Let's Talk About Scientific Racism, Colonialism, and Imperialism — Community Engagement, Environmental Justice & Health

Contributors: Dr. Sacoby Wilson & Sakereh Carter

Science can be POWERFUL. It can be used for both good and evil. Environmental science can remediate contaminated lands and revitalize the world that we need to survive. Agricultural science can feed an entire nation or destroy an entire ecosystem. Nuclear chemistry can provide electricity to millions or be used to build an atomic bomb that kills billions. Social justice-centered science can help re-develop policies and restructure the racist power dynamic of this country. Unfortunately, the power of scientific research to help address social injustice threatens America’s White supremacist and capitalistic society; therefore, the scientific narrative must be controlled AT ALL TIMES. In order to control the scientific narrative effectively, racism has to permeate through every facet of the scientific enterprise. To perpetuate the White supremacist and capitalist culture of this nation, scientists are taught to devalue the (1) perspectives of low-wealth black, indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC), (2) erase scientific contributions from people of color, (3) value knowledge that aligns with the capitalist agenda, (4) impede real-world applications of scientific knowledge that can be used to uplift low-income communities of color, (5) exploit Black and brown bodies in scientific research, (6) and maintain racist sentiments in the scientific culture. This culture quells the true intellectual prowess of non-White individuals and perpetuates racial capitalism which justifies the global subjugation and oppression of low-wealth communities of color. If scientific research was TRULY anti-racist, we’d use research to revamp and revitalize the world in order to alleviate poverty, eradicate health disparities, and end the global exploitation of low-wealth communities of color (See Image 1) [1].

Image 2. Dorothy Vaughan (left), Katherine Johnson (middle), and Mary Jackson’s (right) mathematical contributions to aeronautical science enabled space flight in the United States/COURTESY OF NASA SOURCE: ESSENCE

The current scientific narrative or paradigm is rooted in racial capitalism. This narrative determines what knowledge is considered “valuable” in scientific research and “who” is considered valuable in the field. Often, valuable knowledge does not coincide with contributions from people of color. People of color that have contributed to scientific research are often omitted from class lectures and science history lessons. In the last century, only 1.5% of Nobel Peace Prize recipients are people of color and none of those awardees are scientists [2]. In 1961, America launched the first successful aircraft into space and failed to mention the major contribution of Black mathematicians Katherine Johnson, Mary Jackson, and Dorothy Vaughan (See Image 2) [3]. Consequently, America is considered one of the most powerful scientific forces in the world backed by the farce that only Whites have contributed to its greatness.

Quote 1. According to the President’s Cancer Panel under the Barack Obama administration, the proportion of cancer attributed to environmental pollutants is grossly underestimated and the panel advised former President Barack Obama to enact legislat… — Quote 1. According to the President’s Cancer Panel under the Barack Obama administration, the proportion of cancer attributed to environmental pollutants is grossly underestimated and the panel advised former President Barack Obama to enact legislation that will remove carcinogenic substances from American food, air, and water. SOURCE:

The field of science controls what is considered valuable knowledge by pitting majors against each other, where the “pre-med students’’ and “science majors” are somehow intellectually superior to the “social science” and “policy majors”. Notably, social science and policy majors aim to dismantle racist systems in this country that drive inequality and oppression. Conversely, science majors are taught to accept the way society operates and treat the “symptoms” of social problems. For example, cancer researchers study the mechanisms of cancer and identify drugs that can be used to treat cancer. Studies have shown that 90–95% of cancer is caused by environmental factors and lifestyle choice [4]. This statistic suggests that ameliorating exposures to environmental pollutants can PREVENT a large proportion of cancer cases (See Quote 1) [5]. Unlike cancer researchers, environmental sociologists attempt to understand and rectify the ROOT of environmental problems by using policy and real-world applications to reduce exposure to environmental toxicants [6]. We need to PREVENT environmental exposures that lead to diseases instead of trying to rectify highly complex pathological conditions with pharmaceutical agents AFTER the onset of disease. However, shifting America’s mindset from the treatment of disease to disease prevention would dismantle capitalistic structures that depend on sickness for profit (See Image 3) [7]. In 2019, the pharmaceutical industry was worth 1.3 trillion and accrued 392.5 billion dollars in revenue [8].

