CHEMICALS AND CONCENTRATION: Children exposed to phthalates in the womb are more likely to develop problems with attention.
Image: ISTOCKPHOTO/LOVLEAH
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
Children exposed in the womb to chemicals in cosmetics and fragrances are more likely to develop behavioral problems commonly found in children with attention deficit disorders, according to a study of New York City school-age children published Thursday.
Scientists at Mount Sinai School of Medicine reported that mothers who had high levels of phthalates during their pregnancies were more likely to have children with poorer scores in the areas of attention, aggression and conduct.
Children were 2.5 times more likely to have attention problems that were “clinically significant” if their mothers were among those highest exposed to phthalates, the study found. The types of behavior that increased are found in children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and other so-called disruptive behavior disorders.
“More phthalates equaled more behavioral problems,” Stephanie Engel, a Mount Sinai associate professor of preventive medicine and lead author of the study, said in an interview Thursday. “For every increase of exposure, we saw an increase in frequency and severity of the symptoms.”
The connection was only detected for the types of phthalates used in perfumes, shampoos, nail polishes, lotions, deodorants, hair sprays and other personal care products. No behavioral effects were found for the phthalates used in vinyl toys and other soft plastics.
A federal law that went into effect a year ago bans phthalates in children’s vinyl toys and other products. But there are no U.S. restrictions on phthalates in cosmetics and other personal care items. They are, however, banned in cosmetics sold in Europe. Manufacturers of the products maintain that the chemicals are safe after being widely used for about 50 years.
Scientists said the study has uncovered a new problem that could be related to phthalates - effects on a child’s developing brain. Until now, most research has focused on their potential to block male hormones and feminize boys or contribute to male reproductive problems.
“Clearly environmental toxicants play a role in child neurodevelopment, and phthalates, in particular, have been understudied in this area,” Engel said.
Dr. Philip Landrigan, a pediatrician at Mount Sinai and director of the Children's Environmental Health Center, called it “a new area of concern” about phthalates.
“Clearly it needs to be replicated, as does any study that breaks new ground, but the study itself is very well done and very credible,” he said.
The research involved 188 children between the ages of 4 and 9 who were born between 1998 and 2002, according to the study published online in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives. Most were from East Harlem or the Upper East Side of Manhattan, and three-quarters of them were low-income.
The children’s scores were based on the answers that their mothers provided to standardized questions commonly used by psychiatrists and other clinicians to help diagnose attention deficit disorders. The mothers responded to 130 questions designed to detect problematic behaviors on a 4-point scale ranging from “never” to “almost always" and to 86 questions on another test designed to measure cognitive function, such as memory.
Some effects were stronger in boys than girls, but the associations to the chemicals were still considered significant in the girls, Engel said.
The researchers did not use doctors or other clinicians to evaluate the children. Instead, the findings were based on the mothers’ evaluations.
"A parent's report about a child's behavior is certainly subjective,” Engel said. But she added that mothers have been found to be very accurate in assessing poor conduct, aggression and attention problems.
See what we're tweeting about
24 Comments
Add CommentThis really sounds like a case of correlation confused with causation.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTelling details: The results are based on self-reported answers to standardized questions which could well have created sample bias (just asking the question increases the changes of the correlation being associated).
The sample size is vanishingly small: less than 200 respondents.
The sample set is geographically limited, meaning the cause, if there is one, could be environmental.... See More
The sample demographics are overwhelmingly from low-income families, meaning there could be some factor related to environment or demographics that could be relevant.
This kid of stuff drives me crazy, and I'm surprised SciAm just published it without asking questions of the report.
I agree, perfumes are know to be unhealthy but that never stops some people.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMaybe it's possible...but not likely. I go with bad genes makes bad problems.
A connection between cosmetics use and autism seems imminent...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisA strong link between perfumes/cosmetics use and the occurrence of autism appears imminent,,,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhen I saw that there were only a few comments, I worried that representatives of the cosmetics industry had not yet chimed in. All that worry was for nothing. They did not disappoint.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOne has already claimed that the study is suspect because they used poor people in the sample. That's what I call class, but it's not science class.
Those poor people had varying levels of phthalates in their blood. Just because some of them are users of cheap perfume does not make them all the same because some may not use any perfume at all, hence, there are differences in the population and they correlate with ADHD.
While statistical analysis may not prove a causal relationship, it can suggest probable cause, avenues to investigate, and products to avoid. Europeans have already banned phthalates in products applied to the body for a good reason. The study supports that and also suggests that the usual industry denials at this point may lead to a worrisome thing called a product liability tort.
