New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

DDT May Cause Premature Births

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The pesticide DDT¿which was banned in the U.S. in 1972, but is still used elsewhere today¿may cause premature births, according to a new study published in the current issue of The Lancet. "The findings of our study strongly suggest that DDT use increases pre-term births, which is a major contributor to infant mortality," lead author Matthew Longnecker of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences says. Longnecker collaborated with scientists from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, as well as from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The team studied samples of blood drawn from women who had given birth between 1959 and 1966 and stored as part of the U.S. Collaborative Perinatal Project, a program of the National Institutes of Health and 12 universities. The scientists selected 44,000 samples and analyzed them for DDE, a breakdown product of DDT. They also had available additional information about 2,380 children from the original study: 361 of these children were born prematurely and 221 were born smaller than usual. As it turned out, the mothers of these children had higher DDE blood levels than other women in the survey. Moreover, the average DDE blood level of all the women was about five times higher than that found today. "DDT levels in the U.S. are now low and likely not causing any harm," Longnecker says. "But we have to be concerned about what might be happening in those 25 countries where DDT is still used. Also, looking back on earlier decades in the U.S., we may have had an epidemic of pre-term births that we are just now discovering."

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe