued underestimation of the risks chemicals pose to vulnerable populations in the United States.
Article’s Relation to the Protection of Vulnerable Communities
The prioritization of a vulnerable community’s needs is an integral element of distributive justice. They include people who struggle with systemic exclusion and discrimination based on factors such as age, race, gender, income, and religion(Barron et al., 2022). For instance, a community may receive poor health services as a result of their race (Cai et al., 2021). Individuals in the aforementioned group have a right to access healthcare, housing, and education (Saunkeah et al., 2021). The article by Rayasam et al. (2022) focuses on the protection of the health of susceptible communities. By highlighting the need for the EPA to correctly apply recommendations made in the amended Toxic Substances Control Act, the authors are advocating the protection of fundamental rights. For instance, the author’s insistence that the EPA should quantify the cumulative risks and aggregate exposures are meant to provide a comprehensive assessment of the level of exposure in vulnerable communities. The findings can then be applied to develop interventions that reduce the incidence of adverse health conditions in the target population.
Evidence of Reliability
The article presented is reliable for a number of reasons. First, the authors are highly qualified and respected practitioners in their fields. In addition, the article has been published in a reputable journal. The Journal of Environmental Science and Technology is renowned for the publication of scientifically sound material. It is also worth noting that all the scientific material used in the article has been accurately referenced. For instance, the fact that more than 130 million people in the United States live in areas surrounded by approximately 3433 facilities that produce, use or store toxic chemicals is referenced to a reputable source (Rayasam et al., 2022). The authors also use up-to-date information such as guidelines from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine as well as the Executive Order issued by President Biden. The authors also reference the January 2022 EPA draft for the evaluation of air and water exposure pathways, which they state “could be adapted” to evaluate “aggregate or cumulative exposure” among vulnerable populations (Rayasam et al., 2022, p. 11972). Finally, the assessment presented in the article is unbiased and based on objective scientific data.
Annotated bibliography Sources
The article is connected to the sources in the annotated bibliography in a number of ways. First, it assesses the health needs of vulnerable populations and proposes solutions to help mitigate the potentially adverse health impacts associated with the highlighted risks. In addition, the article addresses the issues from a systemic perspective in order to create long-term remedies. Finally, it employs scientific rigor in its assessment of the challenges vulnerable communities face.
Conclusion
The article presents a comprehensive analysis of the impact chemicals have on vulnerable communities. It addresses the inefficiency with which the EPA interpreted the proposals outlined in the revised Toxic Substances Control Act and makes recommendations on how the identified issues can be remedied. The questions the article raises are whether the EPA is required by law to implement the article’s proposals and whether the proposed changes will result in meaningful change for vulnerable communities, given the systematic challenges with which they must contend.
References
Barron, G. C., Laryea-Adjei, G., Vike-Freiberga, V., Abubakar, I., Dakkak, H., Devakumar, D., Johnsson, A., Karabey, S., Labonté, R., Legido-Quigley, H., Lloyd-Sherlock, P., Olufadewa, I. I., Ray, H. C., Redlener, I., Redlener, K., Serageldin, I., Lima, N. T., Viana, V., Zappone, K., … Karadag, O. (2022). Safeguarding people living in vulnerable conditions in the COVID-19 era through universal health coverage and social protection. The Lancet Public Health, 7(1), e86–e92. Web.
Cai, S., Yan, D., & Intrator, O. (2021). COVID-19 cases and death in nursing homes: The role of racial and ethnic composition of facilities and their communities. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 22(7), 1345–1351. Web.
Rayasam, S. D. G., Koman, P. D., Axelrad, D. A., Woodruff, T. J., & Chartres, N. (2022). Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) implementation: How the amended law has failed to protect vulnerable populations from toxic chemicals in the United States. Environmental Science and Technology, 56(17), 11969–11982. Web.
Saunkeah, B., Beans, J. A., Peercy, M. T., Hiratsuka, V. Y., & Spicer, P. (2021). Extending research protections to tribal communities. The American Journal of Bioethics, 21(10), 5–12. Web.