Image 3. A human individual taking pharmaceutical pills. SOURCE: VIRALITYTODAY

The differential value placed on research that increases capital gain is also observed in the field of chemistry. Environmental toxicologists should conduct in-depth research about the health effects of potentially harmful chemicals BEFORE they are placed in our grocery stores, personal care products, and environmental media. “Of the more than 80,000 chemicals currently used in the United States, most haven’t been adequately tested for their effects on human health [9].” In 2018, the total chemical output revenue in the U.S. was more than 812 billion dollars [10]. According to the American Chemical Society, 3% of employed chemists that hold Ph.D. degrees in chemistry are Black or Latinx relative to 68% of Whites [11]. We have an entire field of environmental toxicology, but most people only know about the health effects of lead!

Racial capitalism teaches medical practitioners to perform research in a vacuum without bearing in mind the inextricable linkage between social determinants of health and health outcomes. In Venezuela, women are voluntarily opting to sterilize themselves, due to dire economic conditions [12]. Instead of rectifying the underlying issues, medical doctors are honoring their requests. Sterilization techniques cost around $1,500, an astronomical price for low-income Venezuelan communities [13]. Medical doctors must be advocates for improving the social determinants of health in order to attain a truly healthy society.

Image 4. A handwritten note with the words “Oh you’re really smart for a black girl”, an example of a microaggression.

If scientific research is about the ceaseless acquisition of knowledge, then you should value ALL knowledge not just knowledge that fattens the pockets of chemical manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies. RESEARCH MUST BE TRANS-DISCIPLINARY. The moment you say that’s not my field of work or that’s not relevant to my topic, you’re stunting your growth as a researcher and doing a disservice to communities fighting for social justice.

RACISM HAS TO BE MAINTAINED IN ORDER FOR IT TO BE SUSTAINED. In order to maintain “business as usual” racial capitalism, the scientific enterprise must also control WHO engages in scientific research. How? They create a culture so unbearable that even the brightest minds cannot withstand it. The negative racial attitudes in the scientific field are propagated in a multigenerational manner. Science aligns with intellectual superiority, the antithesis to Blackness. In order to suppress this form of societal privilege, Blacks are discouraged from entering these spaces. As such, Blacks endure microaggressions and macroaggressions, prejudicial comments, devaluation of Black perspectives, culturally inappropriate innuendos, the continual need to disprove stereotypes, and imposter syndrome [14]. It’s EXHAUSTING (See Image 4) [15].

A study conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics interviewed 5,600 Black, Latinx students, and White students that matriculated in the Fall of 2003 [16]. Approximately, 19, 20, and 18% of White, Latinx, and Black students chose to major in science, respectively. However, 37% of Latinx and 40% of Black students switched to a non-STEM field relative to 29% of Whites [16]. An unwelcoming scientific culture dissuades people of color from entering scientific research which leads to a lack of representation and this lack of representation perpetuates the false narrative that Blacks ARE intellectually deficient. When we know they are NOT.

Even if you make it to the end of the finish line and you obtain your B.S., M.S., and Ph.D., it’s not enough to ESCAPE the racism pervasive in the scientific field. Many people believe that you’re set for life once you receive a Ph.D., “But that’s just not true. Our White graduates have always had more doors open to them than have our African-American students [17].” People of color comprise a mere 26% of all tenure-track faculty in America [18] even though they make up 42% of the total US population [18]. Heilig et al., 2017 analyzed diversity among tenure-track, tenured, and instructional faculty at doctoral-granting institutions in the U.S., and discovered that Whites accounted for 74.20% and 69.95% of Tenured and Instructional Faculty relative to 4.05% and 4.48% for Black Tenured and Instructional Faculty, respectively [18] (See Figure 1). In 2017, Blacks represented 12.7% of the U.S. population [18]. Societal barriers experienced by people of color with advanced degrees are a byproduct of White supremacy and racist sentiments that are maintained in the scientific field. These sentiments foster an environment that devalues perspectives from people of color and research topics that prioritize low-income communities of color. This is demonstrated by the lack of diversity and funding given to Principal Investigators of color, research centers, Blacks at Predominantly White Institutions (PWIs), and Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). In 2015, the National Institutes of Health allocated three-quarters of a billion dollars to the late-stage Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program to advance biomedical discoveries “into healthcare products and services that improve patient care and enhance health [19].” A survey of 604 Principal Investigators that received a late-stage SBIR award between 2001 and 2010 discovered that Principal Investigators listed as Latinx or Black represented 2% and 0.3% of SBIR awardees, respectively [19].

