Gender differences in first and secondhand smoke exposure, spirometric lung function and cardiometabolic health in the old order Amish: A novel population without female smoking RESEARCH ARTICLE Gender differences in first and secondhand smoke exposure, spirometric lung function and cardiometabolic health in the old order Amish: A novel population without female smoking Robert M. Reed 1*, Mark T. Dransfield2, Michael Eberlein3, Michael Miller4,5,6, Giora Netzer 1,6 , Mary Pavlovich 4,6 , Toni I. Pollin 4,6 , Steven M. Scharf 1 , Alan R. Shuldiner 4,5,6 , Don Sin 7 , Braxton D. Mitchell 4,5,6 1 University of Maryland School of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America, 2 University of Alabama School of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Birmingham, Alabama, United States of America, 3 University of Iowa School of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa, United States of America, 4 University of Maryland School of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Nutrition, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America, 5 Department of Veterans Affairs and Veterans Affairs Medical Center Baltimore Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center (GRECC), Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America, 6 University of Maryland School of Medicine, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America, 7 University of British Columbia Respiratory Medicine; Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada * rreed@medicine.umaryland.edu Abstract Due to their relatively homogeneous lifestyle and living environment, the Amish offer a novel opportunity to study the health associations of tobacco smoke exposure, particularly sec- ondhand smoke. We hypothesized that secondhand smoke exposure is associated with worse pulmonary and cardiometabolic health. We examined cross-sectional data on 3568 Amish study participants, including tobacco use and secondhand smoke exposure from family members included in the study. Thirty-four percent of Amish men reported ever smok- ing. Of this proportion, 64% used cigars, 46% cigarettes, and 21% pipes. Less than 1% of women reported ever smoking. Smoking was associated with lower spirometric lung func- tion, higher body mass index, lower HDL cholesterol, higher heart rate, lower ankle-brachial index, and larger aortic diameter in men. A greater number of sources of secondhand smoke exposure (defined from the total of spouses, parents, and siblings who smoke) was associated with higher body mass index (p = 0.03) and with higher fasting glucose in men (p = 0.01), but not in women (p = 0.007 for sex*secondhand smoke interaction). Second- hand smoke exposure was also associated with reduced HDL cholesterol only in women (p = 0.002) and a lower heart rate only in men (p = 0.006). Smoking habits among the Old Order Amish are notable for the absence of female participation and a high proportion of cigar and pipe use. Smoking is associated with decreased spirometric indices of lung func- tion and increased cardiovascular risk in this population and secondhand smoke exposure is associated with a greater burden of risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Sex PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 March 31, 2017 1 / 12 a1111111111 a1111111111 a1111111111 a1111111111 a1111111111 OPEN ACCESS Citation: Reed RM, Dransfield MT, Eberlein M, Miller M, Netzer G, Pavlovich M, et al. (2017) Gender differences in first and secondhand smoke exposure, spirometric lung function and cardiometabolic health in the old order Amish: A novel population without female smoking. PLoS ONE 12(3): e0174354. https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0174354 Editor: Olga Y. Gorlova, Dartmouth College Geisel School of Medicine, UNITED STATES Received: August 18, 2016 Accepted: March 7, 2017 Published: March 31, 2017 Copyright: This is an open access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. Data Availability Statement: Phenotypic and genotypic data on the study participants are to be shared through dbGaP in accordance with NIH data sharing policies, but the