Assessment of Risk Factors for Health Disparities among Latina Farm Workers

Purpose/Background: Latina farm workers may experience a unique intersection of social and environmental factors that are known to affect health and well-being. The disadvantages inherent in their gender, race and social class may be compounded by their immigration status, rural location and the hazards of farm work. We propose to identify the most critical risk factors for poor health facing this underserved and understudied population. Materials & Methods: Our study uses a mixed-methods approach that combines qualitative data from focus groups (n=3 groups of 10 participants each) and semi-structured interviews (n=15) with quantitative and qualitative survey data (n=100) and biological monitoring (n=45). The study includes six domains of inquiry: sociodemographics, food security and food access, housing conditions, social isolation, access to medical care and occupational hazards. Urinary biomonitoring is used to assess exposure to common agricultural pesticides. Results: All study participants identify as Latina or Hispanic and, among those recruited to date (n=25), range in ages from 25 to 71 and report an average of 12 years working in agriculture. While sample and data collection is in progress, preliminary analysis indicate that these participants spend an average of 7.5 months per year employed in agricultural work.Participants report working with a range of crops common in Southern Idaho, including onions, sugarbeets, peas, corn, grapes, and hops. More than 25% of the study participants report that their employers do not provide water, cups and hand washing facilities on a daily basis. Participants report use of backpack and air blast sprayers, and approximately one-third report receiving training from their employers on the use of pesticides. Discussion/Conclusion: This research will assess the prevalence of social and environmental risk factors among Latina farm workers using an interdisciplinary approach that combines surveys, in-depth interviews and focus groups, biological monitoring and field observations

How Gentrification Is Impacting Communities in Ada County

For this project, we will be looking at the movement of diverse social classes, specifically within Ada County, to see how this affects the existing communities. To do this, we will examine and explore the social dimensions that are being influenced by the new money, new ideas, and outside cultures that are moving into the Boise area. We will be looking at how these further influences the management of the Boise foothills as well as the agricultural land and farming communities within the area that are being affected by the sprawl that is following the number of transplants coming into the Treasure Valley. We will be conducting research and gathering data through reviewing previous studies in other cities affected by gentrification, as well as conducting our own Boise-specific surveys and personal interviews with the various dimensions of Treasure Valley communities being affected. This will be done by speaking with and interviewing both traditional residents as well as newcomers. Additionally, we will review income gaps, cultural divisions and their effects on government action and community education

Mixed-Methods Assessment of Farmworkers’ Perceptions of Workplace Compliance with Worker Protection Standards and Implications for Risk Perceptions and Protective Behaviors

Introduction: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s Worker Protection Standards is the primary set of legislation aimed at protecting farmworkers from occupational pesticide exposure in the United States. Previous studies suggest that worker adoption of Pesticide Protective Behaviors (PPBs) promoted by WPS is associated with lower urinary pesticide concentrations. However, adoption of PPBs is often outside of the control of individual farmworkers and dependent on workplace factors such as employer provisioning of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and access to trainings/resources. Methods: We conducted a mixed-method study including urinary pesticide biomonitoring, surveys, and interviews with 62 Latinx farmworkers in southwestern Idaho from April to July 2022. We integrated findings across the various data sources to identify emergent themes relating to farmworkers’ perceptions of workplace compliance with WPS and potential implications for their pesticide risk perceptions, protective behaviors, and urinary pesticide concentrations. Results: Participants reported some indications of poor workplace compliance with WPS regulations, notably inconsistent access to clean handwashing stations and notification of pesticide applications. Some farmworkers, particularly pesticide applicators, viewed herbicides to be categorically safer than other classes of pesticides such as insecticides; these perceptions appeared to influence protective behaviors, such as the relatively low use of PPE while applying herbicides. These findings are underscored by the higher concentrations of biomarkers of herbicides, but not insecticides, among pesticide applicators compared with non-applicators (e.g. median 2,4-D concentrations = 1.40 µg/L among applicators and 0.69 µg/L among non-applicators). Participants further reported concerns regarding the inadequacy of pesticide safety training, pesticide drift, and the lack of communication regarding pesticide applications on and near fields where they are working. Discussion: Participants’ perceptions that herbicides are categorically safer than other pesticide classes is in direct conflict with WPS training, raising concerns about discrepancies between WPS instruction and other on-the-job training, as well as the inadequate provisioning of PPE during the application of certain pesticides. Our findings also suggest that current WPS regulations may not sufficiently address farmworkers’ concerns, particularly in regard to pesticide drift

Measurement of Urinary Pesticide Biomarkers Among Latina Farmworkers in Southwestern Idaho

