4.7 Article

Reducing lead exposure in school water: Evidence from remediation efforts in New York City public schools

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
卷 203, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2021.111735

关键词

Lead exposure; Lead remediation; School drinking water; Health policy; Inequality

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study examines the level and distribution of lead in school drinking water in New York City, showing that although remediation efforts have reduced lead exposure, there are still persistent racial disparities. The results demonstrate the promise of such efforts in reducing lead levels in schools, while also highlighting the ongoing challenges in eradicating lead exposure and addressing racial disparities.
Following the Flint Water Crisis, many states passed legislation requiring schools to measure and remediate lead in school drinking water. In this study, we present new evidence on the level and distribution of lead in school drinking water by examining the case of New York City, which tested water from every public school fixture in the 2016-17 school year, remediated fixtures that showed elevated levels of lead above 15 ppb, and retested a sample of fixtures in 2018-19. Prior to remediation, 8 % of fixtures showed elevated levels of lead; after remediation, 5 % of fixtures did. In both pre-and post-remediation periods, Black children attended schools with a higher proportion of elevated fixtures than White, Asian, and Hispanic children. We observe post-remediation lead exposure reductions that were largest for Black children, though racial disparities in exposure remained. Together, our results show that New York City's remediation efforts significantly reduced lead in its schools' drinking water in a short period of time, providing evidence of the promise of such efforts. However, the continued presence of lead in school drinking water and persistent racial disparities in exposure demonstrate the ongoing challenges to eradicating lead exposure in schools.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据