Are pollutants causing autism spectrum disorder?

While skimming through science news on the hunt for an interesting story to write about I came across an article purporting that pollution is linked with autism spectrum disorder (ASD).

I have a few problems with this article.  It is written like this finding is the break through discovery of the year and definitive in causing autism.  

The major problem I see here is people without a scientific sceptical mind could possibly assume that this proof without truly reading the full report.  This is how silly things end up on the news like "MMR vaccine causes autism". 

I decided to delve in deeper and actually read the report.  To understand my evaluation I must prepare a background for you.

The study conducted was to test whether exposure to pollutants increases the 'likelihood' of ASD.  researchers tested nurses in differing regions and measured the amount of pollutants these women were exposed to.  Specifically nine months prior to conception, during pregnancy and nine months post-partum.

The results indicated that you had a higher risk of having a child with ASD if you are exposed to high amounts of pollutants/ particle matter the size of 2.5 micrometers during the third trimester of the pregnancy.

There were inconsistencies in the methods of the report which both myself and the authors picked up on.  A high percentage of the children effected by ASDs mothers smoked through their pregnancies, and home pollutants were not measured during the study. Also their work environments were not measured and being all nurses could they have been exposed to some chemical before or during pregnancy e.g. were they surgical nurses exposed to small doses of anaesthetic gasses? 

The authors of the study state that "Our findings support the possibility of an effect of maternal exposure to air pollution during pregnancy"   Not our findings show that pollutants cause autism.

This website should not be claiming that this study found links to autism and pollutants without reading the report properly first.

Moral of the story ...Don't believe everything that you read.

Link to the article
https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/science-ticker/air-pollution-linked-autism?tgt=nr

Reference

Raz., R., Roberts, A. L., Lyall, K., Hart, J. E., Laden, F., Just, A. C., . . . Weisskopf, M. G. (2014). Autism Spectrum Disorder and Particulate Matter Air Pollution before, during, and after Pregnancy: A Nested Case–Control Analysis within the Nurses’ Health Study II Cohort. http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/wp-content/uploads/advpub/2014/12/ehp.1408133.acco.pdf doi:/10.1289/ehp.1408133

Reduce unwanted animals of New Zealand

We need to reduce the neglect or dumping of unwanted animals because of irresponsible ownership in this country.
 
This is an issue most dear to my heart. 

Obviously I am a crazy cat lady, I admit it, however I do not live with a million cats, that fornicate, proliferate and urinate all over my property.

I am a responsible owner,  my cats are neutered, they have regular health checks (much to their disliking) and are so well loved that friends and family know to sit on the floor if the cats are taking up the seats.

Unfortunately this is not the case for all animals in New Zealand.  Every year the SPCA and council pounds are inundated with unwanted animals,  many are unable to be re-homed and are euthanized.  These ones may be the more fortunate animals, see the following article posted on Stuff.co.nz on 14th December "Puppies, kittens heading for slaughter", is about people that don't fix their animals and have unwanted litters and get rid of them in deplorable ways. 

How can we decrease these occurrences?

I propose that to decrease the amount of unwanted puppies and kittens that pet shops and the SPCA not sell kittens until they are de sexed and micro chipped. Puppies need to be registered and de-sexing regulated by councils. And breeding should be illegal unless you have a license and have training in breeding and parturition.      

Why? 

Cats are reflex ovulators which means, ovulation occurs by the stimulation of mating. In short, pretty much every time a female cat mates they get pregnant!

A female cat as early as 4 months can come into heat and have 2-5 kittens each.

Below is a picture that shows some of the other benefits of spaying and neutering cats early, and the implications if you don't.

This was a diagram depicting one cat having only 2 kittens imagine 5!

The best thing about early neutering is, once kittens reach a kilogram in weight they can be de-sexed. This can be as early as 12 weeks, so they are still kittens by the time you can adopt one.

 

With dogs it is a little harder, they usually can be fixed at around 5-6months.  But to curb the problem of owners not fixing them I suggest potential adoptees should be made to pay a de-sexing fee before the release of a puppy.  Which means they will most likely come back because they have prepaid. also compulsory micro chipping can keep the vet clinics in contact with owners and the council so that they can be alerted to any entire (unneutered) dogs.

The one issue I see arising from this proposal is that backyard breeding and home euthanasia may rise. to lessen this effect perhaps the SPCA and pet shops should first instigate the fixing of kittens and micro-chipping before sale, more advertisement and education about neutering pets and incentives like discounted neutering should be a priority.

Once the SPCA has seen a decline in unwanted animals, they then should implement a law change in which no animal can be bred without the owner having proper training and licenses to do so.     

This is would be no quick fix and could take many years to reduce the amount of unwanted animals in this country, but surely it is better than doing nothing.

Perhaps some one will read this and be inspired to write a proposal to the SPCA to get the ball rolling on this problem. 

For more information see:

http://www.kittycatfixers.org.nz/

http://desexyrevolution.hurrah.org.nz/

The Debate

The Debate

My essay is about the vaccination schedule and whether we need to change it.  I found many good articles evidence on reasons why we should change the amount and times. Petousis-Harris and Nowlans article on Pox, plague, progress and prospects for the future, convinced me on the point that because measles is so incredibly infectious and can have horrific results for the very young and old, that we should be vaccinating earlier (at 12 months as opposed to 15 months) and administering a further third booster in later years. They also advise vaccinating six month olds during outbreaks to protect them secondary complications like pneumonia and encephalitis.  Their debate is further strengthened with evidence that countries such as Australia are now considered endemic free due to the earlier vaccination timing of 12 months, 18 months and 4 years as as in contrast to 15 months and 4 years in New Zealand.

I used the Ministry of Health’s immunization handbook which possesses the current recommendations for my counter argument.  Reading the handbook showed me that the Ministry of health in New Zealand sees the current schedule to be adequate.  They report that an increasing number of the population is vaccinated, but they do wish to raise the current quota up from 93% to 95%, this would lead to greater herd immunity that prevents the disease infecting at risk and non-vaccinated population.

Due to our vaccinations being free it seems that our health system is restricted by the amount that can be funded by Pharmac. The New Zealand Minisrty of health, and Pharmac should comparing our infection rates and outbreak statistics which are embarrassingly high compared to other developed countries.  

There seems to be a lack of public knowledge on vaccinations,  when asked all of my friends and co-workers, most of the over 30 year olds did not know whether they were vaccinated! I also talked to one pregnant woman that did not get tested for rubella antibodies which is quite frightening. One person told me that they were advised by their doctor not to immunize, and another couple said that the vaccination nurse was so ill informed that they lost the confidence in vaccination and did not immunise their children.  This research also showed me the see a lack of public attention to the impact that these diseases can have on the population. One of the people I talked to asked "why should I worry if my child is not vaccinated, its not hurting anybody?, if they get sick its a risk that I decided to take for my child", which I explained to them the impact it may have on an non vaccinated pregnant woman, they were horrified and said that they "never thought of that".

 Which makes me believe that the current campaign for vaccination is weak and ineffective.

References

Ministry of Health. (2014). Immunisation Handbook 2014 (6th ed.). Wellington: Ministry of Health. Retrieved from http://immunisation.book.health.govt.nz/General+information

Petousis-Harris, H., & Nowlan, M. (2014). Pox, plague, progress and prospects for the future. New Zealand Doctor, 34-35. Retrieved from http://eds.a.ebscohost.com