Search
Advanced Search
Share this Article info
  • Facebook StumbleUpon Connotea CiteULike Bibliography

Open Access

Correspondence

Air Pollution and Birth Weight in Connecticut and Massachusetts

Muhammad Towhid Salam

Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California, E-mail:msalam@usc.edu

In their paper, Bell et al. (2007) examined the effects of ambient air pollutants on birth weight in children born in Connecticut and Massachusetts between 1999 and 2002. The study is the largest among the studies conducted in the United States and has provided evidence that, even with pollutant levels that met the air quality standards, significant reductions in birth weight occurred.

The study findings are in line with other articles; however, there are several concerns that need further attention. Infants with preterm birth (born at 32–37 weeks of gestation) were included in the analysis, and this may have affected the overall and the third trimester–specific results. Although these children comprised only 6.7% of the sample, their birth weights were greatly affected (i.e., mean birth weight was 585–1,050 g less than those born at 39–40 weeks of gestation).

In the discussion, Bell et al. (2007) pointed out that the effect of air pollutants on birth weight could be mediated by the effect of these pollutants on preterm birth and/or on fetal growth. It is unclear whether the effects observed in this study were mediated by one or both competing mechanisms. Bell et al.’s Table 6 compared studies that tested pollutant effects mediated only by fetal growth (Basu et al. 2004;Parker et al. 2005;Ritz and Yu 1999;Salam et al. 2005), only by preterm birth (Rogers and Dunlop 2006;Rogers et al. 2000), or by both mechanisms separately (Wilhelm and Ritz 2003, 2005;Woodruff et al. 2003). Bell et al. (2007) could have further benefited readers if they had evaluated pollutant effects on intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR), a metric of pathological fetal growth. Although IUGR is conventionally defined based on the bottom 10th percentile of the birth weight distribution, a better approach would be to define it by < 15th percentile of predicted birth weight based on gestational age, infant sex, and maternal race.

Pollutant data were not available from all counties. As such, different counties contributed to different exposure effects. This makes the comparison between single and two-pollutant models difficult. In Figure 2 (Bell et al. 2007), for example, the effect of particulate matter < 2.5 μm in aerodynamic diameter (PM2.5; measured in 13 counties) seems to have been significantly changed when adjusted for carbon monoxide (measured in 7 counties). It would have been more meaningful if sensitivity analyses were conducted comparing one and two-pollutant models restricting to those counties that had data on all exposures.

The detrimental effect of PM2.5 on birth weight was significantly larger in black infants than in white infants. Hispanic white infants were at increased risk of low birth weight in a similar population (Maisonet et al. 2001). Thus, combining non-Hispanic and Hispanic whites into one group, it is not possible to determine whether Hispanic infants were disproportionately affected by ambient pollutants. There is significant heterogeneity in the percentages of African-American and Hispanic white population by county (U.S. Census Bureau 2007). For example, within the state of Massachusetts, 25% of residents were African American and about 18% were Hispanic in Suffolk, whereas about 2% each were African American and Hispanic in Barnstable. In addition, in counties with higher proportions of African-American and Hispanic populations, the percentages living in poverty were also much higher. Although Bell et al. (2007) acknowledged within-county heterogeneity, questions remain about whether significant heterogeneity in effects existed across counties.

In summary, the results would have been more appealing if Bell et al. (2007) could provide data to show whether pollutant effects were mediated by preterm birth and/or affected fetal growth, and whether these effects were greater in Hispanics, in mothers who smoked, and in counties with a higher proportion of people living in poverty.

References Top

  1. Basu R, Woodruff TJ, Parker JD, Saulnier L, Schoendorf KC. 2004. Comparing exposure metrics in the relationship between PM2.5 and birth weight in California J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol 14:391–396.15361898 Find this article online
  2. Bell ML, Ebisu K, Belanger K. 2007. Ambient air pollution and low birth weight in Connecticut and Massachusetts Environ Health Perspect 115:1118–1125.17637932 Find this article online
  3. Maisonet M, Bush TJ, Correa A, Jaakkola JJ. 2001. Relation between ambient air pollution and low birth weight in the northeastern United States Environ Health Perspect 109(suppl 3):351–356.11427384 Find this article online
  4. Parker JD, Woodruff TJ, Basu R, Schoendorf KC. 2005. Air pollution and birth weight among term infants in California Pediatrics 115(1):121–128.15629991 Find this article online
  5. Ritz B, Yu F. 1999. The effect of ambient carbon monoxide on low birth weight among children born in southern California between 1989 and 1993 Environ Health Perspect 107:17–25.9872713 Find this article online
  6. Rogers JF, Dunlop AL. 2006. Air pollution and very low birth weight infants: a target population? Pediatrics 118(1):156–164.16818561 Find this article online
  7. Rogers JF, Thompson SJ, Addy CL, McKeown RE, Cowen DJ, Decoufle P. 2000. Association of very low birth weight with exposures to environmental sulfur dioxide and total suspended particulates Am J Epidemiol 151(6):602–613.10733042 Find this article online
  8. Salam MT, Millstein J, Li YF, Lurmann FW, Margolis HG, Gilliland FD. 2005. Birth outcomes and prenatal exposure to ozone, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter: results from the Children’s Health Study Environ Health Perspect 113:1638–1644.16263524 Find this article online
  9. U.S. Census Bureau2007 [[accessed 4 July 2007]]. State and County QuickFacts. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
  10. Wilhelm M, Ritz B. 2003. Residential proximity to traffic and adverse birth outcomes in Los Angeles County, California, 1994–1996 Environ Health Perspect 111:207–216.12573907 Find this article online
  11. Wilhelm M, Ritz B. 2005. Local variations in CO and particulate air pollution and adverse birth outcomes in Los Angeles County, California, USA Environ Health Perspect 113:1212–1221.16140630 Find this article online
  12. Woodruff TJ, Parker JD, Kyle AD, Schoendorf KC. 2003. Disparities in exposure to air pollution during pregnancy Environ Health Perspect 111:942–946.12782496 Find this article online
Post Your Note (For Public Viewing)
Compose Your Note
 
Declare any competing interests.
Add a note to this text.
Please follow our guidelines for notes and comments and review our competing interests policy. Comments that do not conform to our guidelines will be promptly removed and the user account disabled. The following must be avoided:
  • Remarks that could be interpreted as allegations of misconduct
  • Unsupported assertions or statements
  • Inflammatory or insulting language
Add a note to this text.
You must be logged in to add a note to an article. You may log in by clicking here or cancel this note.
Add a note to this text.
You cannot annotate this area of the document. Close
Add a note to this text.
You cannot create an annotation that spans different sections of the document; please adjust your selection.
Close
Rate This Article
Please follow our guidelines for rating and review our competing interests policy. Comments that do not conform to our guidelines will be promptly removed and the user account disabled. The following must be avoided:
  1. Remarks that could be interpreted as allegations of misconduct
  2. Unsupported assertions or statements
  3. Inflammatory or insulting language
Compose Your Annotation
 
Declare any competing interests.