Having Faith, An Ecologist's Journey To Motherhood by Steingraber

[Guest guest]

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,370008731,00.html

>

>Deseret News, Thursday, January 31, 2002

>

>For baby's sake

>

>Book warns about possible effects of environmental toxins

>

>By Whitney

>Deseret News staff writer

>

>It's winter along the Wasatch Front. Between storms, the cold air stagnates

>in the valleys. We complain about the dirty air, but we continue to drive

>our cars.

>

>Studies have shown that toxins can pass through the placenta and injure a

>fetus. The subject is explored in the book " Having Faith, An Ecologist's

>Journey To Motherhood " by Steingraber, a Cornell biologist.

>

>If the inversion persists, the Utah Division of Air Quality issues a

>warning

>about outdoor exercise, especially for those who are young or old or who

>have asthma.

>

>No one mentions pregnant mothers. No one says " too much exposure to air

>pollutants may cause your baby to be born too small. "

>

>State health officials are careful about the warnings they give, careful to

>make sure their warnings are warranted.

>

>In her book, " Having Faith: An Ecologist's Journey To Motherhood, "

>biologist

> Steingraber doesn't necessarily advocate air-pollution warnings. Nor

>does she advocate warning labels on tuna cans - though she knows that ocean

>fish contain mercury, and she has seen studies linking a fetus'

>methylmercury exposure to deficiencies in learning when the child is 7

>years

>old.

>

>The reason Steingraber wrote the book was not so much to advocate anything.

>She wrote it to turn other mothers into advocates. She figures everyone

>should know what biologists know about the environment. Then the moms of

>the

>world can take it from there.

>

>Steingraber is a poet as well as a biologist and is currently on the

>faculty

>at Cornell University. The day she found out she was pregnant with her

>daughter, Faith, she was 38 years old, and she and her husband were both

>visiting professors at Illinois Wesleyan University.

>

>Some women might rush to the library the moment they learn they are

>pregnant, excited to read about how their baby grows. As for Steingraber,

>when she saw the little test stick turn lavender, she decided to write her

>own book about the biology of motherhood. (She felt some confidence with

>this project, having already written " Living Downstream, " a book about

>environmental toxins.)

>

>In " Having Faith, " Steingraber tells her own story interspersed with

>scientific descriptions of fetal development, labor and breast-feeding. She

>alternates these happy passages with reports of medical studies on the

>impact of environmental toxins on the fetus and the nursing baby.

>

>Steingraber is perhaps braver than most pregnant women. When she went to

>the

>library, her research quickly took her to the topic of thalidomide babies.

>Early in her pregnancy, she spent hours looking at photos of children with

>birth defects.

>

>Her book begins with the history of the placenta. Steingraber explains that

>in the United States as late as the 1950s, some doctors were taught that

>the

>placenta was an impervious membrane. A fetus was thought to be protected

>from anything its mother ate or drank or breathed into her own body.

>

>As for thalidomide, it was a relaxant, introduced in Europe and promoted by

>its manufacturer as having no side effects. Studies did show that some

>adults had tingling in their hands and feet when they took it. Still, to

>most in the medical field back then, it seemed perfect for women with

>morning sickness.

>

>Even as doctors in Germany and England began to wonder about tragic

>malformations in babies whose mothers used the drug, it continued to be

>marketed in Canada. In 1960, an Ohio pharmaceutical company applied to

>distribute thalidomide in the United States. A new scientist at the Food

>and

>Drug Administration single-handedly held up the application. Steingraber

>heralds this public employee, one Frances Kelsey, and uses her example of

>caution as a metaphor for the entire book.

>

> " Having Faith " is about having caution.

>

>Steingraber cites studies showing how pesticides, mercury, industrial oils,

>nicotine, dioxin, nickel (from car exhaust) and lead pass through the

>placenta. She quotes study after study. Some are inconclusive, others show

>no harm from certain levels of chemicals, other studies show behavioral

>rather than physical effects from certain levels of exposure.

>

>Some studies she quotes are downright alarming.

>

>Steingraber cites studies from Beijing and Los Angeles showing that

>exposure

>to high levels of carbon monoxide during the final months of pregnancy

>increases the risk for low birth weight. According to studies done in

>Poland

>by U.S. researchers, a fetus absorbs more of the airborne chemicals than

>its

>mother does.

>

>Steingraber cites studies in North Carolina and Michigan showing that high

>levels of PCBs (industrial pollutants) in the umbilical cord at birth

>correspond to a toddler's poor performance on motor-skill and memory tests.

>In these U.S. studies, the lag disappeared as the child got older.

>Long-term

>studies in the Netherlands show more long-lasting effects.

>

>The bottom line of the studies? " The principle of biomagnification means

>that a persistent poison concentrates as it moves up the food chain, " she

>writes. She adds, in italics: " Of all members of a human population, fetuses

>are most vulnerable to toxic harm. "

>

>Utah experts who have read Steingraber's book welcome a chance to put her

>work into perspective.

>

> on, a counselor with the state's pregnancy risk hotline,

>believes " Having Faith " might cause pregnant women some stress. (She says

>she'd like to talk to moms who read the book about any data they find

>worrisome. The Utah Pregnancy Riskline number is 1-800-822-BABY.) on

>does, however, think it's an important book and recommended it to everyone

>she works with, locally and nationally.

>

>Here's an example of what on might tell a pregnant woman: Say you

>called about Steingraber's report that the health departments of eight

>states have advised women of childbearing age to avoid fresh and frozen

>tuna

>and to limit their intake of canned tuna to one can per week. You're also

>concerned about groups that tell women of childbearing age not to eat

>swordfish at all.

>

>on would then give the Utah caller the FDA recommendations for tuna

>and swordfish - which in this case are similar to the recommendations

>Steingraber cited in her book: No swordfish. Canned tuna once a week.

>

>Aquatic biologist Baker, from Utah State University, found no

>fault

>with Steingraber's book and in fact found it fascinating. Baker says she

>has

>long understood what it means to be at the top of the food chain and

>understands that humans eat and absorb the chemicals that reside in the

>bodies of those lower on the chain. She has always been careful about what

>fish she eats. She routinely avoids dairy products, unless they come from

>the organic section of the supermarket.

>

>Baker understands how chemicals become concentrated in human fat. But until

>she read Steingraber's book, she says she never made the next connection.

>She never asked herself what happens to pollutants stored in the fat cells

>of nursing mothers.

>

>Writes Steingraber, " At least 60 percent of the fat in milk fat globules is

>drawn from adipose reserves scattered throughout the mother's body - from

>belly, hips, thighs, buttocks - and only 30 percent comes from the mother's

>daily diet. (The remaining 10 percent is manufactured on the spot in the

>mammary gland.) What this means is that a lifetime burden of long-lived fat

>soluble contaminants becomes mobilized when adipose tissue is called upon

>to

>supply fat for breast milk production. "

>

>Steingraber contends that human breast milk " typically carries

>concentrations of organochlorine pollutants that are 10 to 20 times higher

>than those in cow's milk. Indeed, prevailing levels of chemical

>contaminants

>in human milk often exceed legally allowable limits in commercial

>foodstuffs. "

>

>Steingraber cites a 1998 study that found that a U.S. woman who nursed

>twins

>for three years had lowered her own body's burden of dioxins by 69 percent.

>(The twins got her dioxins.)

>

> Chan, a doctor and breast milk researcher at the University of Utah

>Medical Center, fears Steingraber's chapters on toxins in breast milk may

>make some mothers afraid to nurse their babies. Chan is reassuring,

>however,

>saying that, yes, breast milk does contain toxins, but unless a mother has

>been living near Love Canal, her milk is fine and much preferable to

>formula. He knows of no site in Utah that would make anyone's milk unsafe.

>

> " Though we should be concerned about environmental contaminants, we should

>not misinterpret the findings, " he says. " Except for extreme cases of

>maternal chemical poisoning, mother's milk remains safe. All nutritional

>and

>federal agencies have supported breast feeding. " He goes on to say that

>even

>breast milk with PCBs and dioxins has no effect on a child's neurological

>development, and he cites two studies to support this statement. (Huisman

>M., 1995, and Patandin S., 1999).

