New studies: unborn child reacts when mother smokes(No pictures).

[Deleted]

A British study has just been published in the medical journal Acta Paediatrica shows that fetuses are much more influenced by cigarette smoking than has been assumed.

It is common knowledge that smoking during pregnancy harm the fetus, increasing the risk stillbirth, and children of smokers generally are born prematurely more often than non-smookers.

But now unique ultrasound images that fetuses seem to cut grimaces when the mother smokes.

Source:http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...13001/abstract


Warned by mod not to show pictures, so will not do that

[Halyon]

That is an extremely small sample group... When the study becomes a bit more solid, sure, until then...

[Deleted]

That's not what the study says.

But now unique ultrasound images that fetuses seem to cut grimaces when the mother smokes.

Are you kidding me? It's not like smoke is passed through the umbilical cord and fetuses are in there, coughing at the smoke that instantly comes through whenever mommy lights up a cigarette. It's a study on facial movements in terms of development. It has nothing to do with "grimacing".

Also, it's a ridiculously small sample size. You may as well call this chance.

[Deleted]

That's not what the study says.



Are you kidding me? It's not like smoke is passed through the umbilical cord and fetuses are in there, coughing at the smoke that instantly comes through whenever mommy lights up a cigarette. It's a study on facial movements in terms of development. It has nothing to do with "grimacing".

That's exactly what it does. There is a significant difference in fetal movements of the uterus, depending on their mother smoke or not. The fetus have much greater tendency to mouth movements and to touch herself in the face if the mother smokes.

Of course not at the moment she inhales.

[Eviscero]

There are MANY studies which have been repeated ad nauseam that show conclusively that smoking during pregnancy has numerous negative effects on fetus development which carry into later developmental stages. No doubt these studies are (at least partially) responsible for the massive reduction in the use of cigarettes by pregnant women over the past 60 years.

Do we really need a potentially inaccurate study like this one to sensationalize why smoking is bad for you?

[MMKing]

There is a reason why the study is branded as a pilot study. You are not disproving anyone within the science of medicine community by stating that the sample group is to small, they are well aware of it. Even in the conclusion does the people performing the study state that a larger study is needed.

Why didn't you read the original post? This is the reason why actual scientists tend not to interact with the rest of society, because the rest of society doesn't fucking read more than the 5 first words.