Passive smoking increases stillbirth risk, says study

[Amby 490]

Fathers-to-be should stop smoking to protect their unborn child from the risk of stillbirth or birth defects, scientists say.

University of Nottingham researchers found that pregnant women exposed to smoke at work or home increased their risk of stillbirth by 23% and of having a baby with defects by 13%.

They looked at 19 previous studies from around the world.

A UK expert said it was "vital" women knew the risks of second-hand smoke.

The studies used to pull this research together were carried out in North America, South America, Asia and Europe.

All the studies focused on pregnant women who did not smoke themselves but were passive smokers due to their proximity to a partner who smoked or work colleagues who smoked.

The combined data from the studies suggests that being exposed to more than 10 cigarettes a day is enough for the risks to be increased.

However, the University of Nottingham study did not find an increased risk of miscarriage or newborn death from second-hand smoke - only an increased risk of still birth and birth defects.

The results did not point to a link with any specific congenital birth defect.

Impact on sperm development

The researchers say fathers who smoke should be more aware of the danger they pose to their unborn child.

Previous research has shown that women who smoke during their pregnancy create serious health risks for their unborn baby, including low birth weight, premature birth and a range of serious birth defects such as cleft palate, club foot and heart problems.

Dr Jo Leonardi-Bee, lead researcher of the study and associate professor in medical statistics at the University of Nottingham, said they still did not know when the effects of the second-hand smoke begin.

"What we still don't know is whether it is the effect of sidestream smoke that the woman inhales that increases these particular risks or whether it is the direct effect of mainstream smoke that the father inhales during smoking that affects sperm development, or possibly both.

"More research is needed into this issue although we already know that smoking does have an impact on sperm development, so it is very important that men quit smoking before trying for a baby."

Dr Leonardi-Bee added: "The risks are related to the amount of cigarettes that are smoked so it is therefore very important for men to cut down.

"Ultimately though, in the interests of their partner and their unborn child, the best option would be to give up completely."

Andrew Shennan, professor of obstetrics at St. Thomas' Hospital in London and spokesperson for baby charity Tommy's, said: "It is vital that women are made aware of the possible risks associated with second-hand smoke and alert those around them of the impact it could potentially have on the health of their unborn baby.

"The chemicals in cigarettes are known to significantly increase the risk of serious pregnancy complications."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12711615

[^_^ 5,021]

Socialist nonsense.

[TBoneTX 45,288]

Socialist nonsense.

And it could also be yet another meta-analysis with a flawed statistical basis.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Fathers-to-be should stop smoking to protect their unborn child from the risk of stillbirth or birth defects, scientists say.

University of Nottingham researchers found that pregnant women exposed to smoke at work or home increased their risk of stillbirth by 23% and of having a baby with defects by 13%.

They looked at 19 previous studies from around the world.

A UK expert said it was "vital" women knew the risks of second-hand smoke.

The studies used to pull this research together were carried out in North America, South America, Asia and Europe.

All the studies focused on pregnant women who did not smoke themselves but were passive smokers due to their proximity to a partner who smoked or work colleagues who smoked.

The combined data from the studies suggests that being exposed to more than 10 cigarettes a day is enough for the risks to be increased.

However, the University of Nottingham study did not find an increased risk of miscarriage or newborn death from second-hand smoke - only an increased risk of still birth and birth defects.

The results did not point to a link with any specific congenital birth defect.

Impact on sperm development

The researchers say fathers who smoke should be more aware of the danger they pose to their unborn child.

Previous research has shown that women who smoke during their pregnancy create serious health risks for their unborn baby, including low birth weight, premature birth and a range of serious birth defects such as cleft palate, club foot and heart problems.

Dr Jo Leonardi-Bee, lead researcher of the study and associate professor in medical statistics at the University of Nottingham, said they still did not know when the effects of the second-hand smoke begin.

"What we still don't know is whether it is the effect of sidestream smoke that the woman inhales that increases these particular risks or whether it is the direct effect of mainstream smoke that the father inhales during smoking that affects sperm development, or possibly both.

"More research is needed into this issue although we already know that smoking does have an impact on sperm development, so it is very important that men quit smoking before trying for a baby."

Dr Leonardi-Bee added: "The risks are related to the amount of cigarettes that are smoked so it is therefore very important for men to cut down.

"Ultimately though, in the interests of their partner and their unborn child, the best option would be to give up completely."

Andrew Shennan, professor of obstetrics at St. Thomas' Hospital in London and spokesperson for baby charity Tommy's, said: "It is vital that women are made aware of the possible risks associated with second-hand smoke and alert those around them of the impact it could potentially have on the health of their unborn baby.

"The chemicals in cigarettes are known to significantly increase the risk of serious pregnancy complications."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12711615

While the article is cute, it's a 'scare' tactic of course as usual that doesn't use 'real' numbers to tell its story.

about 1 in 160 babies are stillborn.

So that's .625% of babies

So add "23%" in the course of their study (which is skewed in the first place by us not knowing the full stats)

that would 'possibly' make the percentage .769% of babies that are stillborn under those circumstances.

Now the other way to look at this possibly is that the .625% is the accurate number overall, so if we were to reduce that by the "23%" then it could possibly only be .469% of babies that would be stillborn.

The odds are though, that the number falls somewhere in the middle of that or maybe even higher as the 1 in 160 is just an average like anything else.

MY POINT IS, is that it doesn't make much of a difference at all. This was a non-story and a study that at the end of the day didn't produce the results they were hoping for (as usual).

[Amby 490]

Because passive and secondhand smoke doesn't harm people?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Because passive and secondhand smoke doesn't harm people?

Not to the extent some want to make it out to.

That wasn't what I was saying though. I was pointing to the way the article using 'large' numbers to skew the 'real' numbers.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So what is an acceptable % of risk?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

So what is an acceptable % of risk?

in this situation?

Anything less than "60%" if you want to get down to the root.

That keeps the % less than 1.

Anything 'bad' that happens to less than 1% of the population, isn't really that bad at all relatively speaking.

Sure it's bad for those it happens to, but at the same time in an overall 'effect' it's not bad at all.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So if you know that smoking raises the risk, it's not worth doing anything about it?

Still births are, after all, only a single piece of that puzzle.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

So if you know that smoking raises the risk, it's not worth doing anything about it?

Still births are, after all, only a single piece of that puzzle.

that's my point though, that "23% increase" isn't even truly a noticeably increase at all... In relation to the actual number of still births, it's not even really a dent.

I also gave you both scenarios and explained how much of a difference it is/isn't making based on the current number of stillbirths.

It's those situations where you see "10000% increase in the odds of factor X happening" when that 10000% take the numebr from .008% to .0081%.

[Amby 490]

are you a statistician now too?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It's a personal decision is it not?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

are you a statistician now too?

? where did i make that claim?

How is simple math claiming anything other than the obvious?

[Amby 490]

Obviously scientists, doctors, researchers, etc think that this study is important even if you don't think it is. By knowing there is an increased risk (even if it doesn't matter to you), they know there is a risk and it helps them learn more about the body and how it reacts to things while its developing. This helps develop new hypotheses, sparks new ideas, new research, and eventually new cures or medications. Knowing there is a risk helps scientists develop ways to explore why there is a risk and learn how to decrease that risk and eventually eliminate it. Right now they don't know enough to tell you more than "passive smoke increases stillbirth risk" but with more research they will be able to tell you why, what you can do other than "don't smoke" to prevent this, and it opens the door for them to learn more about how a fetus develops and what happens to cells during development.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Never mind. It's all good if paul says it is.

Next pregnant women will be given a green flag to do that cigar party trick.