4.3 Article

Distribution and Predictors of Pesticides in the Umbilical Cord Blood of Chinese Newborns

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph13010094

Keywords

pesticides; prenatal; pregnancy; infant; neonate; exposure assessment; China; cord blood

Funding

  1. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) [R01ES021465]
  2. National Institute of Child Health and Development (NICHD) [P01HD39386]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NNSFC) [81273085]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Rates of pesticide use in Chinese agriculture are five times greater than the global average, leading to high exposure via the diet. Many are neurotoxic, making prenatal pesticide exposure a concern. Previous studies of prenatal exposure in China focused almost entirely on organochlorines. Here the study goals were to characterize the exposure of Chinese newborns to all classes of pesticides and identify predictors of those exposures. Eighty-four pesticides and 12 metabolites were measured in the umbilical cord plasma of 336 infants. Composite variables were created for totals detected overall and by class. Individual pesticides were analyzed as dichotomous or continuous, based on detection rates. Relationships between demographic characteristics and pesticides were evaluated using generalized linear regression. Seventy-five pesticides were detected. The mean number of detects per sample was 15.3. Increased pesticide detects were found in the cord blood of infants born in the summer (beta = 2.2, p = 0.01), particularly in July (beta = 4.0, p = 0.03). Similar trends were observed for individual insecticide classes. Thus, a summer birth was the strongest predictor of pesticide evidence in cord blood. Associations were more striking for overall pesticide exposure than for individual pesticides, highlighting the importance of considering exposure to mixtures of pesticides, rather than individual agents or classes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available