Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 15 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Friday October 20, @05:48PM   Printer-friendly

A study has found that pregnant women exposed to air pollution (as inferred by their residential addresses, not lung biopsies or something) give birth to babies with shorter telomeres, considered a sign of premature aging damage:

"Reducing exposure to air pollution is a good thing, for both the parents and for the unborn baby," said Pam Factor-Litvak, author of an accompanying editorial and a public health researcher at Columbia University in New York. "Prenatal exposure to air pollution is associated with a host of adverse outcomes," Factor-Litvak said by email.

For the study, Tim Nawrot of Hasselt University in Diepenbeek, Belgium, and colleagues examined telomere length from samples of cord blood and placental tissue for 641 newborns in the Flanders region. They also looked at mothers' exposure to pollutants known as PM 2.5, a mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets smaller than 2.5 micrometers in diameter that can include dust, dirt, soot and smoke and are often found in traffic exhaust.

Some previous research has linked exposure to traffic fumes and air pollution to higher odds of infertility as well as an increased risk of delivering underweight or premature babies. Prior research has also linked shorter telomeres to an increased risk of a variety of chronic health problems in adults, including heart disease and cancer.

Also at CleanTechnica.

Prenatal Air Pollution and Newborns' Predisposition to Accelerated Biological Aging (open, DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.3024) (DX)

Editorial: Environmental Exposures, Telomere Length at Birth, and Disease Susceptibility in Later Life (DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.3562) (DX)


Original Submission

Related Stories

UNICEF Says 17 Million Babies Worldwide Breathe Air Pollution Six Times Worse Than Recommended Limit 12 comments

Toxic air puts 17 million babies' brains and lungs at risk: UNICEF

About 17 million babies worldwide live in areas where outdoor air pollution is six times the recommended limit, and their brain development is at risk, the U.N. children's agency (UNICEF) said on Wednesday.

The majority of these babies – more than 12 million – are in South Asia, it said, in a study of children under one-year-old, using satellite imagery to identify worst-affected regions.

"Not only do pollutants harm babies' developing lungs – they can permanently damage their developing brains – and, thus, their futures," said UNICEF executive director Anthony Lake.

The links between air pollution and dain bramage are not yet conclusive, according to the report's author.

UNICEF press release. Danger in the air (PDF).

Related: Air Quality Unsafe for 90% of People In Urban Centres
80 Percent of World's City Dwellers Breathing Bad Air: UN
Study Links Pregnant Women's Exposure to Air Pollution to Shorter Telomeres in Babies
Lancet Report Says Pollution Caused 9 Million Premature Deaths in 2015
Air Pollution Linked to Osteoporosis and Bone Fractures


Original Submission

Air Pollution Linked to Osteoporosis and Bone Fractures 8 comments

Air pollution has been linked to weakening of bones:

Poor air quality may be a modifiable risk factor for osteoporosis and bone fractures, especially among people living in low-income communities, according to a newly published analysis of data from two independent studies.

In one study researchers documented higher rates of hospital admissions for bone fractures in communities exposed to elevated levels of ambient particulate matter (PM2·5) air pollution in an analysis of data on more than nine million Medicare enrollees.

In another 8-year follow-up of approximately 700 middle-age, low-income adults participating in a bone health study, participants living in areas with relatively high levels of PM2·5 and black carbon vehicle emissions had lower levels of a key calcium and bone-related hormone and greater decreases in bone mineral density than participants exposed to lower levels of these air pollutants.

All associations were linear and observed -- at least for part of the PM2·5 distribution -- at PM2·5 concentrations below the annual average limits set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (12 μg/m3) and most other industrialized nations.

[...] The researchers acknowledged multiple limitations in both studies, which limit the ability to establish causality. But in an editorial [open, DOI: 10.1016/S2542-5196(17)30143-2] [DX] published with the studies, Tuan Nguyen, PhD, of the Garvan Institute of Medical Research in New South Wales, Australia, wrote that the studies are just the latest in a growing body of research linking air pollution exposure to osteoporosis: "Osteoporosis and its consequence of fragility fracture represent one of the most important public health problems worldwide because fracture is associated with increased mortality."

Association of air particulate pollution with bone loss over time and bone fracture risk: analysis of data from two independent studies (open, DOI: 10.1016/S2542-5196(17)30136-5) (DX)

Related: 80 Percent of World's City Dwellers Breathing Bad Air: UN
Study Links Pregnant Women's Exposure to Air Pollution to Shorter Telomeres in Babies
Lancet Report Says Pollution Caused 9 Million Premature Deaths in 2015


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough

Mark All as Read

Mark All as Unread

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Friday October 20, @06:00PM (7 children)

    by bob_super (1357) on Friday October 20, @06:00PM (#585351)

    So, if you add more pollution, kids get premature aging, cutting the education budget?
    I guess Republicans' policies are based on science!

