Doggedly searching for the crux of the biscuit.
Well now, this just doesn't seem fair.
A child whose grandmother smoked while pregnant may have doubled the risk of developing asthma compared to a child whose grandmother did not smoke, according to researchers from the Keck School of Medicine of USC. Published in the April issue of the journal Chest, the study suggests that tobacco's harmful effects on the lungs can be passed down through generations, from grandmother to grandchild, even when the child's mother appears unaffected. [...] They hypothesize that smoke can affect the [in utero] child in two ways: First, if the child is a girl, her eggs may be affected, which will in turn put her future children at risk; and second, the fetus' mitochondria may be damaged through subtle changes in which genes are turned on or off – changes that may be transmitted through the maternal line as well.
Cigarette damage may be inheritable? Yikes.
TrackBackThrough the mother, eh? Thank goodness my wife's mother did not smoke. My mother smoked and still does, but my only living sister has not had any children.
My children are also asthma free. We are doing what we can by having household pets. Supposedly the pet poop may help with asthma and allergies. Yuck!
Posted by: Tripp at April 18, 2005 09:54 AMNot that it's anything but anecdotal (and therefore dismissable): my mother, who did not smoke whilst pregnant with me but did so whilst pregnant with my sister, produced me (a smoker who will not bear children) and my sister (a non-smoker who has had 2 kids). Who weighed more at birth? My sister. Her kids show no signs of asthma at 4 and 6 years of age, though there are strains of redneckery.
Posted by: KJ at April 18, 2005 10:10 AMThere is s significant possibility that any poor choices of a pregnant woman could profoundly affect the children of her female child. A female child is already born with all of the immature eggs she will produce in her lifetime.
Posted by: Ru at April 20, 2005 12:39 PM