specific database used in this study include direct integration with the Amish pedigree. As such, individuals in the study could be directly identified within the dataset, and the consent forms signed do not permit such sharing. Given the unique ancestral relationships among Amish participants and publicly available https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0174354&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2017-03-31 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0174354&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2017-03-31 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0174354&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2017-03-31 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0174354&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2017-03-31 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0174354&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2017-03-31 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0174354&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2017-03-31 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ differences in correlations could reflect differences in exposure patterns, mechanisms, or susceptibilities. Introduction Tobacco smoking is the leading preventable cause of death in the United States, responsible for an estimated 480,320 deaths annually, including 41,280 deaths attributable to lung cancer and coronary heart disease related to secondhand smoke exposure[1]. Secondhand smoke consists of main-stream smoke (the smoke that is inhaled and then exhaled by the smoker) and side-stream smoke (smoke that wafts directly from the burning tobacco). Secondhand smoke exposure has been associated with increased risks of COPD[2], lung cancer[3], stroke [4], as well as various fetal and pediatric health issues including low birth weight and infant death[1, 5]. While uncertainty remains, emerging data suggest secondhand smoke may also contribute to diabetes[6], obesity[7], and hypertension[1, 8]. Epidemiologic issues complicate correlative studies of the effects of tobacco smoke expo- sure and make the Amish a population well-suited for such investigation. Socioeconomic sta- tus and educational levels are associated with both smoking behavior[9] and cardiovascular risk[10], but within the Amish these and other lifestyle factors are relatively homogeneous[11]. Another key benefit to studying secondhand smoke in the Amish is that smoking is virtually nonexistent among Amish women[12, 13]. In populations including female smokers, it is diffi- cult to disentangle the effects of secondhand smoke from the exposures uniquely associated with maternal smoking such as intrauterine fetal exposure from a mother who smokes, high- intensity side-stream smoke exposure during infancy, and exposure through breastmilk[9], which are exposures absent in the Amish. Cigars and pipes represent the predominant forms of tobacco smoked by the Amish[12] and these create a greater degree of side-stream smoke than do cigarettes[14], thus presenting potential for a significant burden of secondhand tobacco exposure on the family members of those who smoke. As such, the Amish represent a useful population in which to examine the associations of secondhand smoke exposure. For these reasons, we examined the health characteristics associated with smoking patterns in a cross sectional sample of the Old Order Amish of Lancaster County to consider the hypoth- esis that smoke exposure in this novel population would be associated with pulmonary, cardiac, and metabolic derangements. Materials and methods Data source This report is based on data obtained in three community surveys of cardiovascular health in the Amish between 2001 and 2015[15, 16]. All studies were conducted with participant informed consent and with approval from the Institutional Review Board of the University of Maryland. Inclusion criteria and definitions Enrollment in each survey was limited to adults (age �18 years). The majority (n = 2683) par- ticipated in a wellness screening program offered to the community beginning in 2010 and open to all Amish adults. An additional 