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 20, @06:29PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 20, @06:29PM (#585359)

      yes, the rich people will just get regular deliveries of sixpacks/cans of perrier-aire and be fine!

      its the only legal way to solve The Other problem.

    • (Score: 5, Funny) by DeathMonkey on Friday October 20, @08:22PM (1 child)

      by DeathMonkey (1380) on Friday October 20, @08:22PM (#585411) Journal

      On the flip side maybe we can get them to care about pollution by calling it a REALLY late term abortion.

      • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday October 21, @02:13AM

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Saturday October 21, @02:13AM (#585532)

        They only care about abortion because they want to punish the sinners who are having more sex than they are. Children are God's ultimate punishment.

    • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday October 21, @02:01AM (3 children)

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Saturday October 21, @02:01AM (#585527)

      I don't think this level of telomere shortening prematurely ages enough to cut the education budget, but it might make Social Security and Medicaid solvent again.

      • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Saturday October 21, @03:06AM (2 children)

        by Immerman (3985) on Saturday October 21, @03:06AM (#585545)

        Social Security is only having solvency problems because Congress has borrowed billions of dollars from its fund.

        • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Saturday October 21, @05:25AM (1 child)

          by bob_super (1357) on Saturday October 21, @05:25AM (#585572)

          And also because raising the damn cap, which would eliminate the problem altogether, is taxing the rich...

          • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday October 21, @11:47AM

            by JoeMerchant (3937) on Saturday October 21, @11:47AM (#585635)

            If you tax the rich then they'll all pout, and take their money elsewhere.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 20, @07:05PM (16 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 20, @07:05PM (#585379)

    <sarcasm>The free market will fix this. The government should under no circumstance try to do anything here. People will magically move to the place of their desires where they either get the best pollution or the least pollution. Anyone who doesn't move away from these areas of pollution clearly desires being polluted. Why are you trying to take away their Freedom(tm)? Social and Historical reasons for this play no role because the market is always correct!</sarcasm>

    • (Score: 2) by takyon on Friday October 20, @07:12PM

      by takyon (881) <{takyon} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Friday October 20, @07:12PM (#585384) Journal

      Just wait until you see the other pollution story I submitted...

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 20, @07:27PM (11 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 20, @07:27PM (#585386)

      Individuals are free to enter into voluntary contracts with their energy provider and the local department of motor vehicles. Any person that does not like pollution is free to buy an electric vehicle, but they must not be allowed to infringe upon the rights of others to choose gas powered vehicles. If the pollution in their city gets too bad they can simply update their contractual agreement to demand less pollution, or they can use the market to provide incentives for others to switch to EVs. Offer a competing contract, sink life savings into providing everyone with the "cost savings" they require to make the right choice. This is the free market at work! Such a series of contracts will naturally get society to evolve into the most optimal configuration.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 20, @07:33PM (4 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 20, @07:33PM (#585390)

        I produce all the energy I need with solar panels and a couple windmills, batteries during the night.

        I did not enter a contract with anybody to allow their refuse to waft on to my property. I'm not certain which contract enforcer to hire, because there is no contract to allow their waste to trespass on my property. What do you suggest?

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 20, @08:01PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 20, @08:01PM (#585399)

          Public Dumping?

          I am pretty sure there are stiff fines for public littering, and even stiffer fines for public dumping of materials considered 'toxic waste' or otherwise harmful to the health of the general public.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 20, @08:53PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 20, @08:53PM (#585428)

            No, no, no. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the responses.

            But I'm from Ancapistan! Where were have an emergent society based on voluntary exchange, contracts, and all that stuff. There's no violent imposition here!

            Except for all the smog that's reducing my solar panel efficiency!

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 20, @08:44PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 20, @08:44PM (#585426)

          When it comes to a "contract" and "enforcer", the entity which immediately springs to mind is The Mob. [google.com]

          -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

        • (Score: 2) by t-3 on Friday October 20, @09:48PM

          by t-3 (4907) on Friday October 20, @09:48PM (#585445) Journal

          Get your air quality regularly tested. If you can show a change and link it to a polluter, you can sue.

