bannerHON
img
HONnews
HONnews
img PATIENT / PARTICULIER img PROFESSIONNEL DE SANTE img WEBMESTRE img
img
 
img
HONcode sites
Khresmoi - new !
HONselect
News
Conferences
Images

Themes:
A B C D E F G H I
J K L M N O P Q
R S T U V W X Y Z
Browse archive:
2017: O S A J J M A M F J
2016: D N O

 
  Other news for:
Environment
Infertility
Pregnancy
 Resources from HONselect
Do Flame Retardants Hinder Infertility Treatments?
Study found link between exposure to a certain chemical and failed in-vitro fertilization attempts

By Randy Dotinga

FRIDAY, Aug. 25, 2017 (HealthDay News) -- Researchers have linked higher exposure to a type of flame retardant to a greater likelihood that in-vitro fertilization won't work.

"Couples undergoing IVF and trying to improve their chances of success by reducing their exposure to environmental chemicals may want to opt for products that are flame retardant-free," said senior study author Russ Hauser. He is a professor of reproductive physiology at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston.

The study is said to be the first to look at possible connections between pregnancy and exposure to organophosphate flame retardants, also known as PFRs. These are used in the manufacturing of polyurethane foam products, and are found in upholstered furniture, baby supplies and gym mats.

"These findings suggest that exposure to PFRs may be one of many risk factors for lower reproductive success," study first author Courtney Carignan, a research fellow at Harvard, said in a school news release. "They also add to the body of evidence indicating a need to reduce the use of these flame retardants and identify safer alternatives."

PFRs first appeared in polyurethane foam products as an alternative to another flame retardant that was believed to be unsafe, the researchers said. However, evidence has suggested that PFRs disrupt hormones in animals, and can enter the air and dust indoors.

For the new study, the researchers analyzed urine samples from 211 women who were undergoing in-vitro fertilization at the Massachusetts General Hospital Fertility Center between 2005 and 2015.

After adjusting their statistics to compensate for other factors, the investigators found that women whose urine showed signs of more exposure to the flame retardants were 10 percent less likely, on average, to achieve successful fertilization. They were also 31 percent less likely to have an embryo implanted, 41 percent less likely to become pregnant and 38 percent less likely to give birth to a live child, the study authors said.

The study doesn't prove that exposure to flame retardants caused a lower likelihood of pregnancy and birth. It's also not clear what role flame retardant exposure may play in male fertility.

Funded by the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, the study was published online Aug. 25 in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.

More information

For more about flame retardants, visit the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.

SOURCE: Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, news release, Aug. 25, 2017

Copyright © 2017 HealthDay. All rights reserved. URL:http://consumer.healthday.com/Article.asp?AID=725863

Resources from HONselect: HONselect is the HON's medical search engine. It retrieves scientific articles, images, conferences and web sites on the selected subject.
Infertility
Therapeutics
Research Personnel
Urine
The list of medical terms above are retrieved automatically from the article.

Disclaimer: The text presented on this page is not a substitute for professional medical advice. It is for your information only and may not represent your true individual medical situation. Do not hesitate to consult your healthcare provider if you have any questions or concerns. Do not use this information to diagnose or treat a health problem or disease without consulting a qualified healthcare professional.
Be advised that HealthDay articles are derived from various sources and may not reflect your own country regulations. The Health On the Net Foundation does not endorse opinions, products, or services that may appear in HealthDay articles.


Home img About us img MediaCorner img HON newsletter img Site map img Ethical policies img Contact