Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Earth Science

Toxic Air Pollution Particles Found in Lungs, Livers and Brains of Unborn Babies (theguardian.com) 70

Posted by msmash from the worrying-developments dept.
Toxic air pollution particles have been found in the lungs, livers and brains of unborn babies, long before they have taken their first breath. Researchers said their "groundbreaking" discovery was "very worrying," as the gestation period of foetuses is the most vulnerable stage of human development. From a report: Thousands of black carbon particles were found in each cubic millimetre of tissue, which were breathed in by the mother during pregnancy and then passed through the bloodstream and placenta to the foetus. Dirty air was already known to strongly correlate with increased miscarriages, premature births, low birth weights and disturbed brain development. But the new study provides direct evidence of how that harm may be caused. The scientists said the pollution could cause lifelong health effects.

The particles are made of soot from the burning of fossil fuels in vehicles, homes and factories and cause inflammation in the body, as well as carrying toxic chemicals. The study was conducted with non-smoking mothers in Scotland and Belgium, in places with relatively low air pollution. "We have shown for the first time that black carbon nanoparticles not only get into the first and second trimester placenta, but then also find their way into the organs of the developing foetus," said Prof Paul Fowler, at the University of Aberdeen in Scotland. "What is even more worrying is that these particles also get into the developing human brain," he said. "This means that it is possible for these nanoparticles to directly interact with control systems within human foetal organs and cells."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Toxic Air Pollution Particles Found in Lungs, Livers and Brains of Unborn Babies More

Toxic Air Pollution Particles Found in Lungs, Livers and Brains of Unborn Babies

Comments Filter:

  • Ok, but .... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by King_TJ ( 85913 ) on Thursday October 06, 2022 @11:48AM (#62943951) Journal

    I think it's also fair to say that particles of pollution like this were surely getting into the lungs, livers and brains of unborn babies as far back, as say, the Industrial Revolution, where pollution in cities or even small towns was often bad enough so thick black soot lingered in the air all day long.

    It's scientifically notable to prove unborn children are exposed to it. But putting it in perspective? It would seem the human body is able to handle a certain amount of this without problems, or else we should have seen FAR more birth defects, stillborn children and issues with pregnancies in the past than we do in modern times where pollution control devices are mandated as standard for all automobiles, and scrubbers are put on smokestacks of coal powered power plants, etc.

    • Probably had this for most of the 1-2 million history of human evolution, since we started to control fire.

      • Hmm, Iâ(TM)m sure our troglodyte ancestors had pristine clean air and water in their natal care caves.

    • "Handling it" doesn't mean it's necessarily safe for the long-term state of DNA in both individuals and the gene pool as a whole.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by haruchai ( 17472 )

      you're not accounting for the vast number of pregnancies that miscarry, most before the woman knows she's pregnant

    • Ugh - these monsters are dissecting unborn babies.

    • > or else we should have seen FAR more birth defects, stillborn children and issues with pregnancies in the past than we do in modern times

      Umm...We did?

    • Try most of human history. Black carbon is a significant portion of wood smoke.

    • Consider the occurrence of asthma in children is increasing [nih.gov] maybe now the anti-clean air and pro-pollution coal supporters will start to get onboard with cleaner solutions being put into place.

  • An Ironic Theory (Score:5, Funny)

    by Tablizer ( 95088 ) on Thursday October 06, 2022 @12:14PM (#62944029) Journal

    There's an interesting ironic theory that the evangelicals' pro-pollution stance is causing more LGBTQ+. Altering hormone levels is one of the biggest risk factor of many of these chemicals. (It's just speculation, I'm not claiming any clear evidence.)

    • Well, I can tell you didn't get that directly from Alex Jones because you didn't talk about the frogs turning gay. But I see his gay-pollution meme still lives.

      I'm glad someone else is carrying the torch now, lest hormonal imbalances inflict us with "more LGBTQ+". Whatever that is, and however hormones might cause it.

    • I've often wondered if the increase in diagnoses of autism-spectrum kids has something to do with early exposure to environmental toxins. Those same hormones effect early brain development in some pretty important ways.
      • I'd say it has more to do with parents wanting explanations for their shortcomings, the broadening of the criteria for the spectrum, personally.

        I now know 3 people diagnosed as being on the spectrum as adults.
        I also know one dude who was diagnosed with Aspergers, back when that was still a thing, but as a child.

        The 3 people above have one obvious thing in common: They're hypochondriacs, attention whores, and perpetual victims.
        1 of them is a girl I dated in high school. She was about 15x more popular t

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Tablizer ( 95088 )

          I'm not sure if you are blaming parents for poor parenting, doctors for creating "too many fake mental diseases", and/or children for being, well, human.

