Assessing Dietary Consumption of Toxicant-Laden Foods and Beverages by Age and Ethnicity in California: Implications for Proposition 65

TL;DR

This study examines how different age groups and ethnicities in California consume foods linked to toxicants like lead and acrylamide, highlighting health equity issues.

Contribution

The study reveals how Proposition 65's exposure assessment methods may underestimate risks and worsen health inequities.

Findings

Root vegetables, rice, leafy greens, pasta/noodles, tea, juice, and seafood are heavily consumed in California.

Consumption of foods like stuffed grape leaves and tamarind/chili candy varies by age and ethnicity.

Proposition 65's methods may underestimate single-day exposures to toxicants in herbs/spices.

Abstract

Background: Investigating human exposure to toxic contaminants through dietary consumption is critical to identify disease risk factors and health guidelines. Methods: In this study, we developed a cross-sectional online survey to collect information about dietary patterns and related food consumption habits among adults (age ≥ 18) and adolescents (ages 13–17) in Southern California, focusing on popular staple foods and/or those targeted most commonly under California’s Proposition 65 law for lead and acrylamide exposure. Results: Results identified root vegetables, rice, leafy greens, pasta/noodles, tea, juice, and seafood to be among the most heavily consumed foods by mass, while the daily intake of many foods such as stuffed grape leaves, tamarind/chili candy and herbs/spices varied by age and race/ethnicity, suggesting that many of Proposition 65’s pollution allowances may be exacerbating issues of health inequity and environmental injustice. Moreover, findings from this study indicate that the methods of exposure assessment often applied under Prop 65, especially relating to herbs/spices, are likely to underestimate single-day exposures, thus allowing unsafe products on the market without warning labels. Conclusions: Study outcomes are broadly relevant to environmental health and nutrition science, with particular relevance to public health practitioners and California’s Prop 65 regulators and other stakeholders.

Figures