A case-comparison interview study of brain tumors and employment in occupations with presumed electric and magnetic field exposures

Results from epidemiologic studies suggest that persons working in occupations with presumed electric and magnetic field (EMF) exposures are at increased risk of brain cancer. This study utilized data from a completed, population-based, interview case-control study of central nervous system (CNS) tumors and employment in the petrochemical industry to test the hypothesis that employment in EMF-related occupations increases CNS tumor risk. A total of 375 male residents of the Texas-Louisiana Gulf Coast Area, age 20 to 79, with primary neuroglial CNS tumors diagnosed during the period 1980-84 were identified. A population-based comparison group of 450 age, race and geographically matched males was selected. Occupational histories and potential risk factor data were collected via personal interviews with study subjects or their next-of-kin.^ Adjusted odds ratios were less than 1.0 for persons ever employed in an electrical occupation (OR = 0.65; 95% CI = 0.40-1.09) or whose usual occupation was electrical (OR = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.33-1.73). Relative risk estimates did not increase significantly as time since first employment or duration of employment increased. Examination of CNS tumor risk by high (OR = 0.80), medium (OR = 0.88) and low (OR = 0.45) exposure categories for persons whose usual occupation was electrical did not indicate a dose-response pattern. In addition, the mean age of exposed cases was not significantly younger than that for unexposed cases. Analysis of risk by probability of exposure to EMFs showed non-significant elevations in the adjusted odds ratio for definite exposed workers defined by their usual occupation (OR = 1.78; 95% CI = 0.70-4.51) and ever/never employed status (OR = 1.54; 95% CI = 0.17-4.91).^ These findings suggest that employment in occupations with presumed EMF exposures does not increase CNS tumor risk as was suggested by previous investigations. The results of this study also do not support the EMF-tumor promotion hypothesis. ^

Differences in small-for-gestational-age and preterm birth among Asian subgroups in relation to nativity status

This retrospective cohort study examined the association between nativity status and very preterm birth, preterm birth, and small-for-gestational-age (SGA) among Asian subgroups using Texas birth certificate data with no personal identifiers. A total of 877,322 birth certificates of Asian and US-born white women with a singleton birth in Texas from 2001-2004 were analyzed. Birth certificate records of US-born white, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Filipino, and Asian Indian women with a singleton birth were included in the analysis. Logistic regressions models were used to explore and understand the differences of the effect of nativity status on birth outcomes in Asian subgroups with US-born whites as the reference group. Most of the Asian subgroups had a lower risk of preterm births compared with US born whites, with reductions in risk ranging from 19% to 49% and the lowest risk of preterm birth observed among foreign-born Chinese mothers. Only Filipino mothers had a higher risk of preterm birth compared to US-born whites. Overall, foreign-born Asians had lower risks for very preterm birth and preterm birth than US-born Asians and US-born whites. US-born Asians were at higher risk for preterm birth than US-born whites. For SGA, all Asian subgroups and Asian subgroups by nativity status were at higher risk of SGA than US-born whites. Asian Indians and Japanese were at highest risk for SGA infants with 2.5 to 3 times the risk of SGA present in US-born whites. Foreign-born Asian women were at higher risk for SGA than their US-born counterparts. This study showed that health disparities among Asian subgroups are hidden by classifying Asians into a single group. By examining Asian subgroups separately and looking at nativity status, the differences in risk of SGA and preterm birth can be revealed so prevention efforts can focus on high risk groups. ^

Epidemiology of perinatal mortality: Birthweight, crown -heel length, gestational age, and weight -for -height

Studies suggest that slim infants (low weight-for-height) experienced higher mortality rates than average or high weight-for-height infants (Miller and Hassanein, 1973; Hoffman, Meirik, and Bakketeig, 1984). In this study, the 1980 National Natality Survey and the National Fetal Mortality Survey were used to examine the association of weight, height and perinatal mortality. All singleton births to white married mothers, between 18 and 34 years of age and of parity less than 4, for whom both mother's and hospital questionnaires were completed in those two surveys (3796 live births and 2043 fetal deaths) were selected for analysis. Overall, low weight and height infants had excess mortality rates. However, after adjustment for low birthweight and preterm birth status, low weight and height infants had only slightly higher mortality rates than their medium or high weight and height counterparts. The current study consists of relatively well-educated white married mothers of optimal reproductive age and low parity. Therefore, lower than expected mortality rates for slim infants may be attributed to these favorable demographic factors in this sample as compared with previous studies, or because of advances in perinatal medicine, slim infants may be prevented from achieving the high mortality seen in earlier studies. ^