          • Parents and doctors.
            The kids are blameless, on the spectrum or not.

            • Re: (Score:1)

              by Tablizer ( 95088 )

              > kids are blameless

              I thought you said many are hypochondriacs?

              If the problem is "everybody", then your solution(s) is probably ignoring human nature: humans are screwy. Solutions that require near-perfect humans will fail.

              • I thought you said many are hypochondriacs?

                Adults, my man. Adults.
                Remember, I said:

                I now know 3 people diagnosed as being on the spectrum as adults.

                If the problem is "everybody", then your solution(s) is probably ignoring human nature: humans are screwy. Solutions that require near-perfect humans will fail.

                If the problem is "everybody", then perhaps a normal thing is being made into a problem

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by kackle ( 910159 )
      In the documentary "Brain Sex", the scientists there could make a rodent's offspring homosexual by altering the hormones in the expectant mother.

  • Anime (Score:2)

    by Xenx ( 2211586 )

    "This means that it is possible for these nanoparticles to directly interact with control systems within human foetal organs and cells."

    Doesn't this sound like the plot of some anime? I mean, the potential downsides aren't lost on me.. just the wording gives it that kind of tone to me.

  • My thinking on this: (Score:3)

    by wakeboarder ( 2695839 ) on Thursday October 06, 2022 @12:27PM (#62944063)
    People have been around cooking and campfires for millennia, so I would think that sooty particles in humans are nothing new. Now if the particles had some kind of new chemical then that would be a problem

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Jzanu ( 668651 )
      Cooking fires [google.com] are not safe either.
      • I am not saying they are safe, I'm saying that humans have had exposure to fires for a long time and it hasn't been the end of the world

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Jzanu ( 668651 )
          It is a problem of scale. In the first article [europepmc.org] of those results (which is what I meant to link before) it mentions that before 1960 or so there were not even 3 billion people on the planet. Now there are 3 billion people using cooking fires on a daily basis. Just because some people survived over time given a lower usage does not say much about survival in an environment with greater usage and greater release. While the article focuses on solid fuels this concept applies to all combustion, and because combu
          • While I agree with this, in industrial societies we have become much cleaner. In london in the 1800's you couldn't even see a block because the smoke was so thick. Prior to the 70's most industral plants did not require scrubbing of smoke to eliminate most aerosols. But in the last 30 years most of these things have changed. That leaves cars, cars are somewhat sooty, and diesel definitely is. But I'd say soot is on the decline compared to the exposure of most humans.
        • There's a very significant difference in risk profile between cooking over a fire for a while every day, and having literally every single breath you take inundated with the most harmful particles that fire emits.

          Stopping to rest in a cave in bear country, mostly safe-ish.
          Living in one? Whole different story.

  • yeah about that. [livescience.com]

    Many isotopes and radioactive elements occur naturally in the environment, where they get into plants and water. So, every time a person eats food or drinks water, they may be imbibing tiny amounts of radioactive isotopes. The biggest sources of radiation in our bodies are trace amounts of carbon 14 and potassium 40, said Mike Short, an associate professor of nuclear science and engineering at MIT. Though these isotopes make up most of our body's radiation, we take in only about 0.39 milligrams of potassium 40 and 1.8 nanograms of carbon 14 a day. The amount of radioactivity caused by isotopes inside the human body is comparable to 1% of the radiation dose people would get on a flight from Boston to Tokyo, Short said.

    If you're old enough you have TetraEthyl Lead in your body too. Joy.

    Choose your poison folks.

  • This is the new lead. It is safe to assume that these particles are substantially more prevalent in low-income neighbourhoods.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by ArchieBunker ( 132337 )

      Just think if today the government announced that lead was found to be a neurotoxin. Half the voters would be calling out fake news and eating lead out of spite.

  • If it's unborn, the correct word is "FETUS"

  • Politicians have to come from *somewhere*.

    I guess?

  • I'm not surprised, if you've ever been to Edinburgh - even if the air quality now is pretty good, the entire city is basically covered in soot. You can't tell me that none of that makes its way into the air or peoples lungs. Someone needs to powerwash the whole place.

  • Like H20 and N2 and CO2 ?
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Maybe this prepares foetal lungs to deal with polluted air once they are born?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Basur ( 9339985 )
      That's one of the reasons why it's so important to take care of health nowadays. Well, I don't there's anything we can do in order to avoid breathing something like that besides moving to some countryside, but we can support our health by taking some supplements. In my case, cannabis works for me and this article [profvalue.com] helped me choose the best strain.

Slashdot Top Deals

If all else fails, lower your standards.

Close