Although lead has been removed from paint and gasoline sold in the U.S., lead exposures persist, with communities of color and residents in urban and low-income areas at greatest risk for exposure. The persistence of and inequities in lead exposures raise questions about the scope and implementation of policies that address lead as a public health concern. To understand the multi-level nature of lead policies, this paper and case study reviews lead policies at the national level, for the state of California, and for Santa Ana, CA, a dense urban city in Southern California. Through a community-academic partnership process, this analysis examines lead exposure pathways represented, the level of intervention (e.g., prevention, remediation), and whether policies address health inequities. Results indicate that most national and state policies focus on establishing hazardous lead exposure levels in settings and consumer products, disclosing lead hazards, and remediating lead paint. Several policies focus on mitigating exposures rather than primary prevention. The persistence of lead exposures indicates the need to identify sustainable solutions to prevent lead exposures in the first place. We close with recommendations to reduce lead exposures across the life course, consider multiple lead exposure pathways, and reduce and eliminate health inequities related to lead.

r There is growing attention to the role of immigration and immigrant policies in shaping the health and well-being of immigrants of color.r The early 21st century in the United States has seen several important achievements in inclusionary policies, practices, and ideologies toward immigrants, largely at subnational levels (e.g., states, counties, cities/towns). National policies or practices that are inclusionary toward immigrants are often at the discretion of the political parties in power.r Early in the 21st century, the United States has implemented several exclusionary immigration and immigrant policies, contributing to record deportations and detentions and worsening inequities in the social drivers of health.

No abstract

Background: Many workers seek care for work-related medical conditions in primary care settings. Additionally, occupational medicine training is not consistently addressed in primary care professional training. These patterns raise concerns about the health outcomes of low-wage Latina/o immigrant workers who make use of primary care settings to obtain care for work-related injuries and illnesses. The objective of this qualitative study was to investigate how primary care clinicians assessed and addressed the role of occupational exposures on the health and wellbeing of Latina/o immigrant workers. Methods:We conducted semistructured in-depth interviews with 17 primary care clinicians (physicians, resident physicians, and nurse practitioners) employed in an urban federally qualified health center (FQHC) with two sites located in Orange County, CA.Results: Using a constructivist grounded theory approach, we determined that primary care clinicians had a general understanding that employment influenced the health and well-being of their Latina/o immigrant patients. Clinicians delivered care to Latina/o immigrant workers who feared reporting their injury to their employer and to Latina/o immigrants whose workers' compensation claim was terminated before making a full recovery. Clinicians were responsive to patients' work-related concerns and leveraged the resources available within the FQHC. Although some clinicians offered suggestions to improve occupational health in the FQHC, a few clinicians raised concerns about the feasibility of additional health screenings and clinic-based interventions, and pointed to the importance of interventions outside of the healthcare system. Conclusion: This study underscores the complexities of addressing occupational health concerns in urban FQHCs.