Risk perception and social participation among women exposed to manganese in the mining district of the state of Hidalgo, Mexico

Science of the Total Environment

Volumn 414, Issue , 2012, Pages 43-52

  Catalán Vázquez, Minerva ^a   Riojas Rodríguez, Horacio ^b   Pelcastre Villafuerte, Blanca Estela ^b  

^a INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE ENFERMEDADES RESPIRATORIAS   (Mexico)

^b INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE SALUD PÚBLICA   (Mexico)

Author keywords

Manganese; Mexico; Risk perception; Social participation; Women

Indexed keywords

AGE GROUPS; CHEST PAIN; FOCUS GROUPS; FRUIT AND VEGETABLES; GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT; HEALTH CONSEQUENCES; LEARNING DIFFICULTIES; LOCAL ENVIRONMENTS; MEMORY PROBLEMS; MEXICO; MINING DISTRICT; QUALITATIVE STUDY; RISK MANAGEMENT PLANS; SOCIAL PARTICIPATION; WOMEN; WORD PROCESSOR;

HEALTH; MANGANESE; RISK MANAGEMENT; RISK PERCEPTION;

HEALTH RISKS;

MANGANESE;

DISEASE; EMPLOYMENT; EMPOWERMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; HEALTH RISK; MANGANESE; MINING; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK PERCEPTION; SOCIAL PARTICIPATION; WOMENS HEALTH;

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; ARTICLE; AUDIO RECORDING; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; COUGHING; DEVELOPMENTAL DISORDER; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH; EYE BURNING; FEMALE; FRUIT PRODUCTION; GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION; HEADACHE; HUMAN; HUMAN IMPACT (ENVIRONMENT); LEARNING DISORDER; MEMORY DISORDER; MEXICO; MINING; PLANT YIELD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MANAGEMENT; SOCIAL PARTICIPATION; THORAX PAIN; VEGETABLE PRODUCTION; WOMEN'S HEALTH;

AGE FACTORS; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; FEMALE; FOCUS GROUPS; HUMANS; MANGANESE; MEXICO; MINING; RISK ASSESSMENT; SOCIAL PARTICIPATION;

HIDALGO; MEXICO [NORTH AMERICA]; MOLANGO;

