Toward Language Justice in Environmental Health Sciences in the United States: A Case for Spanish as a Language of Science.

BACKGROUND: Increasingly, marginalized communities are disproportionately facing the worsening effects of environmental hazards, including air pollution, water pollution, and climate change. Language isolation and accessibility has been understudied as a determinant of health. Spanish, despite being the second-most common language in the United States with some 41.8 million speakers, has been neglected among environmental health scientists. Building capacity in high-quality Spanish-language science communication, both for scientific and nonscientific audiences, can yield improvements in health disparities research, public health literacy, international collaborations, and diversity and inclusion efforts. OBJECTIVES: In this article, we discuss the context of language diversity in environmental health sciences and offer recommendations for improving science communication in Spanish. DISCUSSION: English is currently the predominant language for scientific discourse, but Spanish and other non-English languages are routinely used by many environmental health science students and professionals, as well as much of the public. To more effectively conduct and communicate environmental health work in Spanish, we suggest that researchers and scientific institutions a) foster structural changes, b) train emerging scholars and support established researchers, c) tap into community ways of knowing, and d) leverage emerging technologies. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP12306.

Longitudinal assessment of maternal depression and early childhood asthma and wheeze: Effect modification by child sex.

BACKGROUND: Studies report associations between maternal mental health and adverse respiratory outcomes in children; however, the impact of timing and duration of maternal distress remains understudied. We sought to longitudinally examine associations between maternal depression and childhood asthma and wheeze, and explore sex differences. METHODS: Maternal depression (n = 601) was assessed using the Edinburgh Depression Scale questionnaire, dichotomized at a clinically relevant cutoff (>12) (a) during pregnancy, (b) postpartum, and (c) postpartum and subsequent time points postnatally (recurrent depression). Report of wheeze in the past 12 months (current wheeze) and asthma were obtained using the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood (ISAAC) questionnaire at 48 and 72 months. Associations were analyzed using a modified Poisson regression adjusted for covariates, and in interaction models. RESULTS: Both postpartum and recurrent depression were associated with higher risk of current wheeze (relative risk [RR]: 1.87, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.21, 2.90; RR: 2.41, 95% CI: 1.53, 3.79) and asthma at 48 months (RR: 2.42, 95% CI: 1.01, 5.84; RR: 2.45, 95% CI: 1.02, 5.84). In interaction analyses, associations were stronger in females. Recurrent depression was associated with a higher risk of current wheeze at 48 months in females (RR: 4.34, 95% CI: 2.02, 9.32) when compared to males (RR: 1.89, 95% CI: 1.05, 3.39). CONCLUSIONS: Postpartum and recurrent depression were associated with a higher risk of wheeze and asthma in children. Understanding the temporal- and sex-specific effects of maternal depression may better inform prevention strategies.

Environmental Chemicals in Breast Milk and Formula: Exposure and Risk Assessment Implications.

BACKGROUND: Human health risk assessment methods have advanced in recent years to more accurately estimate risks associated with exposure during childhood. However, predicting risks related to infant exposures to environmental chemicals in breast milk and formula remains challenging. OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to compile available information on infant exposures to environmental chemicals in breast milk and formula, describe methods to characterize infant exposure and potential for health risk in the context of a risk assessment, and identify research needed to improve risk analyses based on this type of exposure and health risk information. METHODS: We reviewed recent literature on levels of environmental chemicals in breast milk and formula, with a focus on data from the United States. We then selected three example publications that quantified infant exposure using breast milk or formula chemical concentrations and estimated breast milk or formula intake. The potential for health risk from these dietary exposures was then characterized by comparison with available health risk benchmarks. We identified areas of this approach in need of improvement to better characterize the potential for infant health risk from this critical exposure pathway. DISCUSSION: Measurements of chemicals in breast milk and formula are integral to the evaluation of risk from early life dietary exposures to environmental chemicals. Risk assessments may also be informed by research investigating the impact of chemical exposure on developmental processes known to be active, and subject to disruption, during infancy, and by analysis of exposure-response data specific to the infant life stage. Critical data gaps exist in all of these areas. CONCLUSIONS: Better-designed studies are needed to characterize infant exposures to environmental chemicals in breast milk and infant formula as well as to improve risk assessments of chemicals found in both foods. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP1953.

Infant Dietary Exposures to Environmental Chemicals and Infant/Child Health: A Critical Assessment of the Literature.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of breastfeeding to the infant and mother have been well documented. It is also well known that breast milk contains environmental chemicals, and numerous epidemiological studies have explored relationships between background levels of chemicals in breast milk and health outcomes in infants and children. OBJECTIVES: In this paper, we examine epidemiological literature to address the following question: Are infant exposures to background levels of environmental chemicals in breast milk and formula associated with adverse health effects? We critically review this literature a) to explore whether exposure-outcome associations are observed across studies, and b) to assess the literature quality. METHODS: We reviewed literature identified from electronic literature searches. We explored whether exposure-outcome associations are observed across studies by assessing the quality (using a modified version of a previously published quality assessment tool), consistency, and strengths and weaknesses in the literature. The epidemiological literature included cohorts from several countries and examined infants/children either once or multiple times over weeks to years. Health outcomes included four broad categories: growth and maturation, morbidity, biomarkers, and neurodevelopment. RESULTS: The available literature does not provide conclusive evidence of consistent or clinically relevant health consequences to infants exposed to environmental chemicals in breast milk at background levels. CONCLUSIONS: It is clear that more research would better inform our understanding of the potential for health impacts from infant dietary exposures to environmental chemicals. A critical data gap is a lack of research on environmental chemicals in formula and infant/child health outcomes. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP1954.