Lead linked to aging in older brains
By MALCOLM RITTER,
AP Science Writer, January 27, 2008
NEW YORK - Could it be that the "natural" mental
decline that afflicts many older people is related to how
much lead they absorbed decades before?
That's the provocative idea emerging from some recent studies,
part of a broader area of new research that suggests some
pollutants can cause harm that shows up only years after
someone is exposed.
The new work suggests long-ago lead exposure can make an
aging person's brain work as if it's five years older than
it really is. If that's verified by more research, it means
that sharp cuts in environmental lead levels more than 20
years ago didn't stop its widespread effects.
"We're trying to offer a caution that a portion of
what has been called normal aging might in fact be due to
ubiquitous environmental exposures like lead," says
Dr. Brian Schwartz of Johns Hopkins University.
"The fact that it's happening with lead is the first
proof of principle that it's possible," said Schwartz,
a leader in the study of lead's delayed effects. Other pollutants
like mercury and pesticides may do the same thing, he said.
In fact, some recent research does suggest that being exposed
to pesticides raises the risk of getting Parkinson's disease
a decade or more later. Experts say such studies in mercury
are lacking.
The notion of long-delayed effects is familiar; tobacco
and asbestos, for example, can lead to cancer. But in recent
years, scientists are coming to appreciate that exposure
to other pollutants in early life also may promote disease
much later on.
"It's an emerging area" for research, said Dr.
Philip Landrigan of the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in
New York. It certainly makes sense that if a substance destroys
brain cells in early life, the brain may cope by drawing
on its reserve capacity until it loses still more cells with
aging, he said. Only then would symptoms like forgetfulness
or tremors appear.
Linda Birnbaum, director of experimental toxicology at the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, said infant mice exposed
to chemicals like PCBs show only very subtle effects in young
adulthood. But more dramatic harm in areas like movement
and learning appears when they reach old age.
Animal studies also show clear evidence that being exposed
to harmful substances in the womb can harm health later on,
she said. For example, rodents that encounter PCBs or dioxins
before birth are more susceptible to cancer once they grow
up.
Studying delayed effects in people is difficult because
they generally must be followed for a long time. Research
with lead is easier because scientists can measure the amount
that has accumulated in the shinbone over decades and get
a read on how much lead a person has been exposed to in the
past.
Lead in the blood, by contrast, reflects recent exposure.
Virtually all Americans have lead in their blood, but the
amounts are far lower today than in the past.
The big reason for the drop: the phasing out of lead in
gasoline from 1976 to 1991. Because of that and accompanying
measures, the average lead level in the blood of American
adults fell 30 percent by 1980 and about 80 percent by 1990.
That's a major success story for environmentalists. But
work by Schwartz and Dr. Howard Hu of the University of Michigan
suggests that the long-term effects of the high-lead era
are still being felt.
In 2006, Schwartz and his colleagues published a study of
about 1,000 Baltimore residents. They were ages 50 to 70,
old enough to have absorbed plenty of lead before it disappeared
from gasoline. They probably got their peak doses in the
1960s and 1970s, Schwartz said, mostly by inhaling air pollution
from vehicle exhaust and from other sources in the environment.
The researchers estimated each person's lifetime dose by
scanning their shinbones for lead. Then they gave each one
a battery of mental ability tests.
In brief, the scientists found that the higher the lifetime
lead dose, the poorer the performance across a wide variety
of mental functions, like verbal and visual memory and language
ability. From low to high dose, the difference in mental
functioning was about the equivalent of aging by two to six
years.
"We think that's a large effect," Schwartz said.
Hu and his colleagues took a slightly different approach
in a 2004 study of 466 men with an average age of 67. Those
men took a mental-ability test twice, about four years apart
on average. Those with the highest bone lead levels showed
more decline between exams than those with smaller levels,
with the effect of the lead equal to about five years of
aging.
Nobody is claiming that lead is the sole cause of age-related
mental decline, but it appears to be one of several factors
involved, Hu stressed.
If so, it would join such possible influences as high blood
pressure, diabetes, stroke, emotional stress and maybe education
level, said Bradley Wise of the National Institute on Aging.
Nobody knows exactly what causes mental decline with age,
he said.
Although the studies by Hu and Schwartz suggest lead is
involved, Wise and others say they don't prove the link.
"I think many things impact how we age, but I think
right now it's maybe premature to be giving lead a huge role
in our age-related cognitive decline," said Dr. Margit
L. Bleecker, director of the Center for Occupational and
Environmental Neurology in Baltimore. Still, she called the
lead hypothesis "a very interesting idea" deserving
more study.
Others were more impressed.
"The new evidence from these studies should concern
people" said epidemiologist Andrew Rowland of the University
of New Mexico. "These two research groups are finding
adverse effects on the aging brain at low levels of lead
exposure. More work needs to be done, but these studies are
raising important questions."
In any case, scientists still face some basic mysteries
about the delayed effects of lead. For example, when does
it actually harm the brain? Does a high level in the shinbone
merely identify those who were the most harmed by chronic
exposure decades ago? Or does lead in the bone continue to
do its dirty work over a lifetime, leaching into the bloodstream
and continuously hammering the brain?
"I think that both things are happening," Schwartz
said, though he suspects most of the damage occurred in the
past, during years of higher exposure. Hu's suspicions are
similar.
Just how lead impairs brainpower is still a mystery. And
so is the question of whether anything can be done to help
people who have absorbed a lot of lead over a lifetime.
A medical procedure called chelation can remove lead from
the body, but it wouldn't help in this case, said experts,
who had few suggestions.
For younger people, prevention is a clearer strategy, Hu
said. He called for tougher federal standards on lead exposure
in the workplace.
And plenty of low-income neighborhoods could use a strong
effort to remove lead from old houses, many of which still
have lead paint, Rowland said. "It's there on the walls,
it's on the radiators, it's underneath the top layers of
paint. In places where the paint is crumbling, there's still
exposure going on," he said.
Yet another question: Who really has to worry about long-ago
lead affecting their brainpower? What about people born after
the high lead levels of the 1970s were history?
Schwartz noted that most Americans younger than 30 have
gotten much less lead from the environment than the men in
his study did. And Hu hopes that the lead effect will peter
out in the future.
However, Hu points out that there's still lead in the environment,
and exposure remains especially high in many developing countries.
And citing evidence that lead can cross the placenta, he
says women who grew up in the 1970s might dose their fetuses
with the metal.
"Kids who grew up in the 21st century have a lot less
to worry about" than their elders, Hu said. But "it's
hard for me to be totally optimistic the current generation
is completely scot-free."
|