Mom's Genetics Contributes to Fetal Alcohol Damage

Understanding the parental genetics of fetal alcohol spectrum disorder could lead to ways to prevent it. Steve Mirsky reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Pregnant women shouldn’t drink. It’s become gospel, because of the danger of fetal alcohol spectrum disorder. Alcohol can disturb the normal development of a fetus, leading to a lifetime of learning disabilities and social problems. But the percentage of children born with the disorder has remained constant, despite the warnings. And not all fetuses of drinking mothers suffer.

Now research with rats has shown why some fetuses are naturally protected. Which could lead to ways to protect the vulnerable ones. The work is in the FASEB Journal. [Laura Sittig et al., "Strain-specific vulnerability to alcohol exposure in utero via hippocampal parent-of-origin expression of deiodinase-III"]

The key is a gene called Dio3, which governs the levels of thyroid hormone in the brain. If mom passes on a normal Dio3, no problem. And a male fetus that inherits a problem Dio3 variation from mom but a normal Dio3 from dad should be okay. But alcohol can stop dad’s normal Dio3 gene from working. Now mom’s bad Dio3 allows the brain to be flooded with thyroid hormone, damaging the hippocampus.


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 hope is that gene screening could ID women whose fetuses would be at-risk, and that dietary supplements or drugs could block alcohol’s effect. And keep a child from suffering from a parent’s addiction.

–Steve Mirsky

[The above text is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe