Study: How smoking results in smaller babies
By Danell Swim
April 30, 2008
Scientists have discovered how smoking during pregnancy can result in babies of low birth weight, according to a new study.
Previous research has linked smoking with negative effects on the unborn child, including low birth weight and premature birth.
Now researchers at the University of Sydney say there is a significant association between smoking during pregnancy, an effect on blood vessels and growth restriction in the unborn baby.
The effect on blood vessels is described as endothelial dysfunction; a state that can lead to reduced dilation of blood vessels, inflammation of the vascular (blood vessel) wall and an increase in the incidence of blood clots.
The researchers studied 41 pregnant women; 21 smoked ten or more cigarettes a day and 20 who were non-smokers.
Participants were monitored between week 28 and week 32 of their pregnancy and for those who smoked, the average number of cigarettes per day was 15.7.
The results, published in BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, revealed that the women who smoked during pregnancy had persistent endothelial dysfunction, which remained at a constant level whether one or two cigarettes had just been smoked or following a nine-hour break from smoking.
Strong links were also found between endothelial dysfunction and intrauterine growth restriction, which carries an increased risk of babies dying around the time of birth.
Birth weight was significantly reduced in the smokers, with babies of the lowest weight being born of mothers with a significantly lower endothelial function.
Comments
2 Responses to “Study: How smoking results in smaller babies”
Got something to say?
This maybe true for some but not for me! I just quit with hypnosis 2 months ago, but my first (7yrs) was 9lbs 11.5 oz and 21.5 in, and my 2nd (4 yrs) was 7lbs 11 oz and 21 in. There goes that theory!
I find it very frustrating when women disregard facts and statistics about the risks of smoking while pregnant based on a handful of incidents where there was no detectable damage…..even though the women and babies who are unaffected are a statistical minority. But for some women, the fact that it was “safe” for a few makes it a risk worth taking.
But then on the other hand, even more of them dismiss homebirthing DESPITE the facts and statistics supporting it’s safety, claiming that the extremely rare incidence of bad outcomes is suddenly too much of a risk to take.
How is that logical? What’s statistically USAFE for most (smoking) is acceptable because some people get lucky. But what is statisally SAFE for most (homebirthing) is unacceptable because of irrational and unfounded fears. Oh…….women.