Yet another article to make us feel guilty/worried about a few drinks in pregnancy?

[Tinker]

Just a few drinks in pregnancy could harm baby
Published: 15 August 2005
Mothers who drink even low levels of alcohol during pregnancy could permanently damage their children's intelligence, research suggests.

The study of seven-and-a-half-year-olds by scientists in Detroit found lower IQ scores, and memory and problem-solving difficulties among those who had had low-level exposure to alcohol during pregnancy.

The research, which the Department of Health says it wants to consider, appears to challenge current British Government advice that pregnant women can safely consume one to two units of alcohol a week.

It has long been established that serious problems such as severe learning difficulties and physical abnormalities can occur when women drink large amounts of alcohol during pregnancy, leading to foetal alcohol syndrome (FAS).

Now American scientists say more research is needed to look at the damage caused by prenatal exposure to alcohol at lower levels.

Julie Croxford, from Wayne State University in Detroit, said: "In the past, much focus was placed on studying full-blown FAS. More recent research has considered those individuals damaged by lower levels of exposure. This is an important focus."

The study, published in the journal, Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, looked at 337 African-American children who were exposed to moderate to heavy levels of alcohol in the womb.

It found they were able to perform memory, number and other tasks as well as other youngsters when these tasks were simple, such as naming colours.

But when the children were pressed to respond quickly while having to think about the response, their processing speed slowed down significantly.

Researcher Matthew Burden, from Wayne State University, said: "Prenatal alcohol exposure is often associated with slower reaction times and poorer attention in infancy and some of these deficits may be at the core of poorer academic performance and behaviour problems often seen later in childhood.

"In cases of FAS, lower IQ scores are common, often reaching the level of retardation. This is because alcohol consumed by the mother has a direct impact on the brain of the foetus.

"However, full FAS is not required to see this impact ­ it is just less obvious to detect across the array of exposures found in foetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD), which include effects of prenatal alcohol at lower drinking levels."

Ms Croxford said: "This is likely to mean that these children may be more and more challenged the older they get by the demands placed on them within the school system and within their day-to-day social interactions. This reinforces the current public health message that women should not drink alcohol during pregnancy."

It is estimated that one baby in every 3,000 suffers from the full effects of FAS, ­ others are struck with milder forms of symptoms.

Campaigners in the UK have said that the only definitely safe level of alcohol during pregnancy is no alcohol at all, saying that recommended limits are too high.

The Department of Health said: "Current DoH advice is that women who are pregnant or who are trying to get pregnant should not drink more than 1-2 units of alcohol per week.

"This guidance was reviewed as part of the Government's Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy in March last year and was found to be safe."

"We would be interested to see any further research into this area but current evidence does not justify changing our advice."

The research echoes warnings from British scientists in the past year.

Mothers who drink even low levels of alcohol during pregnancy could permanently damage their children's intelligence, research suggests.

The study of seven-and-a-half-year-olds by scientists in Detroit found lower IQ scores, and memory and problem-solving difficulties among those who had had low-level exposure to alcohol during pregnancy.

The research, which the Department of Health says it wants to consider, appears to challenge current British Government advice that pregnant women can safely consume one to two units of alcohol a week.

It has long been established that serious problems such as severe learning difficulties and physical abnormalities can occur when women drink large amounts of alcohol during pregnancy, leading to foetal alcohol syndrome (FAS).

Now American scientists say more research is needed to look at the damage caused by prenatal exposure to alcohol at lower levels.

Julie Croxford, from Wayne State University in Detroit, said: "In the past, much focus was placed on studying full-blown FAS. More recent research has considered those individuals damaged by lower levels of exposure. This is an important focus."

The study, published in the journal, Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, looked at 337 African-American children who were exposed to moderate to heavy levels of alcohol in the womb.

It found they were able to perform memory, number and other tasks as well as other youngsters when these tasks were simple, such as naming colours.

But when the children were pressed to respond quickly while having to think about the response, their processing speed slowed down significantly.

Researcher Matthew Burden, from Wayne State University, said: "Prenatal alcohol exposure is often associated with slower reaction times and poorer attention in infancy and some of these deficits may be at the core of poorer academic performance and behaviour problems often seen later in childhood.
"In cases of FAS, lower IQ scores are common, often reaching the level of retardation. This is because alcohol consumed by the mother has a direct impact on the brain of the foetus.

