Vicarious Racism Linked to Increased Lupus Activity in Black Women

In a recent study, “Vicarious Racism and Disease Activity: The Black Women’s Experiences Living with Lupus (BeWELL) Study,” researchers have unveiled a potential link between vicarious racism and increased lupus activity in Black women. Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), commonly known as lupus, is an autoimmune disease that causes widespread inflammation in the body. Black women are diagnosed with SLE 2-4 times more often than white women and experience more severe symptoms.

What is Vicarious Racism? 

Vicarious racism refers to exposure to racism against others. The study assessed stress from vicarious racism through:

  • Experiences of family or friends
  • Witnessing racism in public
  • Hearing about racism in the news
  • Seeing it depicted in media

Study Findings 

The study analyzed survey data of 431 Black women with SLE from the Black Women’s Experience Living with Lupus (BeWELL) Study to explore the effects of direct and indirect racism on disease activity. Key findings include:

  • Increased Disease Activity: Vicarious racism was linked to greater SLE activity in Black women, independent of their personal experiences with racism.
  • Racial Stress Impact: The study highlights the significant impact of racial stress on health outcomes, particularly for Black women who bear a disproportionate burden of SLE.

What role does understanding racial trauma play in autoimmunity?

This study underscores the need for better support and interventions tailored to Black women with SLE. Understanding the impact of racial trauma on health is essential for developing effective treatments and improving patient outcomes. The findings add to the growing body of evidence on racial trauma’s impact and emphasize the importance of addressing these issues in healthcare.

Citation:

Martz, C. D., et al (2019). Vicarious Racism Stress and Disease Activity: the Black Women’s Experiences Living with Lupus (BeWELL) Study. Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities6(5), 1044–1051. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40615-019-00606-8