Black People Are More Likely Than Whites to Die of Heart Disease. Here’s One Reason Why.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

It’s not just diet and lifestyle that determine your risk for heart disease—race matters, too. About 37 percent of white men and 32 percent of white women develop heart disease, versus 44 percent of black men and 49 percent of black women. Overall, the average life expectancy for African Americans is 3.4 years shorter than it is for white Americans, and researchers attribute most of that disparity to the differences in heart disease rates.

The reasons black Americans have higher rates of cardiovascular problems are complicated—among them, as researchers have pointed to, elevated levels of stress as a result of poverty and racism. But a study published today in the journal JAMA Cardiology sheds light on another possible explanation: African Americans are slightly less likely than Caucasians to be given drugs to control their cholesterol levels—and they’re far less likely to be prescribed the correct doses.

A team of researchers from Duke University Medical Center followed the progress of 5,689 patients who were eligible for treatment with statins, a class of cholesterol drug. About 75 percent of the white patients were prescribed statins, compared with 71 percent of African Americans. But when the team looked at dosages, the disparity was starker: About 44 percent of white patients received therapy that followed the guidelines from the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association, compared to 33 percent of black patients.

Why are African Americans less likely to get the correct cholesterol treatment? Researchers documented a few possible reasons. For starters, they’re less likely than white patients to see a cardiologist, so their primary care physicians or other providers may not be familiar with the recommendations. In the study, the researchers found, clinicians who saw the black patients were less likely to use the current guidelines in determining a statin dose. “We really looked deeply into the reasons for the disparity, and what we found were a lot of subtle but important differences,” says lead author Michael Nanna, a cardiology fellow at Duke University,

Another key point: African American patients were less likely than white patients to believe that statins were safe and effective, and they also reported significantly less trust in the drugs than their white counterparts. Doctors whose patients express skepticism about the drugs may be less likely to prescribe them, Nanna says.

Experts in the field of cardiovascular health hailed the new research as an important contribution. “It confirms disparities in the use of potentially life-saving medications, and it isolates that the disparities are related to factors that clinicians don’t often consider or measure,” says Keith C. Ferdinand, a professor of medicine at Tulane University who has written about health disparities. He adds, “The overall disparity is real. It directly impacts longevity.”

Craig Umscheid, an associate professor of medicine and epidemiology at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine, suggested that future studies might look more closely at black Americans’ mistrust of statins. “Is this a general belief about medications, or is it specific?” he asks. “You can imagine, given the history of medicine, why that might be.” He believes researchers should ask people the same questions about their trust in clinicians.

Duke’s Nanna points out that doctors are under increasing pressure to see more patients in less time, and shorter appointments won’t do much to make sure clinicians are prescribing appropriately or building trust with their patients. “We need to set up health systems where all patients who need treatment get treated,” he says. “If we raise the quality of care for everyone, then everyone benefits, and maybe we can close these treatment gaps.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate