Thread by @joanacasey

👋 fellow scientists trying to contribute work on environmental and social determinants of health

#EnvironmentalJustice work is critical and difficult

Wanted to share R2 comments received from a top journal in our field, which we were not invited to respond to @marydotwillis

Comment 1: "Any time I see the term "xxx* + justice," I immediately think I'm being hustled by some virtue-signaling ignoramus who is incapable of doing something good for himself or society."

R1: Actually justice is one of the 3 ethical principles from the Belmont Report

Comment 2: "I revert to the overly simple idea that justice is following the law. If you are within the law, that is good enough for rough and ready justice."

R2: This is not the definition of justice--a fair distribution of costs and benefits.

Comment 3: "1. People are free to move where they like."

R3: Nope. Historic policies, zoning, and systemic racism shape options. Many scholars have noted this, considering reading Harriet Washington, Richard Rothstein, and others

See @EPA epa.gov/environmentalj…

Comment 4: "2. Humans are very alike in their response to chemicals so "people of color" mostly has no meaning beyond virtue-signaling."

R4: I agree--by race, we do not mean biology, we mean a host of experiences and racism, e.g., @EHPonline ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/EH…

Comment 5: "3. So called "hazardous" industries are within the law both on placement and exposures. Justice is being within the law. If there is a problem, go through legal channels."

R5: Issues of procedural injustice often mean groups do not have equal access to the law.

Comment 6: "Over geologic time CO2 has been much higher than now. Some argue that the CO2 greening of the earth is a net benefit."

R6: OMG please read the recent IPCC Report. I can't.

ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/

To add a final exclamation point to this thread: I received a review request from this journal yesterday that included the words "structural racism" in the title.

I declined.