"However, full FAS is not required to see this impact ­ it is just less obvious to detect across the array of exposures found in foetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD), which include effects of prenatal alcohol at lower drinking levels."

Ms Croxford said: "This is likely to mean that these children may be more and more challenged the older they get by the demands placed on them within the school system and within their day-to-day social interactions. This reinforces the current public health message that women should not drink alcohol during pregnancy."

It is estimated that one baby in every 3,000 suffers from the full effects of FAS, ­ others are struck with milder forms of symptoms.

Campaigners in the UK have said that the only definitely safe level of alcohol during pregnancy is no alcohol at all, saying that recommended limits are too high.

The Department of Health said: "Current DoH advice is that women who are pregnant or who are trying to get pregnant should not drink more than 1-2 units of alcohol per week.

"This guidance was reviewed as part of the Government's Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy in March last year and was found to be safe."

"We would be interested to see any further research into this area but current evidence does not justify changing our advice."

The research echoes warnings from British scientists in the past year.

Message withdrawn

According to the recent news, citizens say sod the consequences about many things that have health and life implications, drugs, unprotected sex, alcohol and smoking.
Quite frankly the air we breathe and the water than runs from our taps and the rain that falls on our heads is statistically as likely to cause some health issue in an unborn child as an odd glass of wine.
I certainly have chosen to moderate drinking within my pregnancies once I knew, as I know that binge drinking and alcohol fetal syndrome are dire consequences I would not be ready to inflict upon my conscience nor on my child.
But for those of us who found out a little later and had indulged, sometimes these studies really do twist the guilt knife very deeply indeed.

Spots - I won't be drinking for my next pregnancy, but then I am a worry wort.

This is only one study (which suggests that even small amounts of alcohol may be harmful) but most previous studies have concluded otherwise (i.e. small, infrequent alcohol consumption - particularly post first trimester, is not a problem)

Had panic attacks all day yesterday. Could have taken my tablets, but drank a beer instead. Slept like a log.

I Agree with mawbroon. I have not had a drop of alcohol since I found out I was PG. I had a M/c last year and found it very hard to cope with and in my mind if I had been drinking then my concience would have killed me. As it happened the fact that I had done everything I could became a comfort to me that it was something that was not meant to be.

Its only for 9 months and I would like to say I have done everything I could possible do to limit danger to my baby. I don't smoke or eat things the 'pregnancy guidelines' tell me not to eat. ( although this varies from person to person each week!)

I don't condemn other people though it's their choice and their baby.

considering the participants admitted to modearte/heavy usage, and the fact that people will never be truthful in such an experiment (and therefore underestimated their intake)suggests that the majority were very heavy drinkers.
also there is no explantion for why they chose to study only african americans and what confounding variables choosing such a sample would have on extrapolating these results to the general public.
I would take these results with a pinch of salt, as would the majority of health professionals. thousand of such studies have been performed all with conflicting results.

I agree with Babyonboard - was wondering why they only used an african american sample, and what impact this would have on the results. Also need to remember that in these studies, correlation does not imply causation...

Obviously if you are necking a bottle of vodka a night, that is going to be an issue. However, our mothers were not told that they shouldn't drink during pregnancy (in fact sometimes alcohol was encouraged for relaxation), and our generation does not appear to have a disproportionate number of FAS affected individuals in it. Personally, I think that food we put in our mouths, with the number of additives, high fat and salt contents, genetic modifications, along with the increased number of chemicals used in every day life, and pollution are more likely to cause problems than the odd glass of wine, and they are things that we often don't have a lot of control over...

This study follows children born to mothers who have admitted to "moderate to heavy" alcohol intake which I'm guessing is slightly more than than the 1 - 2 units per week that the current UK guidelines suggest. When I was being induced with dd2, my OB gave me a sleeping tablet so that I could get a decent night's sleep before things kicked off. If that's OK, I'm not going to beat myself up about having one glass of wine per week!

I have never drunk a sip in any of my pregnancies but that is my choice nothing to do with anyone or anything else.

Hi. Strong views on this subject. It's common sense to me regardless of studies. I won't touch a drop throughout pregnancy and think it's a small sacrifice even though perhaps in later pregnancy I'll want it. The smell doesn't do it for me at the moment. We are all so worried about expressing our opinions on this in case we offend those that do do it. But why is the opinion that it's not good to drink in pregnancy looked so down on by those that choose to drink? It's personal choice as some of you say and as long as I've done what I can to ensure my baby has the best start, it's up to others what they do, but I can't help judging them, even if I don't voice it to to these friends. This forum is one way of getting those feelings across and I totally respect other people's thoughts on this, even if I don't agree. Hope everyone is feeling well.