506 were recruited into a study that limited enrollment Tobacco smoke in the Amish PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 March 31, 2017 2 / 12 genealogical records (i.e. Anabaptist Genealogical Data Base), limited data may be provided in order to protect participant confidentiality. De-identified data is available upon request to Melanie Daue (mdaue@som.umaryland.edu). Funding: Robert M. Reed is supported in part by the Flight Attendants Medical Research Institute. Michael Eberlein is supported by a PILOT grant from the Institute for Clinical and Translational Science (ICTS) at the University of Iowa via the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program, grant 2 UL1 TR000442-06. Dr. Mitchell is funded in part by the Department of Veterans Affairs and Veterans Affairs Medical Center Baltimore Geriatric Research, Education and Clinical Center. This work was made possible by funding from: R01 HL088119-03, U01 GM074518-05, NIH K12 HD052224-05, R01 HL69313, U01 HL72515 and the University of Maryland General Clinical Research Center (grant M01 RR 16500). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 mailto:mdaue@som.umaryland.edu to age �30 years and excluded pregnant women[15]. The remaining 379 participated in a study of longevity conducted between 2001–2006 that enrolled participants � 90 years of age, as well as their offspring and the spouses of their offspring[16]. Amish who participated in multiple studies were included only once in these analyses, preferentially using data from the wellness screening program. Diabetes was defined by self-report, use of a diabetic medication, or fasting glucose �7.0mmol/, and obesity was defined by a body mass index �30. Smoking history was ascertained through self-report using questionnaires administered by research coordinators. “Ever smoking” was defined by either reporting any cigarette, pipe, or cigar use, or by answering affirmatively to having ever smoked regularly. All secondhand smoking analyses were limited to participants who had never smoked. Family and spousal smoking was characterized based on the self-reported smoking status of enrolled family mem- bers. We examined secondhand smoke exposure in both dichotomous (exposed/not exposed) terms as well as in ordinal terms according to a score relating to the number of family mem- bers reporting a history of smoking. For dichotomous analyses a study participant was consid- ered exposed to secondhand smoke if either the participant’s father, husband, or brother reported himself to be a current or an ex-smoker. To quantify the number of sources of sec- ondhand smoke, we counted the number of smokers in the nuclear family, assigning 1 point if the participant’s father smoked, 1 point if the participant’s husband smoked, and 1 point if one or more of the participant’s brothers smoked. We then generated a secondhand smoking expo- sure category score ranging from 0 to 3, based on the sum of these points. For this analysis, the secondhand smoke exposure category was set to missing if the smoking status of either the father or the husband of the participant was unknown.The number of parental sources of sec- ondhand smoke exposure has previously been shown to correlate with cardiovascular mea- sures[17]. Assessments Blood samples were taken while fasting and processed in CLIA (clinical laboratory improve- ment amendments) certified centers. Spirometry was performed in accordance with ATS stan- dards[18] without bronchodilator, and interpreted in terms of reference values for a Caucasian cohort [19]. Vascular health was assessed using ankle brachial index (ABI) and aortic ultra- sound measures on fasting individuals over age 40. Mean ABI was obtained by averaging mea- sures from the left and right side. Aortic ultrasound measures were performed using a C4-7 probe with a Vivid e, GE laptop ultrasound device. Longitudinal and transverse images were recorded at a minimum of 7 locations along the descending aorta, and the maximum outer-to- outer measure was identified. Statistical analysis Data are presented as counts and percentages or as medians with interquartile range (IQR). In