Figure 1. Doctoral-granting institutions across the U.S. exhibit the least faculty diversity and tenure track professors, highlighting insufficient diversity and opportunity gaps in BIPOC faculty. SOURCE: STCLH HISPANIC JOURNAL OF LAW AND POLICY

Inevitably, once the dominant Western scientific hegemony has successfully controlled “what” type of research is conducted and “who” is able to conduct the research, the sociodemographic makeup and research specialties of scientific investigators start to look more and more homogenous. The lack of heterogeneity in scientific perspectives and BIPOC research investigators (1) reiterates/affirms claims of Black intellectual inferiority, (2) contributes to the perceived disposability of BIPOC populations, and (3) marginalizes BIPOC’s research expertise/devalues HBCUs.

Lack of diversity in scientific research affirms Black intellectual inferiority because Whites don’t see people of color around them. Science is associated with intellectual superiority, thus insufficient diversity and inclusion strengthens racist sentiments despite the aforementioned systemic barriers that BIPOC’s face. These racist ideologies can manifest themselves in gruesome ways. Between 1933 and 1973, eugenic practices encouraged the sterilization of 5,000 African-American women attributed to their perceived “inferiority” [20]. Eugenic practices had a massive impact on society, as non-White populations were considered “Feebleminded”, “lazy”, and “unfit” supported by illegitimate scientific findings [21]. Racist ideologies in society and eugenic practices led many to believe that non-White populations are disposable because they’re biologically subhuman and nonvaluable in society. As such, these “disposable” populations have been historically and contemporarily used for inhumane experimentation, economic exploitation, and career advancement.

Many Blacks distrust clinical research as evidenced by the illicit sacrificial experimentation of Black bodies that were often dehumanizing, oppressive, and abhorrent throughout American history. From 1932 to 1972, physicians informed 400 African American males that they had “bad blood” and needed to receive a series of treatments (See Image 5) [22]. In reality, these males were injected with syphilis, a deadly bacterial pathogen, and studied to analyze the progression of the disease. Researchers identified the antidote to syphilis in the late 1920s [23].

Image 5. Photograph of Participants in the Tuskegee Syphilis Study (NARA) SOURCE: FLICKR

In 1951, a physician removed malignant cells from Henrietta Lacks and used them for scientific experimentation without her consent (See Image 6) [24]. Henrietta’s cells were able to grow in a laboratory dish INDEFINITELY. An interview with Rebecca Skloot, the author of the New York Times best-seller The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks highlighted the scientific novelty and monetary worth of Hela cells. “Is there any way to calculate how much money has been made off of Henrietta Lacks’ cells?” Axelrod, a CBS News reporter asked. “No…you can buy HeLa cells for anywhere from about $200 to about $10,000 a vial,” Skloot responded. “So it’s an incalculable amount of money? Axelrod reiterated. “Yeah,” said Skloot. Henrietta’s family has not received compensation [25].

“Despite overall improvement in population health over time, many disparities have persisted and, in some cases, widened [26].” We’ve studied health disparities in America for 40 years and we still see people dying from environmental pollution, food insecurity, inadequate health care, and low-wealth [27]. These colonial scientific practices have to STOP. Scientific colonialism is defined as the incessant utilization of BIPOC populations to extract scientific prestige and career advancement in the form of research projects, capstones, grants, and publications that do not address underlying social (poverty, violence, infrastructure, food deserts, police brutality, racism) and environmental (air, water, and soil pollution) inequities in BIPOC communities. Often, scientific colonialism disproportionately benefits White STEM students and research investigators. When discussing scientific racism in research Camara Jones, an epidemiologist and former president of the American Public Health Association said “They don’t realize that their ability to do science has been advantaged- by White privilege, male privilege, American privilege-and that many other smart and hardworking people have been disadvantaged by not being a part of those privileged groups [17].

Image 6. Photo of Henrietta Lacks in 1945. Prior to her death from cervical cancer, her cells were involuntarily commercialized for scientific research. Image: Crown Brooks SOURCE: BRITANNICA

In order to address colonial scientific practices, we need more community science, such as community-based participatory research (CBPR), community-driven research (CDR), participatory action research (PAR), and community-owned and managed research (COMR) which rely on community and cultural knowledge systems and the subject matter expertise of individuals who live in frontline and fenceline communities [28]. These approaches can help assess social and environmental stressors cumulatively and enhance community vitality in low-wealth communities of color.

Currently, several institutions have increased recruitment initiatives in order to enhance diversity. However, INCLUSION is not synonymous with ANTI-RACISM. It’s a scapegoat, a way to say well we helped some of you so now you can’t complain. Many people of color research topics that are undervalued in the scientific community, a massive issue when you’re in a PUBLISH OR PERISH SCIENTIFIC CULTURE. An investigation of R01 award probability, a prestigious grant awarded by the NIH revealed the award probability for Black R01 applicants was 55% of that for White applicants from 2014–2016 [29]. A detailed analysis of funding disparities between Black and White R01 applicants discovered that applications containing the words “socioeconomic”, “healthcare”, and “disparity” were funded 11.2%-17.2% relative to 12.5%-28.7% for topics associated with White applicants [30].

Figure 2. “Proportion of applications in selected AA/Black disproportionate topics relative to IC award rates. 17 topics, representing 40,307 R01 applications, account for 50% of the submissions from African American and Black PIs. R= -0.45, the cor… — Figure 2. “Proportion of applications in selected AA/Black disproportionate topics relative to IC award rates. 17 topics, representing 40,307 R01 applications, account for 50% of the submissions from African American and Black PIs. R= -0.45, the correlation between IC award rate and proportion of applications on these 17 AA/Black disproportionate topics.” SOURCE: National Institutes of Health Extramural Nexus

A follow-up study discovered that 17 topics associated with AA/Black investigators accounted for 50% of all R01 applications and ICs that received a higher proportion of these topic-focused applications exhibited lower funding rates [31]. The ICs that receive the highest number of applications in these 17 categories include Minority Health and Health Disparities (MD), Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (AT), Child Health and Human Development (HD), Nursing Research (NR), Cancer (CA), Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (EB), Environmental Health Sciences (ES), Aging (AG), Fogarty Center (TW), Allergy and Infectious Diseases (AI), Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (AR), Heart Lung and Blood (HL), Alcohol Abuse (AA), Library of Medicine (LM), Drug Abuse (DA), Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (DK), Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS), Dental (DE), Mental Health (MH), General Medical Sciences (GM), Deafness and Communication (DC), Human Genome Research (HG), and Eye (EY)(See Figure 2) [31]. Additionally, Black investigators who submitted proposals to Centers that receive a higher proportion of Black R01 applications including Minority Health and Health Disparities (MD), Fogarty Center (TW), Nursing Research (NR), Child Health and Human Development (HD), Environmental Health Sciences (ES), and Allergy and Infectious Disease institutes (AI) were funded at a rate lower than the 16.3% average NIH funding rate (See Figure 3) [31].

Figure 3. ‘Institutes that received a higher than average proportion of applications from African American and Black PIs. IC, Institutes, or Center. %AA/Black, percent of R01 applications FY11-FY15 that NIH received from African American and Black P… — Figure 3. ‘Institutes that received a higher than average proportion of applications from African American and Black PIs. IC, Institutes, or Center. %AA/Black, percent of R01 applications FY11-FY15 that NIH received from African American and Black PIs. Overall, 1.5% of R01 applications to NIH were from AA/Black PIs.’ SOURCE: National Institutes of Health Extramural Nexus

Some Black investigators find solace working at predominantly Black institutions (PBIs), such as historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs). However, racist sentiments and systemic racism keep these universities under the heel of existing hegemonies that perpetuate the White supremacist narrative. Historically, imperialist ideologies have supported the notion of White supremacy. In the Scientific Basis of Imperialism, M. Edmond Demolins said “When one race shows itself superior to another in the various externals of domestic life….it explains and justifies the appropriation by Europeans of territories in Asia, Africa, and Oceanica.” Another research scholar exclaimed, “Can there be any doubt that the White man must and will impose his superior civilisation on the coloured races [32]?”

