Environmental health is a key factor in the analysis of structural racism and its impact on health equity. Unfortunately, the term “racism” is rarely mentioned in major environmental health journals and few studies published in these journals have included BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color). This article offers practical solutions to address the ways in which structural racism permeates the issues, methods, results, and impacts of environmental epidemiology. The report was prepared by IEC students Sean McManus and Onnolee Wierson, both third-year law students; Noah Rennert, a final year student in chemical engineering at the McKelvey School of Engineering; and Sophie Watterson, a final year student in environmental policy in Arts & Sciences.
The call for greater inclusion of BIPOC in male reproductive health studies is made while recognizing the long history of exploiting these communities in medical research. Disparities in environmental exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals and in the risk of diabetes in vulnerable populations are just some examples of health disparities that are not well understood due to structural racism in epidemiology and environmental health. Louisianians are exposed to considerably greater environmental risks than white residents, contributing to marked racial disparities with respect to health, economic burdens and quality of life. The exclusion of researchers and participants from the BIPOC and the lack of depth in considering race and racism in environmental health and epidemiology have detrimental consequences in protecting environmental health for all.
To correct structural racism in environmental epidemiology, systemic remedies must be implemented at all levels of education and research. The core of environmental health lies in eliminating environmental burdens for all, a legacy that exists in BIPOC communities. To address environmental racism and its impact on communities of color in St. Louis, MO, there are several practical solutions that can be implemented. Firstly, researchers should name racism explicitly when conducting research.
This will help to ensure that racism is not overlooked or ignored when analyzing data or interpreting results. Secondly, BIPOC should be included in leadership positions within research teams to ensure that their perspectives are taken into account when making decisions about research projects. Thirdly, requirements should be put into place to discuss “race” when conducting research. This will help to ensure that race is not overlooked or ignored when analyzing data or interpreting results. Fourthly, researchers should conduct much more holistic analyses when conducting research.
This will help to ensure that all aspects of an issue are taken into account when making decisions about research projects. Fifthly, community participation should be increased when conducting research. This will help to ensure that the voices of those most affected by an issue are heard when making decisions about research projects. Finally, training on racism should be improved to ensure that researchers understand how racism affects their work. By implementing these practical solutions, it is possible to address environmental racism and its impact on communities of color in St.
Louis, MO. By naming racism explicitly when conducting research, including BIPOC in leadership positions within research teams, requiring requirements to discuss “race” when conducting research, conducting much more holistic analyses when conducting research, increasing community participation when conducting research, and improving training on racism, it is possible to address the myriad ways in which structural racism permeates the issues, methods, results, and impacts of environmental epidemiology.