      • (Score: 3, Funny) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday October 20, @07:53PM (5 children)

        by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Friday October 20, @07:53PM (#585397)

        If this is a joke...well, don't quit your day job for the late-night comedy circuit. If this is not a joke, you are beyond salvation.

        • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday October 20, @08:32PM (3 children)

          by DeathMonkey (1380) on Friday October 20, @08:32PM (#585416) Journal

          Azuma and DeathMonkey have formed a voluntary contract to keep Violently Imposed Monopoly Guy off the site.

          The fact that Azuma and DM have no relationship with the site (polluters), and no ability to enforce our contract terms (laws), is not a problem in Violently Imposed Monopoly Guy's universe.

          • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday October 20, @09:16PM (2 children)

            by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Friday October 20, @09:16PM (#585435)

            Wait, we have? I didn't see any contract. ...oh, damn it, is this because I told that little cat-rabbitty thing I'd fight for him?

            • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday October 20, @09:29PM (1 child)

              by DeathMonkey (1380) on Friday October 20, @09:29PM (#585440) Journal

              You must be great fun at parties!

              • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21, @12:22AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21, @12:22AM (#585490)

                She does not have to be great fun at parties. She never agreed to that!

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 20, @09:12PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 20, @09:12PM (#585433)

          I don't expect to make any money off of it, just trollin the troll. I'm sure the shills do much better with content drafts sent to them by their friendly Deep Learning(tm) networks and media content distributors. It is surprisingly hard to wing it for crazy mode, but I don't get much practice either. You earning a tidy profit off your Leno and SNL comedy writing?

    • (Score: 5, Informative) by JoeMerchant on Saturday October 21, @02:08AM (2 children)

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Saturday October 21, @02:08AM (#585530)

      Pollution moved us out of Houston, plain and simple. Salary and benefits were better there, job market was more robust there, cost of living was lower there, good BBQ restaurants on every corner there, people were friendly and happy there (being able to afford to live well, did I mention BBQ?, will do that) and none of that matters when you can't breathe the fucking air without feeling like it's killing you. 2005-ish, we'd drive out of town on the weekends and could feel the ozone tightness in the chest lighten as we got north of Bush airport, and feel the tightness return as we drove back into town. Tar-dust would accumulate on the cars overnight, and get into the house even with the windows closed A/C on. God damned pesticide warehouses caught fire when we were there, more than once, and one put an ugly black plume straight over our house from 10+ miles away.

      Toyed with the idea of moving the family north and commuting in to Ellington Field in a Mooney, would have been a problem on weather days, but it would have been worth the effort just to have clean air to breathe at night. Ended up just selling out and moving someplace cleaner, more expensive, with a crappier job market. It was worth every penny.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21, @05:05AM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21, @05:05AM (#585566)

        Much of Houston's pollution problem can in fact be traced to some sort of BBQ obsession.

        We talk about diesel and coal being dirty, but those are normally filtered. There are particulate traps on vehicles and bag houses (sort of the same thing) on power plants.

        BBQ is nothing like that. Nobody ever puts a filter on it. Even cigarettes have filters!

        It's not just restaurants that do BBQ. Every random person is burning stuff on his porch, started up with excess lighter fluid and then left burning after the food is cooked.

        • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Sunday October 22, @02:21AM

          by JoeMerchant (3937) on Sunday October 22, @02:21AM (#585846)

          BBQ contributes, no doubt, as does auto exhaust, but when you stand next to the big chemical plants you can clearly see that they are what sets SouthEast Houston apart from other places - sure they're filtered, but not effectively, not all the time, and not for every chemical. BBQ and auto exhaust don't put tar dust in the air the way that flarestacks do.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 20, @08:09PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 20, @08:09PM (#585400)

    It's how you use them. Said no woman ever.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 20, @09:56PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 20, @09:56PM (#585447)

      I can't hold all these chromosomes.

  • (Score: 2) by Snotnose on Friday October 20, @11:15PM (1 child)

    by Snotnose (1623) on Friday October 20, @11:15PM (#585468)

    People with sub-par nose hairs have kids with sub-par life-spans. We need to encourage this! MAGA!

    • (Score: 2, Funny) by Aegis on Saturday October 21, @05:50AM

      by Aegis (6714) on Saturday October 21, @05:50AM (#585578)

      People with sub-par nose hairs have kids with sub-par life-spans.

      Are you really bragging about your HEPA filter nose hairs? I can actually see them from here.

  • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21, @08:32AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21, @08:32AM (#585602)

    So this is why i don't have any Jedi power!

(1)