62
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Perinatal Outcomes and Unconventional Natural Gas Operations in Southwest Pennsylvania

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Unconventional gas drilling (UGD) has enabled extraordinarily rapid growth in the extraction of natural gas. Despite frequently expressed public concern, human health studies have not kept pace. We investigated the association of proximity to UGD in the Marcellus Shale formation and perinatal outcomes in a retrospective cohort study of 15,451 live births in Southwest Pennsylvania from 2007–2010. Mothers were categorized into exposure quartiles based on inverse distance weighted (IDW) well count; least exposed mothers (first quartile) had an IDW well count less than 0.87 wells per mile, while the most exposed (fourth quartile) had 6.00 wells or greater per mile. Multivariate linear (birth weight) or logistical (small for gestational age (SGA) and prematurity) regression analyses, accounting for differences in maternal and child risk factors, were performed. There was no significant association of proximity and density of UGD with prematurity. Comparison of the most to least exposed, however, revealed lower birth weight (3323 ± 558 vs 3344 ± 544 g) and a higher incidence of SGA (6.5 vs 4.8%, respectively; odds ratio: 1.34; 95% confidence interval: 1.10–1.63). While the clinical significance of the differences in birth weight among the exposure groups is unclear, the present findings further emphasize the need for larger studies, in regio-specific fashion, with more precise characterization of exposure over an extended period of time to evaluate the potential public health significance of UGD.

          Related collections

          Most cited references28

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Ambient air pollution, birth weight and preterm birth: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

          Low birth weight and preterm birth have a substantial public health impact. Studies examining their association with outdoor air pollution were identified using searches of bibliographic databases and reference lists of relevant papers. Pooled estimates of effect were calculated, heterogeneity was quantified, meta-regression was conducted and publication bias was examined. Sixty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. The majority of studies reported reduced birth weight and increased odds of low birth weight in relation to exposure to carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO(2)) and particulate matter less than 10 and 2.5 microns (PM(10) and PM(2.5)). Effect estimates based on entire pregnancy exposure were generally largest. Pooled estimates of decrease in birth weight ranged from 11.4 g (95% confidence interval -6.9-29.7) per 1 ppm CO to 28.1g (11.5-44.8) per 20 ppb NO(2), and pooled odds ratios for low birth weight ranged from 1.05 (0.99-1.12) per 10 μg/m(3) PM(2.5) to 1.10 (1.05-1.15) per 20 μg/m(3) PM(10) based on entire pregnancy exposure. Fewer effect estimates were available for preterm birth and results were mixed. Pooled odds ratios based on 3rd trimester exposures were generally most precise, ranging from 1.04 (1.02-1.06) per 1 ppm CO to 1.06 (1.03-1.11) per 20 μg/m(3) PM(10). Results were less consistent for ozone and sulfur dioxide for all outcomes. Heterogeneity between studies varied widely between pollutants and outcomes, and meta-regression suggested that heterogeneity could be partially explained by methodological differences between studies. While there is a large evidence base which is indicative of associations between CO, NO(2), PM and pregnancy outcome, variation in effects by exposure period and sources of heterogeneity between studies should be further explored. Crown Copyright © 2012. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            New intrauterine growth curves based on United States data.

