Environmental Health Perspectives Volume
103, Supplement 6, September 1995
[Citation
in PubMed]
The Disproportionate Impact of Environmental Health Threats on Children
of Color
Lawrie Mott
Natural Resources Defense Council, San Francisco, California
Abstract
Children receive greater exposures to environmental pollutants present
in air, food, and water because they inhale or ingest more air, food, or
water on a body-weight basis than adults do. Communities of color are disproportionately
exposed to hazardous wastes, dioxin, and air pollution. Existing data demonstrate
that children of color are the subgroup of the population most exposed to
certain pollutants, including lead, air pollution, and pesticides. Government
standards do not take into account children's differential exposures or
the cumulative nature of these exposures. Federal regulations fail to protect
the most highly exposed and most sensitive subgroups of the population.
More often than not this group is children of color. --Environ Health
Perspect 103(Suppl 6):33-35 (1995)
Key words: disproportionate impact, children of color, lead, air
pollution, pesticides, drinking water
This paper is based on a presentation at the symposium
on Preventing Child Exposures to Environmental Hazards: Research and Policy
Issues held 18-19 March 1993 in Washington, DC.
The author greatly acknowledges the research assistance
of Farrel Vance.
Address correspondence to Dr. Lawrie Mott, Natural Resources
Defense Council, 71 Stevenson Street, Suite 1825, San Francisco, CA 94105.
Telephone (415) 777-0220. Fax (415) 495-5996.
Introduction
Children receive greater exposure to environmental pollutants present
or contained in the air, water, food, their homes, or their schools. Likewise,
people of color are disproportionately exposed to pollution present in their
communities. The likely confluence of these two trends is that children
of color are the subgroup of the population most exposed to, and least protected
from, environmental health threats.
Greater Childhood Exposures
It is a simple biological fact that children inhale or ingest more air,
water, or food as a percentage of their body weight than adults do. For
instance, the air intake of a resting infant is twice that of an adult under
the same conditions (1). Infants and children drink more than 2.5
times as much water daily as adults do as a percentage of body weight (2).
Children aged 1 through 5 eat three to four times more per unit of body
weight than the average American (3). The average 1-year-old drinks
21 times more apple juice and 11 times more grape juice, and eats 2 to 7.5
times more grapes, bananas, apples, pears, carrots, and broccoli (3).
For behavioral reasons as well, children are more exposed to environmental
pollutants. They are more active and more curious. Children often play at
ground level where pollutants can concentrate. According to a study in California,
children spend more time out of doors (especially in the afternoon when
air pollution levels peak) and are more active outdoors than adults, thereby
increasing their exposure to air pollutants (1).
Communities of Color at Unique Risk
People of color are also more exposed to pollution hazards. Many studies
have found a greater presence of environmental hazards in these communities.
The best-known example of this problem is the siting of hazardous waste
facilities. A landmark report by the United Church of Christ's Commission
on Racial Justice discovered that three of the five largest hazardous waste
landfills in the United States are in black or Latino neighborhoods and
that the mean percentage of people of color in areas with toxic waste sites
is twice that of areas without toxic waste sites (4).
The situation is similar with air pollution. Scientists at the Argonne
National Laboratory have found that African- American and Hispanic population
subgroups experience greater exposure to substandard outdoor air quality.
In particular, their research indicates that these minorities live in greater
concentrations both in areas with above-average numbers of air polluting
facilities and in air quality nonattainment areas. For instance, 52% of
all whites live in counties with high ozone concentrations. For African-Americans
the figure is 62% and for Hispanics 71%. Population-group distributions
were found to be similar for carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide,
lead, and particulate matter, with higher percentages of African-Americans
and Hispanics than whites residing in counties with excessive levels of
these pollutants (5).
Ethnic minorities are also more likely to be exposed to certain chemical
contaminants in the food supply due to dietary differences. For example,
Native Americans and subsistence fishing communities may be at much greater
health risk from dioxin in fish. A draft EPA notice for a water permit to
discharge effluent containing dioxins from a paper and pulp facility into
the Penobscot River noted that the Penobscot Indian Nation had a fish consumption
rate nearly twice the national average (6).