Background Women who work in agriculture may have greater risk of pesticide exposure than men who share this occupation. Despite an increase in the fraction of the agricultural workforce comprised by women, few studies have characterized pesticide exposure in the USA with a focus on among these workers. Objective This pilot study aimed to describe pesticide exposure in a cohort of Latina farmworkers in farming communities in southwestern Idaho. Methods We collected urine samples from 29 Latina farmworkers, which were analyzed for 11 pesticide biomarkers. We evaluated the effect of pesticide spray season on urinary biomarker levels, and explored the effect of self-reported status as a pesticide handler on measured exposures. Results No significant differences were found between biomarker levels in samples collected during the nonspray and spray seasons. We observed 11 extreme outlying values in samples collected during the pesticide spray season. The most extreme outlying values (MDA: 51.7 ng/mL; 3-PBA: 11.8 ng/mL; trans-DCCA: 23.4 ng/mL; and 2,4-D: 31.1 ng/mL) were all provided during the spray season by women who reported loading, mixing or applying pesticides. Conclusions These results provide suggestive evidence that Latina farmworkers who handle pesticides during the spray season may be at an increased risk of exposure to organophosphate and pyrethroid insecticides, as well as the herbicide 2,4- D. We recommend that future research into pesticide exposures among farmworkers should include particular focus on this group

Examination of Urinary Pesticide Concentrations, Protective Behaviors, and Risk Perceptions Among Latino and Latina Farmworkers in Southwestern Idaho

Introduction: Studies have documented high levels of pesticide exposure among men farmworkers; however, few have examined exposures or the experiences of women farmworkers. Data gaps also exist regarding farmworkers’ perceived risk and control related to pesticides, information that is critical to develop protective interventions. Objective: We aimed to compare urinary pesticide biomarker concentrations between Latino and Latina farmworkers and examine associations with occupational characteristics, risk perceptions, perceived control, and protective behaviors. Methods: We enrolled a convenience sample of 62 farmworkers (30 men and 32 women) during the pesticide spray season from April–July 2022 in southwestern Idaho. Participants were asked to complete two visits within a seven-day period; at each visit, we collected a urine sample and administered a questionnaire assessing demographic and occupational information. Urine samples were composited and analyzed for 17 biomarkers of herbicides and of organophosphate (OP) and pyrethroid insecticides. Results: Ten pesticide biomarkers (TCPy, MDA, PNP, 3-PBA, 4-F-3-PBA, cis- and trans-DCCA, 2,4-D, Glyphosate, AMPA) were detected in \u3e80% of samples. Men and women had similar urinary biomarker concentrations (p = 0.19–0.94); however, women worked significantly fewer hours than men (p = 0.01), wore similar or greater levels of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), and were slightly more likely to report having experienced an Acute Pesticide Poisoning (26% of women vs. 14% of men; p = 0.25). We observed inconsistencies in risk perceptions, perceived control, and protective behaviors among men. Discussion: Our study is one the first to examine pesticide exposure and risk perceptions among a cohort of farmworkers balanced on gender. Taken with previous findings, our results suggest that factors such as job tasks, biological susceptibility, or access to trainings and protective equipment might uniquely impact women farmworkers’ exposure and/or vulnerability to pesticides. Women represent an increasing proportion of the agricultural workforce, and larger studies are needed to disentangle these findings

Human Rights in the Context of Environmental Conservation on the US-Mexico Border

At Cabeza Priesta National Wildlife Refuge, a wilderness area on the US-Mexico border in Arizona, conflicting policies permit the provision of supplementary water for wildlife but not for undocumented immigrants passing through the area. Federal refuge environmental policy prioritizes active management of endangered and threatened species. Vast systems of water resources have been developed to support wildlife conservation in this extremely hot and dry environment. At the same time, humanitarian groups are not allowed to supply water to undocumented border crossers in the park. Human border-crossers must utilize non-potable wildlife water guzzlers for survival and face risk of illness or death by dehydration. This article analyzes human rights via an ethnographic lens. From this perspective, water policy at the wildlife refuge brings into question the value of human life in a border conservation context, especially for those entering the site illegally

Immigration, Environment, and Security on the U.S.-Mexico Border

This book examines the convergence of conservation and security efforts along the U.S.-Mexico border in Arizona. The author presents a unique analysis of the history of Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge, a federally protected border wilderness area. Beginning in the early 1990s, changes to U.S. immigration policy dramatically altered the political and natural landscape in and around Cabeza Prieta. In particular, the increasing presence of Border Patrol has contributed to environmental degradation in wilderness. Complicated human rights concerns are also explored in the book. Protecting wildlife in an area with high rates of undocumented border-crossing and smuggling results in complex and sometimes controversial conservation policies. Ultimately, the observations and analysis presented in this book illustrate ways in which the politics of race and nationalism are subtly, but significantly, interwoven into border environmental and security policies.https://scholarworks.boisestate.edu/fac_books/1526/thumbnail.jp

A Disciplined Space: The Co-Evolution of Conservation and Militarization on the US-Mexico Border

Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge is located in southern Arizona along the US-Mexico border. Since its inception as a conservation site, the federally-protected wildlife refuge has also been home to a constellation of military activities including an Air Force training and bombing range and, more recently, Border Patrol and the development of Homeland Security. This article describes how conservation and militarization have co-evolved in a complex yet often symbiotic relationship across time and space. Cabeza Prieta’s location on the international border results in an uneasy balance, promoting protection of nature along with protection of national security. The environmental history of the dual processes of conservation and militarization at the refuge enhances our understanding of contemporary environmental challenges in this hybrid landscape. The overarching theme is one of increasing control over a wilderness borderland region—a “disciplined space” in the words of Michel Foucault (2007)