English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

aLate in 1935, Alice Hamilton, who a generation earlier had done more than any other government-sponsored researcher to expose and ameliorate industrial lead poisoning, wrote to Martha May Eliot, assistant chief of the U.S. Children’s Bureau. 1 A young friend of Hamilton’s, a new mother married to a third-year medical student at Harvard, had asked Hamilton how to be sure that paint on baby furniture was lead-free. Although Hamilton had always assumed “that furniture and toys were painted with enamel paint, lead-free,” the Bureau of Standards informed her that in fact many enamel paints contained lead. Hamilton’s purpose in writing Eliot, then, was to urge “that tests would have to be made of furniture paints and toy paints,” and to suggest who should take on this task: “Do not you think that it is an important question and that it lies within the field of the Children’s Bureau?” No such investigation was ever undertaken by the Children’s Bureau, the federal agency charged with advocating for “the welfare of children and child life among all classes of our people.” 2

Little Pamphlets and Big Lies: Federal Authorities Respond to Childhood Lead Poisoning, 1935–2003