>

>If even one woman decided not to nurse because of her book, Steingraber

>would be heartbroken, she says. Steingraber spoke to the Deseret News from

>Ithaca, N.Y. She was just home from a college campus speaking tour and says

>most of the pregnant women she met said her book was the kind of prenatal

>reading they'd looked for but could not find. Steingraber says she believes

>in nursing. In fact, she is still breast-feeding Faith, who is now 3, along

>with her new baby boy.

>

>Steingraber also cites Patandin's studies. " It is one thing to document the

>presence of contaminants in breast milk, " she writes. " It is another to

>document evidence of harm. The later kind of study is much more difficult

>to

>conduct, for ideally it would require comparing breast-fed infants

>receiving

>contaminated milk with breast-fed infants receiving uncontaminated milk,

>which does not exist. The best we can do is to compare breast-fed infants

>receiving highly contaminated milk with those receiving less contaminated

>milk. Unfortunately for purposes of scientific inquiry, infants who receive

>highly contaminated breast milk tend also to receive contaminants via their

>umbilical cords before birth, so we need study designs that try to tease

>apart the relative effects of prenatal exposures and breast-milk

>exposures. "

>

>She next cites several studies done in the United States that show prenatal

>exposures to PCBs and pesticides do cause developmental lags, but that

>post-natal exposures (through breast-feeding) do not.

>

>Steingraber takes the discussion a step farther, citing an ongoing series

>of

>studies in the Netherlands (the Patandin studies) that show that breast-fed

>babies are actually farther ahead, developmentally, at the age of 18 months

>than their formula-fed counterparts - unless their mothers have high levels

>of PCBs and dioxins in their milk, in which case their scores on motor and

>muscular activity are in line with formula-fed infants.

>

>Although breast-fed babies are not worse off than formula-fed babies,

>Steingraber's point is that they should be better off. Every woman's breast

>milk should be vastly superior to formula, not merely superior in some

>aspects.

>

>Steingraber is fairly militant on the subject. If mothers do everything

>they

>can to have healthy babies - avoid alcohol and cigarettes, eat a healthy

>diet and nurse their babies once they are born - then, she believes, the

>rest of the world should do its part, too. The food and air and water have

>to be pure, for the mother's sake and for the baby's sake.

>

>When she spoke to the Deseret News, Steingraber said she hopes her book

>does

>not make pregnant women afraid but that it gives them a sense of purpose.

>

> " The average pregnant woman is soundproofed away, " not hearing about the

>latest studies. " There hasn't been a public-health campaign that has made

>this (the relationship between the environment and pregnancy) its

>centerpiece. There never will be a social movement unless pregnant women

>know about this. " Yes, we need more data, she said. But that doesn't mean

>we

>should not act on what we already know.

>

>As Steingraber spoke on the phone, she nursed her new son, saying, " It's

>not

>like I wrote this book from some great distance. I'm concerned because I'm

>in the trenches, reproductively. And I was very wary. I don't want to alarm

>women unnecessarily. But I felt it was my responsibility to learn about

>these things, just as it was my responsibility to learn about car seats. "

>

>She hopes that mothers will organize themselves. " It is time for mothers

>around the world to join the campaign for precaution, which is fundamental

>to our daily lives as parents, and about which we are all experts. " She

>wants women to lobby. " It is time to start divorcing our economy from any

>chemical that causes birth defects or can get into human milk. " She wants

>women to form an organization similar to MADD, a group that was effective

>at

>getting legislation to help stop drunken driving.

>

>Knowledge is power, she says. " The scientific evidence we have is far

>greater than what the average pregnant woman hears about. "

>

>

>Kathleen Schuler, MPH

>Children's Environmental Health Scientist

>Institute for Agriculture & Trade Policy

>2105 First Avenue South

>Minneapolis, MN 55404

>Phone: 612-870-3468

>Fax: 612-870-4846

www.iatp.org

[Guest guest]

Barbara,

Thank you. I really appreciate your help. We moved out of the house in August and I'm still grieving over the miscarriage. I turned 42 in Jan and so wanted another baby.

