HJAR Jul/Aug 2025

HEALTHCARE JOURNAL OF ARKANSAS I  JUL / AUG 2025 29 Resource Economics, 15(1), 279–303. 208 Garasky, S., Mbwana, K., Romualdo, A., Tenaglio, A., & Roy, M. (2016). Foods typically purchased by SNAP households (Summary). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. 209 Make America Healthy Again: Stop Taxpayer-Funded Junk Food. (2025, January 16). The Foundation for Government Accountability. https://thefga.org/research/ make-america-healthy-again-stop-taxpayer-funded-junk-food/. 210 Conrad, Z., Rehm, C. D., Wilde, P., & Mozaffarian, D. (2017). Cardiometabolic Mortality by Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Participation and Eligibility in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 107(3), 466–474. 211 Mande, J., & Flaherty, G. (2023). Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program as a health intervention. Current Opinion in Pediatrics, 35(1), 33. 212 Macartney, S., & Ghertner, R. (2023, January). How many people who receive one safety net benefit also receive others? U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. https://aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/5bd792aaea69a2259bc93b3dfd9110b3/ program-overlap-datapoint.pdf. 213 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. (n.d.). SNAP healthy incentives. Retrieved May 17, 2025, from https://fns- prod.azureedge.us/snap/healthy- incentives. 214 Food insecurity and food assistance programmes across OECD countries: Overcoming evidence gaps (OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers No. 183; OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers, Vol. 183). (2022). https://doi.org/10.1787/42b4a7fa-en. 215 Food and Nutrition Assistance Policies in Korea: Focus on Food Voucher Program. (2023, March 1). FFTC Agricultural Policy Platform (FFTC- AP). https://ap.fftc.org . tw/article/3293. 216 National School Lunch Program | Food and Nutrition Service. (n.d.). Retrieved May 4, 2025, from https://www.fns.usda.gov/nslp. 217 Child Nutrition Programs—National School Lunch Program | Economic Research Service. (n.d.). Retrieved May 4, 2025, from https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food- nutrition-assistance/child-nutrition-programs/national-school-lunch-program. 218 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. (2024). National School Lunch Program Meal Pattern. https://www.fns.usda.gov/school-meals/nutrition- standards/nslp-meal-pattern. 219 All foods sold at school during the school day are required to meet nutrition standards. The Smart Snacks in School regulation applies to foods sold a la carte, in the school store, vending machines, and any other venues where food is sold to students. https://www.fns.usda.gov/school- meals/nutrition-standards/smartsnacks. 220 Jensen, M. L., McCann, M., Fleming-Milici, F., Mancini, S., & Harris, J. L. (2022, April). Food industry self-regulation: Changes in nutrition of foods and drinks that may be advertised to children. UConn Rudd Center for Food Policy & Health. https://uconnruddcenter.org/research/food-marketing. https://media.ruddcenter.uconn.edu/wp- content/uploads/sites/2909/2024/06/FACTS2022.pdf. 221 Harris, J. L., Hyary, M., & Schwartz, M. B. (2016). Effects of offering look-alike products as smart snacks in schools. Childhood Obesity, 12(6), 432-439. conception through early adulthood. 255 • Adolescent Brain Remodeling: The brain undergoes a second phase of remodeling during adolescence, particularly in regions respon- sible for impulse control and emotion. 256 Neurotoxic substances—such as solvents and heavy metals—can have lasting effects that extend well beyond the teenage years. 257 258 While children are uniquely vulnerable, they are also exposed to hazardous substances in different ways: • Virtually every breastmilk sample (important for infant health, growth, and development) tested in America contains some level of persistent organic pollutants (POPs), including pesticides, microplastics, and dioxins. 259260 Breastfeeding is the top recommendation for infant nutrition but the data indicates the pervasiveness of the exposures in American life. • Infants and toddlers ingest much more household dust than adults, much of which contains detectable levels of lead, flame retar- dants, and pesticide residues. 261 262 • With infants putting their hands and objects in their mouths nearly ten times per hour, they are frequently ingesting invisible con- taminants, such as lead dust, which often exceeds federal hazard levels in many homes nationwide. 263 264 • The 2009American Healthy Homes Survey, a collaborative effort by EPA and HUD, demonstrated the widespread presence of pesti- cides in U.S. homes, with almost 90% showing measurable levels of at least one insec- ticide on their floors. 265 • Nearly 25% of U.S. children live within close proximity to one of 1,341 Superfund sites -areas contaminated with industrial toxic waste which, depending on their level of con- tamination and clean up status, could further compound their risk for chemical exposure and associated adverse outcomes. 266 267 268 • More than eight billion pounds of pesticides are used each year in food systems around the world, with the U.S accounting for roughly 11%, or more than one billion pounds. 269270 The Executive Order establishing the MAHA Commission directed this assessment to evaluate the threat that “certain chemicals, and certain other exposures pose to children with respect to chronic inflammation or other established mechanisms of disease, using rigorous and transparent data.” Children are exposed to numerous chemicals, such as heavy metals, PFAS, pesticides, and, phthalates, via their diet, textiles, indoor air pollutants, and consumer products. 271 272 Chil- dren’s unique behaviors and developmental physiology make them particularly vulnerable to potential adverse health effects from these cumulative exposures, 273 many of which have no historical precedent in our environment or biology. 274 A limited review of the epidemiological and clinical studies of several environmental expo- sures reveals that certain studies, though findings vary, show these exposures, including when combined, may affect children’s health. Though findings that show risk often contrast with findings that showminimal, if any, risk, this still demonstrates the need for continued studies from the public and private sectors, especially the NIH, to better understand the cumulative load of multiple exposures and how it may impact children’s health, including exposures from: There are 17 Superfund sites in Arkansas: 1. ARKWOOD, INC. – Omaha 2. CECIL LINDSEY – Newport 3. CEDAR CHEMICAL CORPORATION – West Helena 4. FRIT INDUSTRIES – Walnut Ridge 5. GURLEY PIT – Edmondsen 6. INDUSTRIAL WASTE CONTROL – Fort Smith 7. JACKSONVILLE MUNICIPAL LANDFILL – Jacksonville 8. MACMILLAN RING FREE OIL – Norphlet 9. MID-SOUTH WOOD PRODUCTS – Mena 10. MONROE AUTO EQUIPMENT CO. (PARAGOULD PIT) – Paragould 11. MOUNTAIN PINE PRESSURE TREATING – Plainview 12. OLD MIDLAND PRODUCTS – Ola/Birta 13. OUACHITA NEVADA WOOD TREATER – Reader 14. POPILE, INC. – El Dorado 15. ROGERS ROAD MUNICIPAL LANDFILL – Jacksonville 16. SOUTH 8TH STREET LANDFILL – West Memphis 17. VERTAC, INC. – Jacksonville Source: https://www.epa.gov/superfund/ search-superfund-sites-where-you-live