BMJ public health · 2025
Gender, self-care and toxic exposures: a narrative review of personal care product use and health equity implications.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Prifti Eleni, El-Osta Austen
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Personal care products (PCPs) are widely used across populations, yet their composition includes a range of hazardous chemicals that pose risks to human health and the environment. Emerging evidence highlights how PCP-related exposures are not evenly distributed, but shaped by intersecting forces of gender, race and social inequality. Despite being framed as tools for empowerment and wellness, PCPs may contribute to disproportionate toxic exposures, particularly for women and girls.
OBJECTIVE: This narrative review critically examines the environmental health implications of gendered self-care practices through the lens of PCP use. It synthesises current evidence on chemical exposures, identifies high-risk subgroups, explores mechanisms of harm and outlines implications for regulation, clinical practice and environmental health literacy.
METHODS: Drawing on interdisciplinary peer-reviewed literature published between 2000 and 2025, the review focuses on endocrine-disrupting chemicals, perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, volatile organic compounds, heavy metals and microparticles and nanoparticles commonly found in PCPs. Particular attention is given to vulnerable populations, including beauty salon workers, pregnant individuals, adolescents, women of colour and infants.
FINDINGS: PCP use results in chronic low-level exposure to multiple hazardous compounds via dermal, inhalation and mucosal routes. These exposures have been linked to adverse reproductive, developmental and metabolic outcomes, increasing the risks of non-communicable diseases like cancer and obesity and possibly affecting infertility rates. Early evidence shows that interventions such as product substitution can yield rapid reductions in internal toxicant levels. However, individual behaviour change alone is insufficient to address systemic disparities in exposure risk.
CONCLUSIONS: Self-care must be reframed as a public health and environmental justice issue. Stronger regulatory oversight, clinician education and population-level environmental health literacy are urgently needed to reduce harmful exposures. Equitable self-care should prioritise not only personal choice, but also structural accountability and collective safety.
OBJECTIVE: This narrative review critically examines the environmental health implications of gendered self-care practices through the lens of PCP use. It synthesises current evidence on chemical exposures, identifies high-risk subgroups, explores mechanisms of harm and outlines implications for regulation, clinical practice and environmental health literacy.
METHODS: Drawing on interdisciplinary peer-reviewed literature published between 2000 and 2025, the review focuses on endocrine-disrupting chemicals, perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, volatile organic compounds, heavy metals and microparticles and nanoparticles commonly found in PCPs. Particular attention is given to vulnerable populations, including beauty salon workers, pregnant individuals, adolescents, women of colour and infants.
FINDINGS: PCP use results in chronic low-level exposure to multiple hazardous compounds via dermal, inhalation and mucosal routes. These exposures have been linked to adverse reproductive, developmental and metabolic outcomes, increasing the risks of non-communicable diseases like cancer and obesity and possibly affecting infertility rates. Early evidence shows that interventions such as product substitution can yield rapid reductions in internal toxicant levels. However, individual behaviour change alone is insufficient to address systemic disparities in exposure risk.
CONCLUSIONS: Self-care must be reframed as a public health and environmental justice issue. Stronger regulatory oversight, clinician education and population-level environmental health literacy are urgently needed to reduce harmful exposures. Equitable self-care should prioritise not only personal choice, but also structural accountability and collective safety.