Genotoxic effects of exposure to formaldehyde in two different occupational settings

Formaldehyde (CH2O), the most simple and reactive aldehyde, is a colorless, reactive and readily polymerizing gas at room temperature (National Toxicology Program [NTP]. It has a pungent suffocating odor that is recognized by most human subjects at concentrations below 1 ppm. Aleksandr Butlerov synthesized the chemical in 1859, but it was August Wilhelm von Hofmann who identified it as the product formed from passing methanol and air over a heated platinum spiral in 1867. This method is still the basis for the industrial production of formaldehyde today, in which methanol is oxidized using a metal catalyst. By the early 20th century, with the explosion of knowledge in chemistry and physics, coupled with demands for more innovative synthetic products, the scene was set for the birth of a new material–plastics. According to the Report on Carcinogens, formaldehyde ranks 25th in the overall U.S. chemical production, with more than 5 million tons produced each year. Formaldehyde annual production rises up to 21 million tons worldwide and it has increased in China with 7.5 million tons produced in 2007. Given its economic importance and widespread use, many people are exposed to formaldehyde environmentally and/or occupationally. Commercially, formaldehyde is manufactured as an aqueous solution called formalin, usually containing 37% by weight of dissolved formaldehyde. This chemical is present in all regions of the atmosphere arising from the oxidation of biogenic and anthropogenic hydrocarbons. Formaldehyde concentration levels range typically from 2 to 45 ppbV (parts per billion in a given volume) in urban settings that are mainly governed by primary emissions and secondary formation.

Beyond methodological nationalism: The contribution of Robert E. Park to the history of intercultural communication

The legacy of nineteenth century social theory followed a “nationalist” model of society, assuming that analysis of social realities depends upon national boundaries, taking the nation-state as the primary unit of analysis, and developing the concept of methodological nationalism. This perspective regarded the nation-state as the natural - and even necessary - form of society in modernity. Thus, the constitution of large cities, at the end of the 19th century, through the intense flows of immigrants coming from diverse political and linguistic communities posed an enormous challenge to all social research. One of the most significant studies responding to this set of issues was The Immigrant Press and its Control, by Robert E. Park, one of the most prominent American sociologists of the first half of the 20th century. The Immigrant Press and its Control was part of a larger project entitled Americanization Studies: The Acculturation of Immigrant Group into American Society, funded by the Carnagie Corporation following World War I, taking as its goal to study the so-called “Americanization methods” during the 1920s. This paper revisits that particular work by Park to reveal how his detailed analysis of the role of the immigrant press overcame the limitations of methodological nationalism. By granting importance to language as a tool uniting each community and by showing how the strength of foreign languages expressed itself through the immigrant press, Park demonstrated that the latter produces a more ambivalent phenomenon than simply the assimilation of immigrants. On the one hand, the immigrant press served as a connecting force, driven by the desire to preserve the mother tongue and culture while at the same time awakening national sentiments that had, until then, remained diffuse. Yet, on the other hand, it facilitated the adjustment of immigrants to the American context. As a result, Park’s work contributes to our understanding of a particular liminal moment inherent within many intercultural contexts, the space between emigrant identity (emphasizing the country of origin) and immigrant identity (emphasizing the newly adopted country). His focus on the role played by media in the socialization of immigrant groups presaged later work on this subject by communication scholars. Focusing attention on Park’s research leads to other studies of the immigrant experience from the same period (e.g., Thomas & Znaniecki, The Polish Peasant in Europe and America), and also to insights on multi-presence and interculturality as significant but often overlooked phenomena in the study of immigrant socialization.