SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Disturbing New Study Links Fracking Wells to Lower Birth Weights
'These findings cannot be ignored,' urges University of Pittsburgh researcher.
Jun 04, 2015
In an alarming new study, University of Pittsburgh researchers revealed that pregnant parents who live in close proximity to fracking wells are more likely than their counterparts who live farther away to have babies with lower birth weights.
Perinatal Outcomes and Unconventional Natural Gas Operations in Southwest Pennsylvania was published Wednesday in the journal PLOS ONE. Researchers from Pitt's Graduate School of Public Health investigated birth outcomes for 15,451 babies born between 2007 and 2010 in three counties in the fracking-heavy state of Pennsylvania: Washington, Westmoreland, and Butler.
"Mothers whose homes fell in the top group for proximity to a high density of such wells were 34 percent more likely to have babies who were 'small for gestational age' than mothers whose homes fell in the bottom 25 percent," states a summary of the report's conclusions. "Small for gestational age refers to babies whose birth weight ranks them below the smallest 10 percent compared to their peers."
A low birth weight is associated with medical problems later in life, including diabetes, heart disease, and high blood pressure.
The researchers say these findings persisted even when numerous other factors were considered, including prenatal care, education, age, and birthing history. They emphasized that the study does not definitively prove a causal relationship between fracking wells and low birth weights, but is certainly cause for concern--and further investigation.
"Our work is a first for our region and supports previous research linking unconventional gas development and adverse health outcomes," said co-author Dr. Bruce Pitt, chair of Pitt Public Health's Department of Environmental and Occupational Health. "These findings cannot be ignored. There is a clear need for studies in larger populations with better exposure estimates and more in-depth medical records."
The paper follows numerous scientific findings that fracking poses severe human health and environmental hazards, from contaminated drinking water to earthquakes. A study published in April by Johns Hopkins University researchers found that homes and buildings closer to Pennsylvania fracking sites had a higher concentration of the carcinogenic gas radon.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Sarah Lazare
Sarah Lazare is the editor of Workday Magazine and a contributing editor for In These Times. She is a former Staff Writer at Common Dreams. She comes from a background in independent journalism for publications including The Intercept, The Nation, and Tom Dispatch.
In an alarming new study, University of Pittsburgh researchers revealed that pregnant parents who live in close proximity to fracking wells are more likely than their counterparts who live farther away to have babies with lower birth weights.
Perinatal Outcomes and Unconventional Natural Gas Operations in Southwest Pennsylvania was published Wednesday in the journal PLOS ONE. Researchers from Pitt's Graduate School of Public Health investigated birth outcomes for 15,451 babies born between 2007 and 2010 in three counties in the fracking-heavy state of Pennsylvania: Washington, Westmoreland, and Butler.
"Mothers whose homes fell in the top group for proximity to a high density of such wells were 34 percent more likely to have babies who were 'small for gestational age' than mothers whose homes fell in the bottom 25 percent," states a summary of the report's conclusions. "Small for gestational age refers to babies whose birth weight ranks them below the smallest 10 percent compared to their peers."
A low birth weight is associated with medical problems later in life, including diabetes, heart disease, and high blood pressure.
The researchers say these findings persisted even when numerous other factors were considered, including prenatal care, education, age, and birthing history. They emphasized that the study does not definitively prove a causal relationship between fracking wells and low birth weights, but is certainly cause for concern--and further investigation.
"Our work is a first for our region and supports previous research linking unconventional gas development and adverse health outcomes," said co-author Dr. Bruce Pitt, chair of Pitt Public Health's Department of Environmental and Occupational Health. "These findings cannot be ignored. There is a clear need for studies in larger populations with better exposure estimates and more in-depth medical records."
The paper follows numerous scientific findings that fracking poses severe human health and environmental hazards, from contaminated drinking water to earthquakes. A study published in April by Johns Hopkins University researchers found that homes and buildings closer to Pennsylvania fracking sites had a higher concentration of the carcinogenic gas radon.
Sarah Lazare
Sarah Lazare is the editor of Workday Magazine and a contributing editor for In These Times. She is a former Staff Writer at Common Dreams. She comes from a background in independent journalism for publications including The Intercept, The Nation, and Tom Dispatch.
In an alarming new study, University of Pittsburgh researchers revealed that pregnant parents who live in close proximity to fracking wells are more likely than their counterparts who live farther away to have babies with lower birth weights.
Perinatal Outcomes and Unconventional Natural Gas Operations in Southwest Pennsylvania was published Wednesday in the journal PLOS ONE. Researchers from Pitt's Graduate School of Public Health investigated birth outcomes for 15,451 babies born between 2007 and 2010 in three counties in the fracking-heavy state of Pennsylvania: Washington, Westmoreland, and Butler.
"Mothers whose homes fell in the top group for proximity to a high density of such wells were 34 percent more likely to have babies who were 'small for gestational age' than mothers whose homes fell in the bottom 25 percent," states a summary of the report's conclusions. "Small for gestational age refers to babies whose birth weight ranks them below the smallest 10 percent compared to their peers."
A low birth weight is associated with medical problems later in life, including diabetes, heart disease, and high blood pressure.
The researchers say these findings persisted even when numerous other factors were considered, including prenatal care, education, age, and birthing history. They emphasized that the study does not definitively prove a causal relationship between fracking wells and low birth weights, but is certainly cause for concern--and further investigation.
"Our work is a first for our region and supports previous research linking unconventional gas development and adverse health outcomes," said co-author Dr. Bruce Pitt, chair of Pitt Public Health's Department of Environmental and Occupational Health. "These findings cannot be ignored. There is a clear need for studies in larger populations with better exposure estimates and more in-depth medical records."
The paper follows numerous scientific findings that fracking poses severe human health and environmental hazards, from contaminated drinking water to earthquakes. A study published in April by Johns Hopkins University researchers found that homes and buildings closer to Pennsylvania fracking sites had a higher concentration of the carcinogenic gas radon.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.