Clearing the air and breathing freely: the health politics of air pollution and asthma

This study examines the growing debate around environmental causes of asthma in the context of federal regulatory disputes, scientific controversy, and environmental justice activism. A multifaceted form of social discovery of the effect of air pollution on asthma has resulted from multipartner and multiorganizational approaches and from intersectoral policy that deals with social inequality and environmental justice. Scientists, activists, health voluntary organizations, and some government agencies and officials have identified various elements of the asthma and air pollution connection. To tackle these issues, they have worked through a variety of collaborations and across different sectors of environmental regulation, public health, health services, housing, transportation, and community development. The authors examine the role of activist groups in discovering the increased rates of asthma and framing it as a social and environmental issue; give an overview of the current knowledge base on air pollution and asthma, and the controversies within science; and situate that science in the regulatory debate, discussing the many challenges to the air quality researchers. They then examine the implications of the scientific and regulatory controversies over linking air pollution to increases in asthma. The article concludes with a discussion of how alliances between activists and scientists lead to new research strategies and innovations.

Embodied health movements: new approaches to social movements in health

Social movements organised around health-related issues have been studied for almost as long as they have existed, yet social movement theory has not yet been applied to these movements. Health social movements (HSMs) are centrally organised around health, and address: (a) access to or provision of health care services; (b) health inequality and inequity based on race, ethnicity, gender, class and/or sexuality; and/or (c) disease, illness experience, disability and contested illness. HSMs can be subdivided into three categories: health access movements seek equitable access to health care and improved provision of health care services; constituency-based health movements address health inequality and health inequity based on race, ethnicity, gender, class and/or sexuality differences; and embodied health movements (EHMs) address disease, disability or illness experience by challenging science on etiology, diagnosis, treatment and prevention. These groups address disproportionate outcomes and oversight by the scientific community and/or weak science. This article focuses on embodied health movements, primarily in the US. These are unique in three ways: 1) they introduce the biological body to social movements, especially with regard to the embodied experience of people with the disease; 2) they typically include challenges to existing medical/scientific knowledge and practice; and 3) they often involve activists collaborating with scientists and health professionals in pursuing treatment, prevention, research and expanded funding. This article employs various elements of social movement theory to offer an approach to understanding embodied health movements, and provides a capsule example of one such movement, the environmental breast cancer movement.

Patient activism and the struggle for diagnosis: Gulf War illnesses and other medically unexplained physical symptoms in the US

We examine Gulf War illnesses--which include the fatigue, joint pain, dermatitis, headaches, memory loss, blurred vision, diarrhea, and other symptoms reported by Gulf War veterans--in relation to other medically unexplained physical symptoms such as multiple chemical sensitivity, chronic fatigue syndrome, and fibromyalgia. Our intent is to examine the diagnosis negotiations involved in these mysterious diseases, by showing the different forms of legitimacy involved in such interactions. Factors involved in diagnostic legitimacy are: diagnostic legitimacy in the medical community, lay acceptance of the diagnosis, uncertainty in looking for causes, and social mobilization. We conclude by noting that research may not be able to find any cause for these diseases/conditions; hence, it may be necessary to embrace medical uncertainty, and also to accept patient experience in order to facilitate diagnosis, treatment, and recovery process. Such a change can alter patients' expectations and taken-for-granted assumptions about medicine, and perhaps in turn reduce the frequency with which dissatisfied individuals form illness groups that mobilize to challenge what they see as an unresponsive medical system.

The health politics of asthma: environmental justice and collective illness experience in the United States

While public health, medical, government, and community actors agree that there is a serious asthma epidemic, there is significant disagreement over the role of outdoor environmental factors in causing or triggering asthma. The outcome of these disputes is important because it substantially influences the focus of public health prevention and government regulation. Minority communities in the United States have higher morbidity rates than white communities and, as a result, are more readily affected by debates over environmental factors and subsequent public health and government efforts. Therefore, asthma has figured prominently in community activists' agendas concerning health inequalities. We compare and contrast the efforts of two community environmental justice organizations that include asthma as part of their overall community organizing efforts. We explore obstacles and strategies common to both groups as well as key differences in their orientation vis-à-vis science. To do so, we first discuss the discovery, current research, community action, and resultant changes in the understanding of the disease, specifically within poor and minority communities. Then, to offer a context to examine our two examples of asthma activism, we explore the social discovery of asthma and its environmental correlates, along with the political and economic conflicts surrounding asthma research and regulation. Using examples from the two activist groups, we discuss common approaches to address asthma in poor and minority communities such as challenging "transit racism", employing an environmental justice perspective, and using education to empower community members. Finally, we explore how the issues raised in terms of asthma and the environment lead to a collective form of illness experience, in which people with asthma make direct links to the social determinants of their health.

A gulf of difference: disputes over Gulf War-related illnesses

The social discovery of Gulf War-related illnesses, like other occupational and environmental disease, is firmly rooted in ongoing disputes over causation. Pressure from veterans groups, as well as intra-governmental disputes, have driven innovative research directions and challenged the dominant epidemiological paradigm. This dominant epidemiological paradigm was originally a position that viewed stress as the primary causal factor. In the emerging dominant epidemiological paradigm, researchers view veterans' symptoms as similar to other multi-symptom diseases and conditions, but with a firmer respect for the reality of those symptoms. In addition, some researchers pursue interactions between stress and physical exposure. We examine the evolution of the DEP to demonstrate that in many disease disputes, an affected population challenges government and science decision-making, and even ways of knowing, in an attempt to negotiate a disease definition and etiology that results in better treatment and prevention. After considerable research effort, only limited evidence has been found for environmental causation, and even many researchers sympathetic to veterans are doubtful that much more will be found. We analyze the social discovery and ongoing contestation of these illnesses, and the consequent effects on health and public policy. For extension to other disease disputes, we provide an overall model of disease discovery and contestation, examining the key forces of government, science, and citizens.