The record
Peer-reviewed literature independently documents that women of color have higher levels of beauty-product-related environmental chemicals than white women independent of socioeconomic status, and that targeted advertising exploits mainstream beauty norms to influence use of these products.
Claim scope
THIS IS ALMOST CERTAINLY THE 'STUDY BY GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY' Rep. Pressley referenced: verified per-record as Zota AR (George Washington University Milken Institute School of Public Health) & Shamasunder B, Am J Obstet Gynecol 2017;217:418.e1-418.e6, DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.07.020, PMC5614862. It provides a peer-reviewed framework for the targeted-marketing-as-health-disparity concept.
What this source does not establish
It is a COMMENTARY, not an original study, and it is not about talc or ovarian cancer. It does NOT report that Black women use genital talc at higher rates — Rep. Pressley's characterization ('found that black women in particular again used talcum powders in the genital area at higher rates') overstates what this paper reports.
Limitations
If the page wants a citation for higher genital-powder prevalence among Black women, the correct source is PMID 34155063 (35.8% vs 29.5% among cases) or PMID 27197282 (62.8% of cases / 52.9% of controls reported powder use in an all-AA study) — NOT this commentary. My identification of this paper as the one Pressley meant is INFERRED from the GWU affiliation and subject matter; the transcript names no study.
Source
Pmid — 28822238