Scientific imperialism monopolizes scientific practices such that imperialist ideologies are considered inherently superior which justifies the marginalization of alternative scientific perspectives, differential values placed across scientific disciplines, and funding inequities between HBCUs and Research I institutions. Research I universities are classified by the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education as U.S. institutions with high levels of research output. Scientific imperialism is highly detrimental to Black scientists and predominantly Black institutions (PBIs) as (1) it applies institutional prestige to research I universities whereby PBIs are considered less “credible” than research I institutions, (2) prestige afforded to research I universities justifies the hoarding of scientific funding creating an inescapable loop of funding bias [33] (See Figure 4) and (3) it provides research I universities with the benefit of the doubt even though HBCUs may be performing more high impact applied, action-oriented research.

Top 20 Institutions of Higher Education (2017) that received the most federal funding (DOD, DOE, HHS, NASA, NSF, and the USDA)

Figure 4. DOD= Department of Defense; DOE = Department of Energy; HHS = Department of Health and Human Services; NASA = National Aeronautics and Space Administration; NSF = National Science Foundation; USDA = Department of Agriculture. In 2017, 20 I… — Figure 4. DOD= Department of Defense; DOE = Department of Energy; HHS = Department of Health and Human Services; NASA = National Aeronautics and Space Administration; NSF = National Science Foundation; USDA = Department of Agriculture. In 2017, 20 Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) received the most federal funding across multiple federal funding agencies including DOD, DOE, HSHS, NASA, NSF, and the USDA. SOURCE: NSF

In 2014, only 64% of HBCUs received at least one grant from the National Science Foundation [34]. Approximately, 97.2% of federal funding goes to Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) that are not HBCUs [35] (See Figure 5).

Figure 5. Approximately, 2.8% of all federal funding to Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) is allocated to Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) revealing the unequal distribution of federal funding between IHE’s and HBCUs and th… — Figure 5. Approximately, 2.8% of all federal funding to Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) is allocated to Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) revealing the unequal distribution of federal funding between IHE’s and HBCUs and the devaluation of HBCUs. SOURCE: Presidential Executive Order 13532 — White House Initiative on HBCUs

Image 7. Poster Presenters Evan Jackson, 10, Alec Johnson, 8, and Caleb Robinson, 8, and Barack Obama at the White House Science Fair in the State Dining Room, April 22, 2013. (Official White House Photo by Chuck Kennedy). SOURCE: OBAMAWHITEHOUSE.AR… — Image 7. Poster Presenters Evan Jackson, 10, Alec Johnson, 8, and Caleb Robinson, 8, and Barack Obama at the White House Science Fair in the State Dining Room, April 22, 2013. (Official White House Photo by Chuck Kennedy). SOURCE: OBAMAWHITEHOUSE.ARCHIVES.GOV

WE SHOULD NOT CONDUCT RESEARCH SOLELY TO ACQUIRE KNOWLEDGE. INSTEAD, WE SHOULD USE THE KNOWLEDGE FROM OUR SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATIONS TO CREATE A JUST, EQUITABLE, HEALTHY, AND SUSTAINABLE SOCIETY [36] (See Image 7). Research investigations should be conducted with the goal of translating research into ACTION. Knowledge is POWER, but only if you USE IT. KNOWLEDGE SHOULD BE USED TO INSPIRE, INPOWER, AND IMPROVE PEOPLE’S LIVES PARTICULARLY THE MOST VULNERABLE IN OUR SOCIETY. Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson requested a formal investigation of racism in the scientific research field. Rep. Johnson said, “it is incumbent upon each of us to do what we can to address the systems that perpetuate inequities within our own sphere of influence [17]”.

PROVE THAT YOU ARE ANTI-RACIST by divesting in fossil fuel industries that poison the health of environmental justice communities, PROVE that you are anti-racist by funding institutions that aim to revitalize communities and abolish health disparities, PROVE that you are anti-racist by using your scientific findings that suggest an association between low-wealth and poor health outcomes to influence policies that will redistribute wealth in our society. If you really VALUE perspectives from people of color, then you would change the CULTURE of science, fund scientific research that helps BIPOC, and help DISMANTLE scientific racism with your societal and educational-derived privilege.

REFERENCES