            The objective of this study was to create and validate new intrauterine weight, length, and head circumference growth curves using a contemporary, large, racially diverse US sample and compare with the Lubchenco curves. Data on 391 681 infants (Pediatrix Medical Group) aged 22 to 42 weeks at birth from 248 hospitals within 33 US states (1998-2006) for birth weight, length, head circumference, estimated gestational age, gender, and race were used. Separate subsamples were used to create and validate curves. Smoothed percentile curves (3rd to 97th) were created by the Lambda Mu Sigma (LMS) method. The validation sample was used to confirm representativeness of the curves. The new curves were compared with the Lubchenco curves. Final sample included 257 855 singleton infants (57.2% male) who survived to discharge. Gender-specific weight-, length-, and head circumference-for-age curves were created (n = 130 111) and successfully validated (n = 127 744). Small-for-gestational age and large-for-gestational age classifications using the Lubchenco curves differed significantly from the new curves for each gestational age (all P 36 weeks) who were large-for-gestational-age. The Lubchenco curves may not represent the current US population. The new intrauterine growth curves created and validated in this study, based on a contemporary, large, racially diverse US sample, provide clinicians with an updated tool for growth assessment in US NICUs. Research into the ability of the new definitions of small-for-gestational-age and large-for-gestational-age to identify high-risk infants in terms of short-term and long-term health outcomes is needed.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Methane contamination of drinking water accompanying gas-well drilling and hydraulic fracturing.

              Directional drilling and hydraulic-fracturing technologies are dramatically increasing natural-gas extraction. In aquifers overlying the Marcellus and Utica shale formations of northeastern Pennsylvania and upstate New York, we document systematic evidence for methane contamination of drinking water associated with shale-gas extraction. In active gas-extraction areas (one or more gas wells within 1 km), average and maximum methane concentrations in drinking-water wells increased with proximity to the nearest gas well and were 19.2 and 64 mg CH(4) L(-1) (n = 26), a potential explosion hazard; in contrast, dissolved methane samples in neighboring nonextraction sites (no gas wells within 1 km) within similar geologic formations and hydrogeologic regimes averaged only 1.1 mg L(-1) (P < 0.05; n = 34). Average δ(13)C-CH(4) values of dissolved methane in shallow groundwater were significantly less negative for active than for nonactive sites (-37 ± 7‰ and -54 ± 11‰, respectively; P < 0.0001). These δ(13)C-CH(4) data, coupled with the ratios of methane-to-higher-chain hydrocarbons, and δ(2)H-CH(4) values, are consistent with deeper thermogenic methane sources such as the Marcellus and Utica shales at the active sites and matched gas geochemistry from gas wells nearby. In contrast, lower-concentration samples from shallow groundwater at nonactive sites had isotopic signatures reflecting a more biogenic or mixed biogenic/thermogenic methane source. We found no evidence for contamination of drinking-water samples with deep saline brines or fracturing fluids. We conclude that greater stewardship, data, and-possibly-regulation are needed to ensure the sustainable future of shale-gas extraction and to improve public confidence in its use.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                3 June 2015
                2015
                : 10
                : 6
                : e0126425
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America
                [2 ]Department of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America
                [3 ]Magee-Womens Research Institute and Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America
                Stony Brook University, Graduate Program in Public Health, UNITED STATES
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Conceived and designed the experiments: LLB SLS. Performed the experiments: SLS LLB. Analyzed the data: SLS LLB JCL YS BDG BRP EOT. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: SLS LLB JCL YS BDG BRP EOT. Wrote the paper: SLS LLB JCL YS BDG BRP EOT.

                Article
                PONE-D-15-03518
                10.1371/journal.pone.0126425
                4454655
                26039051
                482a6736-6e07-4642-a9fc-2f21aa74adbd
                Copyright @ 2015

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited

                History
                : 24 January 2015
                : 2 April 2015
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 3, Pages: 15
                Funding
                This study was supported by the Heinz Endowments (website: http://www.heinz.org/) (BRP). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                Gas well data are publicly available from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (website: http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/oil_and_gas_reports/20297). Birth certificate data are considered to be protected health information since it contains personal identifiers, such as geocoded residences. Therefore, it cannot be made available in the manuscript, the supplemental files, or a public repository. The Pennsylvania Department of Health requires Institutional Review Board approval, and data access is password protected. However, readers may direct inquiries and data access requests to: James Rubertone, Department of Health, Bureau of Health Statistics and Registries, 555 Walnut Street, 6th Floor, Harrisburg, PA 17101-1914, Phone: 717-547-3690, Fax: 717-772-3258, jrubertone@ 123456pa.gov .

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article