Carol

From: " Barbara Herskovitz " <bherk@...>

Reply-

Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 08:19:43 -0500

" Sick Buildings " < >

Subject: [] " Having Faith, An Ecologist's Journey To Motherhood " by Steingraber

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,370008731,00.html

>

>Deseret News, Thursday, January 31, 2002

>

>For baby's sake

>

>Book warns about possible effects of environmental toxins

>

>By Whitney

>Deseret News staff writer

>

>It's winter along the Wasatch Front. Between storms, the cold air stagnates

>in the valleys. We complain about the dirty air, but we continue to drive

>our cars.

>

>Studies have shown that toxins can pass through the placenta and injure a

>fetus. The subject is explored in the book " Having Faith, An Ecologist's

>Journey To Motherhood " by Steingraber, a Cornell biologist.

>

>If the inversion persists, the Utah Division of Air Quality issues a

>warning

>about outdoor exercise, especially for those who are young or old or who

>have asthma.

>

>No one mentions pregnant mothers. No one says " too much exposure to air

>pollutants may cause your baby to be born too small. "

>

>State health officials are careful about the warnings they give, careful to

>make sure their warnings are warranted.

>

>In her book, " Having Faith: An Ecologist's Journey To Motherhood, "

>biologist

> Steingraber doesn't necessarily advocate air-pollution warnings. Nor

>does she advocate warning labels on tuna cans - though she knows that ocean

>fish contain mercury, and she has seen studies linking a fetus'

>methylmercury exposure to deficiencies in learning when the child is 7

>years

>old.

>

>The reason Steingraber wrote the book was not so much to advocate anything.

>She wrote it to turn other mothers into advocates. She figures everyone

>should know what biologists know about the environment. Then the moms of

>the

>world can take it from there.

>

>Steingraber is a poet as well as a biologist and is currently on the

>faculty

>at Cornell University. The day she found out she was pregnant with her

>daughter, Faith, she was 38 years old, and she and her husband were both

>visiting professors at Illinois Wesleyan University.

>

>Some women might rush to the library the moment they learn they are

>pregnant, excited to read about how their baby grows. As for Steingraber,

>when she saw the little test stick turn lavender, she decided to write her

>own book about the biology of motherhood. (She felt some confidence with

>this project, having already written " Living Downstream, " a book about

>environmental toxins.)

>

>In " Having Faith, " Steingraber tells her own story interspersed with

>scientific descriptions of fetal development, labor and breast-feeding. She

>alternates these happy passages with reports of medical studies on the

>impact of environmental toxins on the fetus and the nursing baby.

>

>Steingraber is perhaps braver than most pregnant women. When she went to

>the

>library, her research quickly took her to the topic of thalidomide babies.

>Early in her pregnancy, she spent hours looking at photos of children with

>birth defects.

>

>Her book begins with the history of the placenta. Steingraber explains that

>in the United States as late as the 1950s, some doctors were taught that

>the

>placenta was an impervious membrane. A fetus was thought to be protected

>from anything its mother ate or drank or breathed into her own body.

>

>As for thalidomide, it was a relaxant, introduced in Europe and promoted by

>its manufacturer as having no side effects. Studies did show that some

>adults had tingling in their hands and feet when they took it. Still, to

>most in the medical field back then, it seemed perfect for women with

>morning sickness.

>

>Even as doctors in Germany and England began to wonder about tragic

>malformations in babies whose mothers used the drug, it continued to be

>marketed in Canada. In 1960, an Ohio pharmaceutical company applied to

>distribute thalidomide in the United States. A new scientist at the Food

>and

>Drug Administration single-handedly held up the application. Steingraber

>heralds this public employee, one Frances Kelsey, and uses her example of

>caution as a metaphor for the entire book.

>

> " Having Faith " is about having caution.

>

>Steingraber cites studies showing how pesticides, mercury, industrial oils,

>nicotine, dioxin, nickel (from car exhaust) and lead pass through the

>placenta. She quotes study after study. Some are inconclusive, others show

>no harm from certain levels of chemicals, other studies show behavioral

>rather than physical effects from certain levels of exposure.