order to control for non-independence of observations due to family clustering effects, we per- formed regression analyses using the linear mixed model software as implemented in MMAP (mixed models analysis for pedigrees), which accounts for relatedness of individuals (family structure) through inclusion of relationship matrix as a random effect[19]. We also used MMAP to examine interaction factors for sex in linear models to complement sex-stratified analyses. All other statistical analyses were performed using STATA 14 SC software (Stata- Corp-LP, College Station, TX). Despite examination of multiple outcome variables a Bonfer- roni correction was considered unnecessary based on suggested criteria for use [20]. For all analyses, two-tailed p<0.05 was considered significant. Tobacco smoke in the Amish PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 March 31, 2017 3 / 12 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 Results The study group included 3568 adult Amish individuals, of whom 43% were men. Four per- cent of the group were diabetic and 25% were obese. A history of having ever smoked was reported by 519 (34%) men, and 2 (<1%) women. Of men who reported having ever smoked, 46% also reported current smoking. Among smokers, cigar smoking was most common (64%), followed by cigarette (46%), and then pipe (21%). Median cigarette pack-years smoked (one pack a day for a year) was 4.5 (IQR 1.5 to 11.6), cigar-years (1 cigar a day for a year) 65.8 (IQR 15.7 to 180), and pipe-years (one pipe bowl a day for a year) 47.6 (IQR 22.3 to 86.0). Heavy cigarette smoking was uncommon, with 19% of smokers reporting >10 pack-years of lifetime cigarette smoking. Using previously proposed cigarette-per day equivalency estimates based on nicotine content for pipes and the small cigars most commonly smoked among the Lancaster Amish[12], a >10 pack-year “equivalent” was reported by 22% of cigar smokers and 58% of pipe smokers. Firsthand tobacco exposure in men A history of having ever smoked was associated with older age (median 54 vs. 44 years, p<0.0001), and higher BMI (27 vs.25, p<0.0001) (Table 1). Smoking was associated with lower FEV1/FVC%predicted (104 vs. 106%, p<0.0002), and this difference was independent of BMI. The association between higher BMI and smoking persisted after controlling for age differences, and appeared to be a result of both higher weights (p<0.0001) as well as shorter Table 1. Health Related Correlates of Smoking in Old Order Amish from Lancaster County Never Smoking Men (n = 1021) Ever Smoking Men (n = 519) P Never Smoking Women (n = 2026) Age at evaluation (yrs) 44 (33 to 58) 54 (40 to 65) <0.0001 44 (31 to 59) BMI (kg/m 2 ) 25 (23 to 28) 27 (24 to 30) <0.0001* 27 (23 to 31) Height (cm) 172 (169 to 177) 173 (168 to 177) 0.005* 161 (157 to 165) Weight (kg) 75.6 (68.4 to 84.5) 80.4 (72.6 to 89.6) <0.0001* 68.8 (60.0 to 79.0) Waist to Hip Ratio 0.92 (0.88 to 0.96) 0.94 (0.90 to 0.98) 0.0001* 0.83 (0.79 to 0.87) FEV1 (% predicted) 95 (82 to 105) 92 (78 to 105) 0.1† 91 (79 to 101) FVC (% predicted) 89 (79 to 98) 90 (80 to 101) 0.4† 88 (78 to 99) FEV1/FVC (%predicted) 106 (99 to 113) 104 (95 to 110) 0.0002† 104 (96 to 110) LDL-C (mmol/L) 3.39 (2.82 to 4.06) 3.47 (2.84 to 4.06) 0.2‡ 3.28 (2.59 to 4.06) HDL-C (mmol/L) 1.45 (1.22 to 1.68) 1.29 (1.09 to 1.53) 0.0003‡ 1.63 (1.40 to 1.94) TG (mmol/L) 0.64 (0.49 to 0.88) 0.81 (0.59 to 1.16) 0.00003‡ 0.73 (0.54 to 1.10) Heart Rate by EKG 62 (56 to 68) 64 (58 to 72) <0.0001‡ 67 (62 to 73) Fasting glucose (mmol/L) 4.8 (4.5 to 5.1) 4.9 (4.6 to 5.3) 0.5‡ 4.7 (4.4 to 5.1) SBP (mmHg) 110 (103 to 120) 114 (106 to 125) 0.95‡ 109 (101 to 122) Mean ABI (n = 797) 1.25 (1.17 to 1.33) 1.20 (1.12 to 1.30) 0.0005‡ 1.17 (1.10 to 1.26) Aorta (cm) (n = 595) 2.1 (1.9 to 2.4) 2.2 (1.9 to 2.5) 0.046‡ 1.9 (1.7 to 2.2) Data are expressed as medians (IQR) or as percentages. Unadjusted P values were obtained using Wilcoxon rank sum. Adjusted p values were obtained using linear regression and were limited to men. *Adjusted for family structure and age. †Adjusted for family structure. ‡Adjusted for family structure, age, and BMI. ABI: ankle-brachial index; BMI: body mass index; DBP: diastolic blood pressure; EKG: electrocardiogram; FEV1: forced expiratory volume in 1 second; FVC: forced vital capacity; LDL-C: low density lipoprotein cholesterol; HDL-C: high density lipoprotein cholesterol; SBP, systolic blood pressure; TG; triglycerides. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354.t001 Tobacco smoke in the Amish PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 March 31, 2017 4 / 12 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354.t001 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 statures (p = 0.005). After controlling for age and BMI, smoking was associated with lower high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels (p<0.001), higher triglyceride levels, higher resting heart, lower mean ankle-brachial index, and higher aortic size. Secondhand tobacco exposure: Dichotomous approach Evaluation of secondhand smoke exposure was evaluated in dichotomous terms separately in never-smoking men and women (data not shown). Differences in spirometric lung function associated with secondhand smoke were not appreciable in men, but were detected in women. The magnitude of these differences was small, with a mean difference (assessed by Student’s T- test) in FEV1% of 2.7% (p = 0.008) and FVC% of 2.8% (p = 0.002). These differences persisted after adjustment for BMI. Analyses adjusted for age and BMI also showed secondhand smoke to be associated with significantly lower HDL-C in women (p = 0.04), but not men (p = 0.98). Secondhand tobacco exposure: Ordinal approach Characteristics of nonsmokers according to number of secondhand smoking sources are pre- sented in Table 2. Forty percent of women and 48% of never-smoking men had no family member identified as a source of smoke exposure. Potential family sources of exposure in women was primarily from fathers (47%), followed by siblings (23%) and spouses (20%). Of never-smoking men, 39% had fathers with a smoking history and 26% had siblings with a smoking history. No men had more than two sources because none of their spouses smoked. The patterns of exposure in this subgroup were representative of the exposures in the entire group. In women, secondhand smoke exposure was associated with older age (p < 0.0001) and lower HDL cholesterol (age-adjusted p = 0.002). In men, secondhand smoke exposure was associated with older age (p < 0.0001), higher heart rate (age-adjusted p = 0.006), and higher fasting glucose (age-adjusted p = 0.01). Table 3 shows the association between secondhand smoking score and cardiovascular risk factors in the combined set of men and women. With adjustment for age and sex, secondhand smoking score was significantly associated with higher BMI (p = 0.03). After adjusting for age, sex, and BMI, secondhand smoking score remained significantly associated with lower HDL-C (p = 0.045). Secondhand smoking score was also significantly associated with higher fasting glucose levels in men (age and BMI-adjusted p = 0.01), but not women (sex�second- hand smoking score interaction p = 0.007). No association was detected between secondhand smoke exposure and ABI or aortic size in either sex-stratified (data not presented) or com- bined set. These vascular measures were made only in participants �40 years of age, and analy- ses were limited by the relatively small sample sizes. Discussion We found that both smoking and secondhand tobacco exposures in a novel Amish population were associated with cardiovascular risk factors. Our data provide evidence supporting an association between secondhand smoke exposure and higher glucose levels, higher BMI, lower HDL-C, lower heart rates, and lower spirometric measures of lung function. These associa- tions demonstrated notable gender differences. First hand smoke exposure The Amish study group presented here included only male smokers with a relatively high fre- quency of cigar (64%) and pipe (21%) use. For context, smoking preferences in the general US population favor cigarettes (84% of smokers) with far fewer smokers using cigars (19% of Tobacco smoke in the Amish PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 March 31, 2017 