I feel that way too,I dont drink whilst pg or bf!

Agree with Flumpette too.

"But why is the opinion that it's not good to drink in pregnancy looked so down on by those that choose to drink?"

Hmm, I'm not aware that it is looked down upon.

"...but I can't help judging them"

Ah, now I see.

Balls. There is absolutely zip evidence that the occasional drink has any effect. One study doesn't make a ha'port of difference against the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence - especially not one carried out in the US where they have a huge bias to start with. DH response is the one you get when there's one study and it's rude for those in authority to say a rude word.

The docs who want to change the advice actually argue it from a public health perspective - if you say no drinking at all it's an easier message for people to understand and may have some impact on people who drink a lot but fool themselves that they only drink small amounts and that's OK.

DH = department of health, not dear husband!

Drinking in pregnancy is a definite no no in NZ and has been for years.
I don't think that the US is always the first to do studies on things.
My m/w told me that the main reason they strongly advise against drinking even one drink is that there is a major alcohol problem among pacific islander and maori mums (and therefore a high FAS level) and this is to try and encourage them to stop.

Anyway, funnily enough no one frowns on anyone drinking and breastfeeding.

I didn't drink during either of my pregnancies (one born in UK, other in NZ) as it made me feel sick. Drank half a bottle of bubbly when DD was 24 hours old though!!!!

Each to their own. Personally, I'd rather be safe than sorry. Even if the risk is miniscule (and this is not the only study what concludes there is a risk - the medical journals have more, which are perhaps not as highly publicised), I'd rather not take ANY risk. I know, for example, broader studies have been conducted here in NZ.

Don't know why those who do drink during pg would feel guilty because of these articles though. You've obviously assessed the risks and decided that either there is no risk, or it is so small that it does not matter. In which case there is nothing to feel guilty about, surely? (Wouldn't you only feel guilty if you thought that you might be putting baby at risk, and most mothers would not do anything they thought might put their baby at risk, therefore, why feel guilty?)

They looked at children who had had "moderate to heavy levels of alcohol in the womb"

Not "light to moderate" levels. (Although I notice they don't actually define what they mean by "moderate" or "heavy".)

How does "moderate to heavy" get translated into "Just a few drinks in pregancy could harm baby"? and "even low levels of alcohol during pregnancy could permanently damage their children's intelligence"? Moderate to heavy drinking, is not "just a few drinks". Moderate to heavy is not "low levels".

So yes, I would say that this article is using sensationalist headlines which when you actually look into the body of the report, don't bear much relationship to the actual research.

a friend of mine is a Consultant Paediatrician. She says the only babies she sees with FAS are from mums downing a bottle of spirits a day.

I had 2-3 glasses of wine a week until about 26 weeks then I went right off it until DS was about 6 months old. No idea why. Was terribly thirsty though and the thought of booze made me feel even more thirsty.

For me, it's just not worth taking the risk. I can survive without booze, it really is no big deal for me.

I don't drink during pregnancy, but then I don't tend to drink when I'm not pg either (maybe four glasses of wine a year?). Alcohol, even in small quantities, does baaaaad things to me!

Judge away, ladies

Hmmm, must tell dd(aged 8) to stop reading the latest Harry Potter then, as I had the odd glass of wine when pg and she should be unable to read that sort of thing, damaged as she is by my sinful indulgence!

And yes I know, N of one and all that!

The thread title is interesting. How can a research article make you feel guilty. I had the occasional drink whilst pregnant (not a big drinker anyway) and no amount of research articles will make me feel guilty.

Now if I ever became pregnant again (never) and I read convincing research about not having any alcohol whilst pregnant then I wouldnt drink.

Noone making you feel guilty. Reminds me of the breast/bottle thing, people moan at research which they feel is there to make them feel guilty but it would be wrong for them not tp publish research and keep it quiet for fear of offending.

I think the problem arrises because the studies findings get extrapolated too far.

So of itself the study is just a study.

When data relating to moderate to heavy drinking are extrapolated to infer that any exposure is damaging , then the presentaion of the data is harmful and will worry people unecessarily.

Isn't it a case of moderation good, avoidance better? After all, we all metabolise alcohol differently, so unborn babies are likely to react to it differently.