In April 2010, a fatal explosion on the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico resulted in the largest marine oil spill in history. This research describes the association of oil exposure with anxiety after the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and evaluates effect modification by self-mastery, emotional support and cleanup participation. To assess the impacts of the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) conducted the Gulf States Population Survey (GSPS), a random-digit-dial telephone cross-sectional survey completed between December 2010 and December 2011 with 38,361 responses in four different Gulf Coast states: Louisiana, Florida, Alabama and Mississippi. Anxiety severity was measured using the Generalised Anxiety Disorder (GAD) symptom inventory. We used Tobit regression to model underlying anxiety as a function of oil exposure and hypothesised effect modifiers, adjusting for socio-demographics. Latent anxiety was higher among those with direct contact with oil than among those who did not have direct contact with oil in confounder-adjusted models [β = 2.84, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.78, 4.91]. Among individuals with direct contact with oil, there was no significant interaction between participating in cleanup activities and emotional support for anxiety (p = 0.20). However, among those with direct contact with oil, in confounder-adjusted models, participation in oil spill cleanup activities was associated with lower latent anxiety (β = -3.55, 95% CI: -6.15, -0.95). Oil contact was associated with greater anxiety, but this association appeared to be mitigated by cleanup participation.

Prior studies of oil spills have reported adverse impacts on mental health, but have not examined some potentially important moderators. In this cross-sectional analysis of n=38,361 responses to the 2010-2011 Gulf States Population Survey, we assessed the association of direct oil contact with depression severity following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, and modification by self-mastery, emotional support, and cleanup participation using Tobit regression models accounting for the complex survey design. Oil contact was associated with increased depression severity. Among respondents with oil contact, depression was more severe for those reporting lower self-mastery. However, respondents with oil contact had lower depression severity if they participated in cleanup efforts, compared to exposed individuals who did not participate. This potential protective effect was larger for respondents with lower self-mastery. Our results are consistent with the notion that participation in recovery efforts may reduce depressive symptoms following oil spills among impacted individuals.

Environmental justice (EJ) efforts aimed at capacity building are essential to addressing environmental health disparities; however, limited attention has been given to describing these efforts. This study reports findings from a scoping review of community-academic partnerships and community-led efforts to address environmental inequities related to air, water, and land pollution in the United States. Literature published in peer-reviewed journals from January 1986 through March 2018 were included, and community capacity theory was applied as a framework for understanding the scope of capacity-building and community change strategies to address EJ concerns. Paired teams of independent analysts conducted a search for relevant articles (n = 8452 citations identified), filtered records for content abstraction and possible inclusion (n = 163) and characterized selected studies (n = 58). Most articles implemented activities that were aligned with community capacity dimensions of citizen participation (96.4%, n = 53), community power (78%, n = 45), leadership (78%, n = 45), and networks (81%, n = 47); few articles identified a direct policy change (22%, n = 13), and many articles discussed the policy implications of findings for future work (62%, n = 36). This review synthesizes three decades of efforts to reduce environmental inequities and identifies strategic approaches used for strengthening community capacity.

BACKGROUND: Arsenic has been associated with hypertension, though it is unclear whether associations persist at the exposure concentrations (e.g. <100 μg/L) in drinking water occurring in parts of the Western United States. METHODS: We assessed associations between arsenic biomarkers and systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and hypertension in the Strong Heart Family Study, a family-based cohort of American Indians from the Northern plains, Southern plains, and Southwest. We included 1910 participants from three study centers with complete baseline visit data (2001-2003) in the cross-sectional analysis of all three outcomes, and 1453 participants in the prospective analysis of incident hypertension (follow-up 2006-2009). We used generalized estimating equations with exchangeable correlation structure conditional on family membership to estimate the association of arsenic exposure biomarker levels with SBP or DBP (linear regressions) or hypertension prevalence and incidence (Poisson regressions), adjusting for urine creatinine, urine arsenobetaine, and measured confounders. RESULTS: We observed cross-sectional associations for a two-fold increase in inorganic and methylated urine arsenic species of 0.64 (95% CI: 0.07, 1.35) mm Hg for SBP, 0.49 (95% CI: 0.03, 1.02) mm Hg for DBP, and a prevalence ratio of 1.10 (95% CI: 1.01, 1.21) for hypertension in fully adjusted models. During follow-up, 14% of subjects developed hypertension. We observed non-monotonic relationships between quartiles of arsenic and incident hypertension. Effect estimates were null for incident hypertension with continuous exposure metrics. Stratification by study site revealed elevated associations in Arizona, the site with the highest arsenic levels, while results for Oklahoma and North and South Dakota were largely null. Blood pressure changes with increasing arsenic concentrations were larger for those with diabetes at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest a modest cross-sectional association of arsenic exposure biomarkers with blood pressure, and possible non-linear effects on incident hypertension.