Sterling T D
Int J Health Serv. 1984;14(1):43-53. doi: 10.2190/kkx3-qc9j-6vd8-kl17.
How do some health scientists manage to avoid obvious antecedents of disease that are centered in the workplace? The 1981 National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council (NAC/NRC) report entitled Indoor Pollutants is analyzed as an example of this avoidance. Although the report contributes to the understanding of technical problems of indoor pollution, its orientation and some of its conclusions are difficult to reconcile with known scientific findings. Reports of investigations done in response to complaints of white-collar workers are largely ignored, as are reports showing hazardously high carbon monoxide levels from cooking in the home and accounts of misuse of gas ranges for supplemental home heating on the part of low-income families. The major blame for indoor pollution is placed on human behavior, especially smoking; however, most investigations of building illness find not tobacco smoke but inadequate ventilation to be the major source of illness. The report demonstrates the limited viewpoint that continues to ignore the productive processes that dominate social relationships, including the economic and political forces that determine workers' activities and their work environment. Continuance of such an approach will hinder future investigations as to the true causes of building illness and detract from efforts to assign the proper social responsibilities for effecting the changes necessary to reduce health risks for white-collar workers.
一些健康科学家是如何设法避开以工作场所为核心的明显疾病诱因的呢?以1981年美国国家科学院/国家研究委员会(NAS/NRC)题为《室内污染物》的报告为例来分析这种回避情况。尽管该报告有助于人们理解室内污染的技术问题,但其侧重点及其一些结论却难以与已知的科学发现相协调。针对白领工人投诉所开展的调查结果大多被忽视,那些表明家庭烹饪产生的一氧化碳水平高得危险的报告以及关于低收入家庭将燃气炉误用于家庭辅助供暖的描述也同样被忽视。室内污染的主要责任被归咎于人类行为,尤其是吸烟;然而,大多数关于建筑物致病问题的调查发现,致病的主要根源不是烟草烟雾,而是通风不足。该报告体现出一种狭隘的观点,这种观点继续忽视主导社会关系的生产过程,包括那些决定工人活动及其工作环境的经济和政治力量。继续采用这种方法将阻碍未来对建筑物致病真正原因的调查,并妨碍为减少白领工人健康风险而进行必要变革来确定适当社会责任的努力。