EID: 84855560652     PISSN: 00489697     EISSN: 18791026     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.09.079     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. ATSDR: Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Toxicological profile for sulfur dioxide 1998, U.S. Deparment of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Atlanta, GA.
2. Báez L. Encuentros peligrosos. Contaminación y ciclo de vida entrel los nahuas de la sierra norte de puebla (México). Mitológicas 1998, 13:18-34.
3. Barrios-Guerra C.A. Mercury contamination in Chile: a chronicle of a problem foretold. Rev Environ Contam Toxicol 2004, 183:1-19.
4. Beck U. Risk society: towards a new modernity 1992, Sage, London.
5. Bickerstaff K., Walker G. Public understandings of air pollution: the "localization" of environmental risk. Global Environ Change 2001, 11:133-145.
6. Bickerstaff K., Walker G. The place(s) of matter: matter out of place - public understandings of air pollution. Prog Hum Geogr 2003, 27:45-67.
7. Bolhom A. Comparative studies of risk perception: a review of twenty years of research. J Risk Res 1998, 1:135-163.
8. Bush J., Moffatt S., Dunn C. Even the birds round here cough!: stigma, air pollution and health in Teesside. Health Place 2001, 7:47-56.
9. Catalán-Vázquez M., Riojas-Rodríguez H., Shilman A. Perceived health risks of manganese in the Molango Mining District, Mexico. Risk Anal 2010, 30(4):619-634.
10. Cavendish W. Empirical regularities in the poverty-environment relationship of rural households: evidence from Zimbabwe. World Dev 2000, 28(11):1979-2003.
11. Cole D., Pengelly L., Eyles J., Stieb D., Hustler R. Consulting the community for environmental health indicator development: the case o fair quality. Health Promot Int 1999, 14:145-154.
12. CONAPO Índice de marginación, 2005 2006, Consejo Nacional de Población, México.
13. CONEVAL Consejo Nacional de Evaluación de la Política de Desarrollo Social 2005.
14. Dasgupta S., Deichmann U., Meisner C., Wheeler D. Where is the poverty-environment nexus? Evidence from Cambodia, Lao PDR, and Vietnam. World Dev 2005, 33(4):617-638.
15. Díaz-Barriga F., García S., Corra L. Prevención de riesgos en poblaciones vulnerables. Determinantes ambientales y sociales de la salud 2010, Pan American Health Organization. L.A. Galvão, J. Finkelman, S. Henao (Eds.).
16. Douglas M. La aceptabilidad del riesgo según las ciencias sociales 1996, Paidós, Barcelona, 173 pp.
17. Douglas M.Y. Pureza y peligro: un análisis de los conceptos de contaminación y tabú 2007, Nueva Visión, Buenos Aires, 208 pp. 1st ed.
18. Douglas M., Wildavsky A. Risk and culture; an essay on the selection of technological and environmental dangers 1982, University of California Press, Berkely, 221 pp.
19. Downs T. Sustainable health risk management and the role of cross-disciplinary professionals in developing countries: Mexican experience. Environ Dev Sustain 2001, 3:61-68.
20. ENDIREH 2006: Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e informática. Panorama de violencia contra las mujeres, Hidalgo, México. Godínez L, Lazos E. Sentir y percepción de las mujeres sobre el deterioro ambiental: retos para su empoderamiento. En Tuñon E, coord. Género y Medio ambiente. Mexico: Ecosur/Semarnat/Plaza and Valdés, 2003:145-177.
21. Espinosa-Reyes G., Torres-Dosal A., Ilizaliturri C., González-Mille D., Díaz-Barriga F., Mejía-Saavedra J. Wild rodents (Dipodomys merriani) used as biomonitors in contaminated mining sites. J environ Sci Health A Tox Hazard Subst Environ Eng 2010, 45(1):82-89.
22. Godínez L., Lazos E. Sentir y percepción de las mujeres sobre el deterioro ambiental: retos para su empoderamiento. En Esperanza Tuñón Pablos (coord.), Género y Medio Ambiente, El Colegio de la Frontera Sur-Secretaría del Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales-Plaza y Valdés, México; 2003, 145-177.
23. Hudnell K. Effects from environmental Mn exposures: a review of the evidence from non-occupational exposure studies. Neurotoxicology 1999, 20:379-398.
24. Hernández-Bonilla D., Shilmann A., Montes S., Rodríguez-Agudelo Y., Rodríguez Dozal, Solís Vivanco R., et al. Environmental exposure to manganese and motor function of children in Mexico. Neurotoxicology 2011, 32:615-621.
25. INEGI II Conteo de Población y Vivienda, 2005 2005, Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática, México.
26. INEGI Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e informática. Resultados de la Encuesta Nacional de Ocupación y Empleo en el Cuarto Trimestre de 2008 del estado de Hidalgo 2008.
27. Jasso-Pineda Y., Espinosa-Reyes G., González-Mille D., Razo-Soto I., Carrizales L., Torres-Dosal A., et al. An integrated health risk assessment approach to the study of mining sites contaminated with arsenic and lead. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2007, 3(3):344-350.
28. Lammel A., Kozakai T. Percepción y representación de los riesgos de la contaminación atmosférica según el pensamiento holístico y el pensamiento analítico. Desacatos 2005, 019:85-98.
29. López-Austin A. Cuerpo humano e ideología 1996, Instituto de Investigaciones Antropológicas, UNAM, México.
30. Mergler D., Baldwin M. Early manifestations of manganese neurotoxicity in humans: an update. Environ Res 1997, 73:92-100.
31. Moffatt S., Bush J., Dunn C., Howel D., Prince H. Pubblic arwareneness of air quality and respiratory health and the impact of health advice 1999, University of Newcastle, Newcastle.
32. OMS Visited in September, 2011. http://www.who.int/phe/es/.
33. Ordóñez A., Alvarez R., Charlesworth S., De Miguel E., Loredo J. Risk assessment of soils contaminated by mercury mining, Northern Spain. J Environ Monit 2011, 13(1):128-136. Jan.
34. Paz M.F. Tensiones de la gobernanza en el México Rural. Política y Cultura, Núm. 30, sin mes 2008, 193-208.
35. Paz M.F. Del caciquismo a la gobernanza. Desafíos en la construcción de acuerdos en un distrito minero en México. Ajedrez ambiental. Manejo de recursos naturales, comunidades, conflictos y cooperación 2008, 139-155. Flacso, Ecuador. S. Weiss, T. Bustamante (Eds.).
36. Pidgeon N., Hood C., Jones D., Turner B., Gibson R. Risk perception. Ch 5 of Risk Analysis, Perception and Management: Report of a Royal Society Study Group 1992, 89-134. The Royal Society, London.
37. Riojas-Rodríguez Horacio, Vivanco Rodolfo Solís, Schilman Astrid, Montes Sergio, Rodríguez Sandra, Ríos Camilo, et al. Intellectual function in Mexican children living a mining area and environmentally exposed to manganese. Environ Health Perspect 2010, 118(10):1465-1470.
38. Rodríguez-Agudelo Y., Riojas-Rodríguez H., Ríos C., Rosas I., Sabido-Pedraza E., Miranda J., et al. Motor alterations associated with exposure to manganese in the environment in México. Sci Total Environ 2006, 368:542-556.
39. Santos-Burgoa C., Ríos C., Mercado L., Arechiga-Serrano R., Cano-Valle F., Eden-Wynter R., et al. Exposure to manganese: health effects on the general population, a pilot study in central México. Environ Res 2001, 85:90-104.
40. Sims J., Butter M.E. Equidad de género y salud ambiental. OPS 2002, 10.
41. Slovic P. The perception of risk 2007, Earthscan, UK.
42. Solís-Vivanco R., Rodríguez-Agudelo Y., Riojas-Rodríguez H., Ríos C., Rosas I., Montes S. Cognitive impairment in an adult Mexican population non-occupationally exposed to manganese. Environ Toxicol Pharmacol 2009, 28(2):172-178.
43. Taylor Steve, Bogdan Robert Introducción a los métodos cualitativos de investigación. La búsqueda de significados 1986, 126-127. Paidós, Buenos Aires.
44. Uslaner Eric M. Trust and risk: implications for management. Trust in Risk Management - Uncertainty and Scepticism in the Public Mind 2010, 73-93. Earthscan, UK and USA. M. Siegrist, T.C. Earle, H. Gutscher (Eds.).
45. Wakefield S., Elliot S., Cole D., Eyles J. Environmental risk and (re)action: air quality, health, and civic involvement in an urban industrial neighbourhood. Health Place 2001, 7:163-177.
46. Yañez L., Ortiz D., Calderon J., Batres L., Carrizales L., Mejia J., et al. Overview of human health and chemical mixtures: problems facing developing countries. Environ Health Perspect 2002, 110(Suppl. 6):901-909.