Children of Color at Greatest Exposure
Children of color are the obvious intersection of the two subgroups of
the population, children and communities of color, now receiving the greatest
exposures to environmental pollutants. Children of color may be at the highest
risk of any segment of society. Data currently available clearly demonstrate
this. The classic example is lead. The 1988 Centers for Disease Control
report on lead poisoning estimated that 68% of poor, inner-city African-
American children were lead poisoned as compared to 36% of poor, inner-city
white children (7). In an earlier study conducted between 1976 and
1980, 9.1% of all preschool children in the United States had blood lead
levels greater than 25 mg/dl, while 24.5% of black children exceeded this
level (8). A detailed 1990 Centers for Disease Control investigation
found that the average blood lead level in poor Puerto Rican and Mexican-American
children in the United States cities studied exceeded the federal definition
of lead poisoning (12 mg/dl > 10 mg/dl) (9).
The same trend is apparent when active asthma cases are compared by race
and ethnicity. Of Puerto Rican children less than 11 years old, 11.2% suffer
from asthma, 5.9% for non-Hispanic black and 3.3% for non-Hispanic white
children (10). Air pollution has been shown to aggravate asthma in
a number of studies (11).
Pesticides provide another illustration that children of color are more
exposed. A recent pilot project by the California Department of Health Services
examined residential pesticide exposure of infants and children. Sampling
was conducted in a small town in California's San Joaquin Valley. All homes
were within one-quarter mile of agricultural fields and approximately 50
agricultural pesticides were used within one mile of the town during the
study period. Half of the homes sampled had at least one resident who was
a farmworker. A total of 12 pesticides were detected in the house-dust samples.
Although this pilot project was not large enough to draw conclusions, but
was intended rather to test field and lab methods, it suggests a potential
for higher residential exposure to some pesticides for children of farmworkers
versus children of nonfarmworkers. The study did not look at ethnicity of
the homes' residents, but the vast majority of farmworkers are Hispanic
(12).
Another issue worth noting is the racial differences in childhood cancer
rates. For white children, cancer incidence rates increased 9.1% from 1973
to 1990, while for black children during the same period the increase was
23.9% (13). In adults, no such difference exists between blacks and
whites. The incidence rates for all cancers in both sexes increased about
19% for both blacks and whites between 1973 and 1990 (13). The causes
of this disparity in children are unknown but clearly warrant further investigation.
Drinking Water Exposure Scenario
To establish a real world framework for considering the proposition that
children of color are the subgroup of the population most exposed to environmental
contaminants, we present a hypothetical scenario involving drinking water
contamination in a rural agricultural area with a largely Hispanic community,
a good portion of whom are farmworkers.
Consider the following factors. A unique state law requires monitoring
of drinking water for chemical contaminants not currently regulated under
the federal Safe Drinking Water Act. As a result of the monitoring, several
pesticides and other chemicals are detected in drinking water wells, including
a number of pesticides. Some of the pesticides detected are still in use,
and others have been banned. In addition, xylene is detected but no obvious
industrial source of the compound exists in the area. However, it has been
used as an inert ingredient in pesticides applied nearby.
The community discovers results of the drinking water monitoring through
the news media and is understandably scared and angry. Members of this community
have voiced long-standing concerns about the health effects of pesticides,
but an earlier epidemiologic investigation was inconclusive, primarily due
to a small study population and lack of data on pesticide levels in the
air and water.
The disclosure of the drinking water monitoring results is occurring
in the midst of the state's revision of its drinking water action level
standard for one of the pesticides detected in the community's wells. State
government data also demonstrate that this pesticide is being used in fields
adjacent to town. Therefore, the chemical is likely be present in air and
food as well as in the water. Also, farmworkers fortunate enough to be able
to leave their children at home when they go to the fields expose their
children to residues of the chemical present on their clothes when they
return home. Other farmworkers may have to bring their children to the fields,
providing another exposure to the pesticide.
The state decides to lower the drinking water standard for the pesticide
based on new scientific evidence showing the chemical is more hazardous
than previously thought. But the standard assumes the only route of exposure
to the pesticide is drinking water and does not consider children's higher
intake of drinking water. The standard does not reflect the real world multiple
and cumulative exposures to the pesticide for children. The farmworkers'
children in this community are the most exposed and the least protected.