>

>Some studies she quotes are downright alarming.

>

>Steingraber cites studies from Beijing and Los Angeles showing that

>exposure

>to high levels of carbon monoxide during the final months of pregnancy

>increases the risk for low birth weight. According to studies done in

>Poland

>by U.S. researchers, a fetus absorbs more of the airborne chemicals than

>its

>mother does.

>

>Steingraber cites studies in North Carolina and Michigan showing that high

>levels of PCBs (industrial pollutants) in the umbilical cord at birth

>correspond to a toddler's poor performance on motor-skill and memory tests.

>In these U.S. studies, the lag disappeared as the child got older.

>Long-term

>studies in the Netherlands show more long-lasting effects.

>

>The bottom line of the studies? " The principle of biomagnification means

>that a persistent poison concentrates as it moves up the food chain, " she

>writes. She adds, in italics: " Of all members of a human population, fetuses

>are most vulnerable to toxic harm. "

>

>Utah experts who have read Steingraber's book welcome a chance to put her

>work into perspective.

>

> on, a counselor with the state's pregnancy risk hotline,

>believes " Having Faith " might cause pregnant women some stress. (She says

>she'd like to talk to moms who read the book about any data they find

>worrisome. The Utah Pregnancy Riskline number is 1-800-822-BABY.) on

>does, however, think it's an important book and recommended it to everyone

>she works with, locally and nationally.

>

>Here's an example of what on might tell a pregnant woman: Say you

>called about Steingraber's report that the health departments of eight

>states have advised women of childbearing age to avoid fresh and frozen

>tuna

>and to limit their intake of canned tuna to one can per week. You're also

>concerned about groups that tell women of childbearing age not to eat

>swordfish at all.

>

>on would then give the Utah caller the FDA recommendations for tuna

>and swordfish - which in this case are similar to the recommendations

>Steingraber cited in her book: No swordfish. Canned tuna once a week.

>

>Aquatic biologist Baker, from Utah State University, found no

>fault

>with Steingraber's book and in fact found it fascinating. Baker says she

>has

>long understood what it means to be at the top of the food chain and

>understands that humans eat and absorb the chemicals that reside in the

>bodies of those lower on the chain. She has always been careful about what

>fish she eats. She routinely avoids dairy products, unless they come from

>the organic section of the supermarket.

>

>Baker understands how chemicals become concentrated in human fat. But until

>she read Steingraber's book, she says she never made the next connection.

>She never asked herself what happens to pollutants stored in the fat cells

>of nursing mothers.

>

>Writes Steingraber, " At least 60 percent of the fat in milk fat globules is

>drawn from adipose reserves scattered throughout the mother's body - from

>belly, hips, thighs, buttocks - and only 30 percent comes from the mother's

>daily diet. (The remaining 10 percent is manufactured on the spot in the

>mammary gland.) What this means is that a lifetime burden of long-lived fat

>soluble contaminants becomes mobilized when adipose tissue is called upon

>to

>supply fat for breast milk production. "

>

>Steingraber contends that human breast milk " typically carries

>concentrations of organochlorine pollutants that are 10 to 20 times higher

>than those in cow's milk. Indeed, prevailing levels of chemical

>contaminants

>in human milk often exceed legally allowable limits in commercial

>foodstuffs. "

>

>Steingraber cites a 1998 study that found that a U.S. woman who nursed

>twins

>for three years had lowered her own body's burden of dioxins by 69 percent.

>(The twins got her dioxins.)

>

> Chan, a doctor and breast milk researcher at the University of Utah

>Medical Center, fears Steingraber's chapters on toxins in breast milk may

>make some mothers afraid to nurse their babies. Chan is reassuring,

>however,

>saying that, yes, breast milk does contain toxins, but unless a mother has

>been living near Love Canal, her milk is fine and much preferable to

>formula. He knows of no site in Utah that would make anyone's milk unsafe.

