In the News
Consequences of DDT Exposure Could Last Generations
- Scientific American
-
Focus Areas
Chronic Disease Prevention, Environmental Health, Women, Youth & Children -
Issues
Reproductive & Sexual Health -
Expertise
Research – Quantitative -
Programs
Child Health and Development Studies
Hailed as a miracle in the 1950s, the potent bug killer DDT (dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane) promised freedom from malaria, typhus and other insect-borne diseases. Manufacturers promoted it as a “benefactor of all humanity” in advertisements that declared, “DDT Is Good for Me!” Americans sprayed more than 1.35 billion tons of the insecticide—nearly 7.5 pounds per person—on crops, lawns and pets and in their homes before biologist Rachel Carson and others sounded the alarm about its impacts on humans and wildlife. The fledgling U.S. Environmental Protection Agency banned DDT in 1972.
Friends and family often ask Barbara Cohn, an epidemiologist at Oakland’s Public Health Institute, why she studies the effects of the long-banned pesticide. Her answer: DDT continues to haunt human bodies. In earlier studies, she found that the daughters of mothers exposed to the highest DDT levels while pregnant had elevated rates of breast cancer, hypertension and obesity.
Cohn’s newest study, on the exposed women’s grandchildren, documents the first evidence that DDT’s health effects can persist for at least three generations. The study linked grandmothers’ higher DDT exposure rates to granddaughters’ higher body mass index (BMI) and earlier first menstruation, both of which can signal future health issues.
“This study changes everything,” says Emory University reproductive epidemiologist Michele Marcus, who was not involved in the new research. “We don’t know if [other human-made, long-lasting] chemicals like PFAS will have multigenerational impacts—but this study makes it imperative that we look.” Only these long-term studies, Marcus says, can illuminate the full consequences of DDT and other biologically disruptive chemicals to help guide regulations.
In the late 1950s Jacob Yerushalmy, a biostatistician at the University of California, Berkeley, proposed an ambitious study to follow tens of thousands of pregnancies and measure how experiences during fetal development could affect health into adolescence and adulthood. The resulting Child Health and Development Study (CHDS) tracked more than 20,000 Bay Area pregnancies from 1959 to 1966. Yerushalmy’s group took blood samples throughout pregnancy, at delivery and from newborns while gathering detailed sociological, demographic and clinical data from mothers and their growing children.
Cohn took the helm of the CHDS in 1997 and began to use data from the children, then approaching middle age, to investigate potential environmental factors behind an increase in breast cancer. One possibility was exposure in the womb to a group of chemicals classified as endocrine disruptors—including DDT.
Using more than 200 mother-daughter-granddaughter triads, Cohn’s team found that the granddaughters of those in the top third of DDT exposure during pregnancy had 2.6 times the odds of developing an unhealthy BMI. They were also more than twice as likely to have started their periods before age 11. Both factors, Cohn says, are known to raise the risk of later developing breast cancer and cardiovascular disease. These results, published in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers, and Prevention, mark the first human evidence that DDT’s health threats span three generations.
Akilah Shahib, 30, whose grandmother was in the CHDS study and who participated in the current work, says the results provide a stark reminder that current health problems may stem from long-ago exposures.
DDT was a chemical in the environment that my grandparents had no control over.Akilah Shahib
To Andrea Gore, a toxicologist at the University of Texas at Austin, the new results are nothing short of groundbreaking. “This is the first really robust study that shows these kinds of multigenerational outcomes,” says Gore, who was not involved in the study.
Click below to read the full story in Scientific American.
Read the PHI press release on the study here.
Originally published by Scientific American
More Updates
Work With Us
You change the world. We do the rest. Explore fiscal sponsorship at PHI.
Support Us
Together, we can accelerate our response to public health’s most critical issues.
Find Employment
Begin your career at the Public Health Institute.