> The health effect is especially critical for urban disadvantaged groups, where exposure to partical matter has been shown to be related to increased asthma rates, cardiovascular disease, and other respiratory conditions.

Also disadvantaged groups might consume less healthcare and might be less aware of air quality, etc. and so may be more likely to have bad health outcomes for given environmental inputs.

Sincere reply assuming sincere question, the implication is that they are statistically much more likely to live near interstates and highways. Since historically land owned by poor 'disadvantaged groups' has been easier for state and federal governments to get their hands on.

The sentence, while poorly written, isn't saying that "health impacts don't matter for 'non-disadvantaged people'". A reading that is disingenuous.

perhaps the disadvantage is that, over time, living nearest to traffic _is_ the disadvantage, as it means living most immediately near pollution concentration.