>

> " Though we should be concerned about environmental contaminants, we should

>not misinterpret the findings, " he says. " Except for extreme cases of

>maternal chemical poisoning, mother's milk remains safe. All nutritional

>and

>federal agencies have supported breast feeding. " He goes on to say that

>even

>breast milk with PCBs and dioxins has no effect on a child's neurological

>development, and he cites two studies to support this statement. (Huisman

>M., 1995, and Patandin S., 1999).

>

>If even one woman decided not to nurse because of her book, Steingraber

>would be heartbroken, she says. Steingraber spoke to the Deseret News from

>Ithaca, N.Y. She was just home from a college campus speaking tour and says

>most of the pregnant women she met said her book was the kind of prenatal

>reading they'd looked for but could not find. Steingraber says she believes

>in nursing. In fact, she is still breast-feeding Faith, who is now 3, along

>with her new baby boy.

>

>Steingraber also cites Patandin's studies. " It is one thing to document the

>presence of contaminants in breast milk, " she writes. " It is another to

>document evidence of harm. The later kind of study is much more difficult

>to

>conduct, for ideally it would require comparing breast-fed infants

>receiving

>contaminated milk with breast-fed infants receiving uncontaminated milk,

>which does not exist. The best we can do is to compare breast-fed infants

>receiving highly contaminated milk with those receiving less contaminated

>milk. Unfortunately for purposes of scientific inquiry, infants who receive

>highly contaminated breast milk tend also to receive contaminants via their

>umbilical cords before birth, so we need study designs that try to tease

>apart the relative effects of prenatal exposures and breast-milk

>exposures. "

>

>She next cites several studies done in the United States that show prenatal

>exposures to PCBs and pesticides do cause developmental lags, but that

>post-natal exposures (through breast-feeding) do not.

>

>Steingraber takes the discussion a step farther, citing an ongoing series

>of

>studies in the Netherlands (the Patandin studies) that show that breast-fed

>babies are actually farther ahead, developmentally, at the age of 18 months

>than their formula-fed counterparts - unless their mothers have high levels

>of PCBs and dioxins in their milk, in which case their scores on motor and

>muscular activity are in line with formula-fed infants.

>

>Although breast-fed babies are not worse off than formula-fed babies,

>Steingraber's point is that they should be better off. Every woman's breast

>milk should be vastly superior to formula, not merely superior in some

>aspects.

>

>Steingraber is fairly militant on the subject. If mothers do everything

>they

>can to have healthy babies - avoid alcohol and cigarettes, eat a healthy

>diet and nurse their babies once they are born - then, she believes, the

>rest of the world should do its part, too. The food and air and water have

>to be pure, for the mother's sake and for the baby's sake.

>

>When she spoke to the Deseret News, Steingraber said she hopes her book

>does

>not make pregnant women afraid but that it gives them a sense of purpose.

>

> " The average pregnant woman is soundproofed away, " not hearing about the

>latest studies. " There hasn't been a public-health campaign that has made

>this (the relationship between the environment and pregnancy) its

>centerpiece. There never will be a social movement unless pregnant women

>know about this. " Yes, we need more data, she said. But that doesn't mean

>we

>should not act on what we already know.

>

>As Steingraber spoke on the phone, she nursed her new son, saying, " It's

>not

>like I wrote this book from some great distance. I'm concerned because I'm

>in the trenches, reproductively. And I was very wary. I don't want to alarm

>women unnecessarily. But I felt it was my responsibility to learn about

>these things, just as it was my responsibility to learn about car seats. "

>

>She hopes that mothers will organize themselves. " It is time for mothers

>around the world to join the campaign for precaution, which is fundamental

>to our daily lives as parents, and about which we are all experts. " She

>wants women to lobby. " It is time to start divorcing our economy from any

>chemical that causes birth defects or can get into human milk. " She wants

>women to form an organization similar to MADD, a group that was effective

>at

>getting legislation to help stop drunken driving.

>

>Knowledge is power, she says. " The scientific evidence we have is far

>greater than what the average pregnant woman hears about. "

>

>

>Kathleen Schuler, MPH

>Children's Environmental Health Scientist

>Institute for Agriculture & Trade Policy

>2105 First Avenue South

>Minneapolis, MN 55404

>Phone: 612-870-3468

>Fax: 612-870-4846

www.iatp.org