A comprehensive analysis of racial disparities in chemical biomarker concentrations in United States women, 1999-2014

Abstract

27Background: Stark racial disparities in disease incidence among American women remains a persistent 28 public health challenge. These disparities likely result from complex interactions between genetic, social, 29 lifestyle, and environmental risk factors. The influence of environmental risk factors, such as chemical 30 exposure, however, may be substantial and is poorly understood. 31Objectives: We quantitatively evaluated chemical-exposure disparities by race/ethnicity and age in United 32 States (US) women by using biomarker data for 143 chemicals from the National Health and Nutrition 33 Examination Survey (NHANES) 1999(NHANES) -2014 Methods: We applied a series of survey-weighted, generalized linear models using data from the entire 35 NHANES women population and age-group stratified subpopulations. The outcome was chemical 36 biomarker concentration and the main predictor was race/ethnicity with adjustment for age, socioeconomic 37 status, smoking habits, and NHANES cycle. 38Results: The highest disparities across non-Hispanic Black, Mexican American, Other Hispanic, and other 39 race/multiracial women were observed for pesticides and their metabolites, including 2,5-dichlorophenol, 40 o,p'-DDE, beta-hexachlorocyclohexane, and 2,4-dichlorophenol, along with personal care and consumer 41 product compounds. The latter included parabens, monoethyl phthalate, and several metals, such as mercury 42 and arsenic. Moreover, for Mexican American, Other Hispanic, and non-Hispanic black women, there were 43 several exposure disparities that persisted across age groups, such as higher 2,4-and 2,5-dichlorophenol 44 concentrations. Exposure differences for methyl and propyl parabens, however, were the starkest between 45 non-Hispanic black and non-Hispanic white children with average differences exceeding 4 folds. 46 Discussions: We systematically evaluated differences in chemical exposures across women of various 47 race/ethnic groups and across age groups. Our findings could help inform chemical prioritization in 48 designing epidemiological and toxicological studies. In addition, they could help guide public health 49 interventions to reduce environmental and health disparities across populations.50 51 52The stark racial disparities in disease incidence and health outcomes among American women 53 remains a persistent public health challenge. For example, preterm birth incidence was found to be 54 approximately 60% higher in non-Hispanic Black women relative to non-Hispanic white women (Culhane 55 and Goldenberg 2011). Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic women are at increased risk of being diagnosed 56 with developing dysglycemia (Marcinkevage et al. 2013) and diabetes (Cowie et al. 2009), relative to non-57 Hispanic white women. Non-Hispanic Black women are also 2-3 times more likely to develop the most 58 aggressive subtype of breast cancer, triple negative, compared to non-Hispanic white women (Carey et al. 59 2006; Stark et al. 2010). Furthermore, relative to non-Hispanic white women, non-Hispanic Black women...

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Pregnancy and Prenatal Exposure to Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals Commonly Used in Personal Care Products

“…Parabens are found to be weak estrogens that can bind to estrogen receptors α and β [112,113]. Although less studied than phthalates or triclosan, US studies using NHANES have reported that Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black women across the US have higher concentrations of parabens compared to non-Hispanic White women [11,114].…”

An applied environmental justice framework for exposure science

“…Over 30 years of research confirms that marginalized communities are disproportionately exposed to and affected by pollution [4,5], hazardous waste sites [6], lead poisoning [7], hazards resulting from the built environment [8], food deserts [9], and other harmful environmental exposures [10]. In 2020 and 2021, these marginalized communities were repeatedly told that due to their economic status, ethnicity/race, occupations, and home location they faced a higher risk of morbidity and mortality due to COVID-19 [11][12][13][14].…”

“…This structure has led to disproportionate exposures and environmental injustices observed among marginalized communities. Marginalized communities continue to disproportionately face a mixture of harmful exposures [10], and socioeconomic inequality has grown [26], impacts from residential segregation persists [27], and many environmental exposure disparities have not been remedied [28][29][30].…”

Environmental chemical-wide associations with immune biomarkers in the US: A cross-sectional analysis

“…To account for NHANES complex sampling design, we produced statistics representative of the non-institutionalized, civilian US population by applying survey weights to our statistical models. 26 We selected survey weights corresponding to the smallest analysis subpopulation, and this varied by chemical measure. 29 For the initial 101,316 participants, we compiled data on covariates (age, sex, race/ethnicity, poverty-income ratio, waist circumference, creatinine, cotinine, and survey cycle), immune system biomarkers (basophil, eosinophil, lymphocyte, monocyte, neutrophil, mean corpuscular volume, red blood cell count, and white blood cell count), and chemical biomarkers (n=486 chemicals).…”