The study is "suspect" for exactly the reasons that Rich Tatum mentioned. It presents interesting possibilities for further research, but every one of Rich Tatum's points is precisely correct. Now we need to prospectively follow a couple thousand women of childbearing age and check phthalate levels in Mom and post-natal child and compare to actual disorders - not just related behaviors. It could turn out to be very important, or it could turn out to be nothing.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn response to Rich Tatum: if all the respondents are from the same area and income group then the effect of geographical and demographic factors is actually reduced because they vary less. You might question whether the results generalize to a wider population but it is hard to see why they wouldn't. And 188 is not really that small a sample.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOf course this work demonstrates correlation, not causation, because the respondents were not randomly assigned to the high / low phthalate groups. There could be a hidden variable which makes both heavy cosmetic use and behavioral problems more likely. In fact, now that I think about it, that wouldn't surprise me at all!
interesting...but where from do phtalates really come into our system? where is the hurdle between safe and dangerous phtalate build-up? how will a layman like me know this?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRichTatum hit this study right on the nose. I want to take it a step further. I want to encourage Marla Cone and the editors at SciAm to take this study, and others like it, and build an instructive article about how to read and evaluate the merits of a study--and then apply those standards when reporting in SciAm.com. Public safety is not served by weak studies.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIlove these responses that tear apart "weak studies" and dispose of them as if they were meaningless trash. These are the same people who would advocate a multi-institutional, multi-year, multi-million dollar NIH funded study to prove the existence of the noses on their faces. While I agree that this particular study is not the most statistically rigorous nor scientifically pure, it is not meaningless and should not be dismissed.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have advanced degrees in chemistry, biology, and computer science. I'm also a farm boy from a small mountain town in Colorado. It doesn't take much of a chemistry background mixed with a little common sense to conclude that phthalates are dangerous to the normal functions of human physiology. That little 6-carbon ring with doodads hanging from it is very apt to react in disruptive ways with our cells and their building blocks.
Without a doubt, regardless of this study: Minimize your exposure to man-made fragrances and other aromatics.
Per Grey Seal: Hidden Variable? An obvious hypothesis is class. The design of the study is unknown, and my concern is high-phthalates-problem-kids are mostly from Harlem vs Upper East Side.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI would like to know the history of phthalates in perfumes / cosmetics and the quantities used. The increase in behavioral problems increased in the last decade -- does this correlate with phthalate exposure?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have heard about this, it leads to the creation of Democrats!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSpiff
Sample size is way too small. I wouldn't bother at all until more powerful studies and a mechanism of action is determined.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnother major cause of ADHD is the drug (chemical) known as SUGAR (C12H22O11). Eliminate it from the diet of any group of children and you will be amazed at the behavioral change; more self control, more focus and a greater ability to learn among others.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think a revealing study might be one which looks for a potential link between chemical proliferation and lack of objectivity and logic in online posts.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think a revealing study might be one which looks for a potential link between chemical proliferation and lack of objectivity and logic in online posts.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is liberating to know that confirmational bias is an adequate substitute for rigor. Just think about how much time, money and effort can be saved. Here is a hypothesis we can embrace on its face: Jumping to conclusions leads to cardiac health. I just hate to give up that grant money.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI tested positive for phthalates and I can tell you: it hurts like hell! I could hardly walk from it! It was diagnosed as everything you can imagine. Years of chiropractors, antiinflammatories, lost years of my life that I would like to have back.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI also test chidren's brains and I can tell you that there is signficant slowing in their brainmaps as well as stress. I've seen these boys described exactly as it is mentioned.
How horrible that we haven't done anything sooner!
I tested for phthalates and am removing them. Let me tell you how painful it is to have them stuck in your legs so you can hardly walk. Years of misdiagnoses! Doctors, chiropractors, drugs, painkillers! Misdiagnoses. Years of my life wasted!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI also brainmap autistic children and I can tell you there is a brainwave signature for this loss of function due to toxicity. I see the boys come in effeminized, frail and unmotivated getting grilled by parents who had no idea.
This is definitely part of the picture of autism. But it's just scratching the surface for sure of what are many more environmental toxins.
I do believe there will also be a link between obesity and phthalates. That's another study to be done.
What are we dealing with here?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAre the phthalates used in the actual shampoo or perfume chemicals or just in the containers? Are the researchers referring to the containers or the substances that are in those containers?
If it is phthalates in the containers, then is it phthalates leeching into the fluid from the containers?
I've always said, "Perfume stinks."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisplastics... more plastics. What about the mold release agents for plastic products?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisKeep looking at this and you’ll find all kinds of problems. ADHD is just the beginning. What about autism?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThanks,
http://www.buygenericdrugs.net/diseases/Attention-Deficit-Disorder/