surround the California Environmental Contaminant Biomonitoring
Program (CECBP) due to the enormous magnitude of the
program and institutionalized support from the California
state government it receives. These controversies are
particularly present in the tricky, and currently unanswered
questions regarding the role US citizenship will play
in choosing who will be tested.
Will undocumented immigrants be included in the program?
Will documented permanent residents be included? Who
is considered a citizen of California?
not just test those who are consistently and heavily
exposed to toxics?
Would public health money be better spent on monitoring
the people in California who are already known to be
exposed to toxics? Should the program focus on at-risk
occupations, like farm workers, cleaners, construction
workers, and factory workers? Should the program focus
on at-risk communities living close to sources of chemical
and toxic pollution, like factories, mines, landfills,
and polluted waterways? Will the program test undocumented
immigrants who work in at-risk occupations or live in
Will the state’s
new financial focus on large-scale biomonitoring affect
Will monitoring a representative sample of Californians
reduce funding for existing and proposed public health
programs targeting at-risk communities? Or will the
new large-scale program serve to highlight existing
disparities between exposures to toxics?
Image 13. Air pollution on a farm in
the central valley of California.