4.5 Review Book Chapter

Early Childhood Adversity, Toxic Stress, and the Impacts of Racism on the Foundations of Health

Journal

ANNUAL REVIEW OF PUBLIC HEALTH, VOL 42, 2021
Volume 42, Issue -, Pages 115-134

Publisher

ANNUAL REVIEWS
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-090419-101940

Keywords

child health; health disparities; toxic stress; racism; intervention studies; healthy child development

Funding

  1. W.K. Kellogg Foundation [P0131281]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article discusses the impact of inequalities in health outcomes on society, explores the relationship between early adversity and lifelong well-being, and how racism influences health disparities. It proposes a framework for addressing public health challenges and emphasizes the importance of protecting the developing brain and other biological systems from the physiological disruptions of toxic stress.
Inequalities in health outcomes impose substantial human and economic costs on all societies-and the relation between early adversity and lifelong well-being presents a rich scientific framework for fresh thinking about health promotion and disease prevention broadly, augmented by a deeper focus on how racism influences disparities more specifically. This review begins with an overview of advances in the biology of adversity and resilience through an early childhood lens, followed by an overview of the unique effects of racism on health and a selective review of findings from related intervention research. This article presents a framework for addressing multiple dimensions of the public health challenge-including institutional/structural racism, cultural racism, and interpersonal discrimination-and concludes with the compelling need to protect the developing brain and other biological systems from the physiological disruptions of toxic stress that can undermine the building blocks of optimal health and development in the early childhood period.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available