Recommendations
Several reforms are necessary to protect children of color from environmental
health threats. These changes involve immediate efforts to protect children
of color from known hazards, strengthening government standards, and further
research.
First, we must immediately mitigate the environmental exposures that
disproportionately affect children of color. This includes lead, pesticides,
and air pollution where existing data demonstrate children of color are
at greatest risk.
Second, whenever federal or government agencies regulate contaminants
in our air, food, water, or homes, the standards established should protect
the most sensitive and most highly exposed subpopulations. More often than
not this group will be children of color. The standards must also take into
account cumulative exposure to pollutants. In the real world, we are not
exposed to just one chemical in one environmental medium.
Finally, we need more data to demonstrate that children of color are
at disproportionate risk from environmental health threats. Additional research
studies should look at representative community exposures, taking into account
children's differential exposures and the cumulative exposures. Particular
sensitivity in these research efforts should be paid to involving and informing
the community in an appropriate fashion.
In conclusion, children are the most vulnerable and least protected members
of our society. This is especially true for children of color, who face
an array of formidable challenges in their lives. Ultimately we must work
together to protect all children from environmental threats to their health.
This symposium and the Children's Environmental Health Network are critical
in identifying the measures to safeguard children of color and all others
from pollution.
REFERENCES
1. Kun V, Gordon W, Lavelle K, Mott L. Out of Breath: Children's
Health and Air Pollution in Southern California. Los Angeles:Natural Resources
Defense Council, 1993.
2. Plunkett L, Tumbul D, Rodericks J. Differences between
Adults and Children Affecting Exposure Assessment. In: Similarities and
Differences between Children and Adults: Implications for Risk Assessment
(Guzelian P, Henry C, Olin S, eds). Washington:International Life Sciences
Institute, 1992; 79-94.
3. Wiles R, Campbell C. Pesticides in Children's Food.
Washington:Environmental Working Group, 1993.
4. Commission for Racial Justice, United Church of Christ.
Toxic wastes and race in the United States: a national report of the racial
and socioeconomic characteristics of communities with hazardous waste sites.
New York:United Church of Christ, 1987.
5. Wennette DR, Nieves LA. Breathing polluted air. EPA
J 18(1):16-17 (1992).
6. Petition to Prohibit the Discharge of 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodi-benzo-P-dioxin
by Pulp and Paper Mills. U.S. EPA Water Management Division, Compliance
Branch, Region 1, and Maine Department of Environmental Pollution, Bureau
of Water Quality Control, August 23, 1993 as cited in Natural Resources
Defense Council and Natural Resource Council of Maine. September 14, 1993.
7. ATSDR. The nature and extent of lead poisoning in children
in the United States: a report to Congress. Atlanta:Agency for Toxic Substances
Disease Registry, 1988.
8. Landrigan P, Graef J. Pediatric lead poisoning in 1988:
the silent epidemic continues. Pediatrics 79:582-583 (1987).
9. Carter-Porkras, O. Blood levels of 4-11 year old Mexican
American, Puerto Rican, and Cuban children. Public Health Rep 388:388-395
(1993).
10. Guarnaccia P. Asthma, the Puerto Rican child and the
school. In: Puerto Rican Children on the Mainland: Interdisciplinary Perspectives.
As cited in Hispanics and Environmental Equity: Key Indicators. Washington:National
Coalition of Hispanic Health and Human Services Organizations, 1994.
11. Bates, DV. The effects of air pollution on children.
Environ Health Perspect 103(Suppl 5):000-000 (1995).
12. California Department of Health Services. Childhood
Pesticide Exposure Methods Development. Memo to S. Kimberly Belshe, Director,
California Department of Health Services, 24 December 1993.
13. Miller BA, Ries LAG, Hankey BF, Kosary CL, Harras A,
Devesa SS, Edwards BK, eds. SEER Cancer Statistics Review: 1973-1990. National
Cancer Institute. NIH Publ No 93-2789, 1993.
[
Table
of Contents]
Last Update: September 14, 1998
