Skip to main content

Maternal DDT exposure associated with autism?

A new study suggests exposure to residues persisting in the environment from pesticides banned fifty years ago is associated with autism.

The new study provides the first biomarker-based evidence in humans that maternal exposure to DDT residues in the food chain may increase the risk of autism in their children.

DDTs (organochlorines) were widely banned as pesticides from the late 1970s,  but residues persist in the food chain.



These persistent organic pollutants can be transferred from the mother across the placenta to the fetus, resulting in fetal blood concentrations ranging from 30% to 50% of levels found in maternal blood.  

The investigation,  published online in the American Journal of Psychiatry, was derived from the Finnish Prenatal Study of Autism, a large national birth cohort with maternal serum specimens from early pregnancy tested for levels of the organochlorine DDT (dichlorodiphenyl-trichloroethane) and its metabolite DDE (dichlorodiphenyl-dichloroethylene).

Low birthweight and poor cognitive development

Maternal exposure to DDT and DDE is associated with both premature birth and low birthweight.  It is also associated with adverse childhood neurocognitive outcomes, including autistic spectrum.

Autism is a complex neurodevelopment disorder characterised by impaired language, disrupted social interactions, and stereotyped behaviours and interests.  

In this study DDE levels were significantly increased in mothers of children with autism compared with mothers of those without autism.  

The authors of the study say
This study has potential implications for the prevention of autism and may provide a better understanding of its pathogenesis.
The authors also say that although there seems to be a link between autism and DDT exposure, the overall risk of having a child with the disorder is low and further research is needed to establish a clear link.  




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba...

Ethical considerations of a National DNA database.

Plans for a national DNA database   will be revealed by the Prime Minister this week. This is the same proposal the Tories and Liberal Democrats opposed when presented by the Blair government because they argued it posed  a threat to civil liberties. This time it is expected to offer an 'opt-out' clause for those who do not wish their data to be stored; exactly how this would operate isn't yet clear. But does it matter and does it really pose a threat to civil liberties? When it comes to biology and ethics we tend to have a distorted view of DNA and genetics. This is for two reasons. The first is that it is thought that our genome somehow represents the individual as a code that then gets translated. This is biologically speaking wrong. DNA is a template and part of the machinery for making proteins. It isn't a code in anything like the sense of being a 'blueprint' or 'book of life'.  Although these metaphors are used often they are just that, metapho...

In praise of social housing and the welfare state

I will declare an interest. I grew up in a one-parent family on a council estate. I occasionally attended my local comprehensive school. I say occasionally because for the most part I played truant. I spent much of my time skipping school but walking and reading on the local common. It had a windmill which I loved. It later had Wombles but that is another story. I contemplated life under the sun. Like many others, I left school at 15 with no qualifications. My penultimate school report said they  'could see no reason why public money should be wasted on the attempted education of this boy'. So I declare this interest of a privileged upbringing. Social housing kept a roof over our heads at a rent mum could (barely) afford; and oh how I recall the days  when she couldn't. She worked all hours to keep that roof over our heads. In those early days of Rock-and-Roll, Bill Haley and the Comets, Adam Faith, Billy Fury, Cliff Richard (yes I was/am a fan), the estate had three c...