Community | October 07, 2008 | 7 comments

Fetus 'suffers from mother's bad air'

Image
TravG73
Newborn babies who are exposed to air pollution in the womb have to breathe faster to get more oxygen into their lungs, according to research confirming environmental fumes can damage a child's lungs before birth.

A study of 241 Swiss infants shows for the first time that the more pollution a pregnant woman breathes in, the more her baby will struggle for breath.

Australian child health experts say the findings support recent research on Brisbane mothers and help build a case for more environmentally-friendly town planning and better efforts to avoid pollutants in pregnancy.

"This is scary proof that we need to be paying a lot more attention to how we are designing our cities," said Professor Peter Sly, director of the WHO Collaborating Centre for Research on Children's Environmental Health in Perth.

Respiratory specialists at the University of Bern measured the day-to-day air quality of a group of pregnant women and measured lung health of their babies at five weeks.

Babies of mothers who had the highest exposure to pollution breathed an average of 48 times a minute, compared with 42 for those less exposed.

They also had higher levels of exhaled nitric oxide, a marker of airway inflammation.

Those living within 150 metres of a major road were most affected, lead researcher Philipp (Philipp) Latzin told the European Respiratory Society congress in Berlin.

Previous studies have only shown lung damage from air pollution in school-aged children.

Dr Latzin said he was uncertain of the mechanisms but it was possible that oxidative stress and inflammation in the mother's lungs may stifle blood flow to the placenta, reducing nutrient supply.

If the popular theory that exposure to toxins in the womb has lasting effects proves true, "then these early influences on the respiratory system will lead to an increase in lung disease in adulthood and reduce life expectancy," Dr Latzin said.

Prof Sly said this was further evidence for a need to strengthen pollution reduction measures and improve town planning.

"With too many road developments in Australia the only concern is moving traffic and that has to change," Prof Sly said.

"Air pollution has a serious impact on people living near major roads and these roads are everywhere.

"Climate change is going to increase humidity and make the situation worse so we need to get smart about it now."
  1. groups:
    Community,   Green,   Earth and Science,   Health
  2. tags:
    News Green Earth and Science Environment 9 more
  3.     
    |

7 comments // Fetus 'suffers from mother's bad air'

  • kennymotown
  • J_Jammer
    • 0
      J_Jammer [removed]  
    • So what?

      If you believe in pro choice what does it matter of the health of the baby? You can't possibly care. Though I guess it's more about the pollution than the life it affects.

      I sometimes think people care more about the planet and that of the animals than humans...which makes them no better than who they complain about.

    • 3 years ago
  • fuhleesha
    • 0
      fuhleesha  
    • J_Jammer:

      Are you kidding? Pro-choice doesn't mean pro-abortion.

      I'm not pro-choice because I think babies are useless or something like that. I'm pro-choice because I think that if a woman is in a situation where carrying and birthing a baby is going to cause incredible distress (after rape or incest for example, or if the girl is too young, or if the mother's life is in danger), she should have the right to choose not to.

      If a woman chooses not to have the baby, then it is her business.

      If a woman chooses life, then the health of the baby is of course very important, and it becomes her responsibility to take care of that.

      With this study, it becomes everyone's responsibility to help make sure the air is clean for those women who choose to carry their babies.

    • 3 years ago
  • J_Jammer
    • 0
      J_Jammer [removed]  
    • J_Jammer:

      You either care or you don't. You don't decide to care when the person decides to have the child or not care when they decide to get rid of it.

      It's still her body. She decides to smoke..oh well her body. She decides to drink? Oh well her body.

      When is it right to decide that she has that right and then take it away when people all the sudden become sympathetic to the needs of the unborn child?

    • 3 years ago
  • LindseyIndigo
  • DeliaTheArtist
    • 0
      DeliaTheArtist  
    • J_Jammer:

      "If you believe in pro choice what does it matter of the health of the baby? You can't possibly care." Hey, stupidity and wrongfulness all in one!

      Being pro-choice has much more to do with women's rights than whatever crap you are spewing. Like fuhleesha said, once the woman CHOOSES life, she should be responsible for that life. Being Pro-Choice does not mean you do not care about children, life, women, health, etc, it simply means you think that abortion should remain a safe and legal option for women.

      Open your mind, get your facts straight, think before you type!

    • 3 years ago
  • J_Jammer
    • 0
      J_Jammer [removed]  
    • J_Jammer:

      I'm not the one that's closed off to thinking of what is life.

      That would be your spot. I dare not take it.

      And you shouldn't care because you didn't care a moth prior when she could have killed the baby...why care now?

      Claiming woman's rights is nothing but a cop out.

    • 3 years ago
more from Community:

top videos