5 / 12 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 Table 2. Health Related Correlates To Categories of Passive Smoking in Old Order Amish Study Participants. No smoke exposure 1 source of secondhand smoke exposure 2 sources of secondhand smoke exposure 3 sources of secondhand smoke exposure P* Women n = 246 n = 223 n = 124 n = 29 Age at evaluation (yrs) 28 (21 to 38) 36 (27 to 45) 40 (34 to 49) 44 (37 to 53) <0.0001 BMI (kg/m 2 ) 23.9 (21.8 to 27.0) 25.4 (22.5 to 29.8) 26.2 (23.3 to 29.6) 26.8 (24.9 to 30.3) 0.1 Height (cm) 163 (159 to 167) 162 (159 to 165) 161 (158 to 165) 160 (158 to 165) 0.4 Weight (kg) 64.0 (57.8 to 72.0) 66.2 (59.0 to 77.2) 67.7 (60.9 to 77.5) 69.6 (63.4 to 79.0) 0.2 Waist to Hip Ratio 0.82 (0.78 to 0.86) 0.83 (0.80 to 0.87) 0.83 (0.79 to 0.88) 0.82 (0.79 to 0.87) 0.7 FEV1 (% predicted) 92 (82 to 102) 90 (78 to 100) 93 (82 to 101) 91 (78 to 100) 0.09 FVC (% predicted) 90 (80 to 101) 89 (80 to 99) 91 (81 to 98) 90 (79 to 98) 0.07 FEV1/FVC (% predicted) 103 (96 to 108) 102 (94 to 109) 101 (95 to 106) 102 (94 to 109) 0.7 LDL-C (mmol/L) 2.84 (2.33 to 3.57) 2.79 (2.35 to 3.65) 3.05 (2.53 to 3.72) 3.15 (2.79 to 3.93) 0.8 HDL-C (mmol/L) 1.71 (1.50 to 2.02) 1.63 (1.40 to 1.99) 1.60 (1.34 to 1.91) 1.63 (1.32 to 1.84) 0.002 TG (mmol/L) 0.58 (0.45 to 0.75) 0.63 (0.50 to 0.88) 0.67 (0.52 to 0.99) 0.75 (0.56 to 1.05) 0.7 Heart Rate by EKG 69 (63 to 74) 66 (60 to 73) 67 (62 to 74) 68 (63 to 75) 0.9 Fasting glucose (mmol/L) 4.50 (4.22 to 4.78) 4.56 (4.28 to 4.89) 4.67 (4.39 to 5.00) 4.83 (4.44 to 5.17) 0.99 SBP (mmHg) 103 (98 to 110) 104 (98 to 111) 107 (100 to 115) 107 (99 to 117) 0.7 DBP (mmHg) 67 (62 to 72) 67 (62 to 73) 69 (64 to 75) 71 (67 to 73) 0.9 Men n = 264 n = 161 n = 38 n = 0 Age at evaluation (yrs) 32 (26 to 40) 40 (31 to 51) 38 (33 to 43) <0.0001 BMI (kg/m 2 ) 24 (22 to 26) 25 (23 to 27) 25 (24 to 27) 0.2 Height (cm) 174 (171 to178) 173 (168 to 177) 173 (171 to 177) 0.8 Weight (kg) 72.6 (67.8 to 79.5) 75.4 (68.8 to 82.2) 78.0 (70.2 to 81.2) 0.1 Waist to Hip Ratio 0.90 (0.86 to 0.93) 0.91 (0.87 to 0.95) 0.93 (0.89 to 0.98) 0.2 FEV1 (% predicted) 95 (83 to 105) 97 (85 to 106) 94 (90 to 101) 0.5 FVC (% predicted) 91 (83 to 100) 88 (81 to 98) 88 (80 to 99) 0.5 FEV1/FVC (% predicted) 102 (95 to 108) 104 (97 to 108) 103 (94 to 107) 0.4 LDL-C (mmol/L) 3.13 (2.51 to 3.90) 3.31 (2.74 to 4.03) 3.57 (2.66 to 4.45) 0.8 HDL-C (mmol/L) 1.50 (1.27 to 1.73) 1.42 (1.24 to 1.71) 1.50 (1.22 to 1.68) 0.8 TG (mmol/L) 0.53 (0.41 to 0.70) 0.65 (0.49 to 0.94) 0.56 (0.46 to 0.75) 0.1 Heart Rate by EKG 63 (56 to 69) 60 (57 to 66) 56 (52 to 65) 0.006 Fasting glucose (mmol/L) 4.72 (4.44 to 4.94) 4.78 (4.56 to 5.00) 4.83 (4.67 to 5.06) 0.01 SBP (mmHg) 108 (101 to 115) 109 (102 to 116) 107 (101 to 113) 0.5 (Continued ) Tobacco smoke in the Amish PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 March 31, 2017 6 / 12 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 smokers) or pipes (3% of smokers)[21]. As cigar and pipe users typically inhale less deeply, such smoking involves more side-stream rather than main-stream smoke inhalation, and thus it more closely resembles secondhand smoke than the first-hand smoking of cigarettes[14, 22]. Despite this and modest smoking habits overall, adjusted analyses demonstrated associations between smoking and detectable differences in spirometric lung function, BMI, HDL-C, and heart rate. Furthermore, smoking was associated with subclinical cardiovascular disease as evi- denced by lower ankle-brachial index and larger aortic size. This supports prior assertions that a large proportion of cardiovascular risk attributable to tobacco exposure occurs at low levels of exposure[23, 24]. Prior observations have suggested that this low threshold for effect may be attributable primarily to prothrombotic effect[23, 24]. Our data would suggest a low threshold for other mechanisms as well. Table 2. (Continued ) No smoke exposure 1 source of secondhand smoke exposure 2 sources of secondhand smoke exposure 3 sources of secondhand smoke exposure P* DBP (mmHg) 70 (64 to 75) 71 (65 to 76) 71 (64 to 74) 0.5 Data are expressed as medians (IQR) or as percentages. *P values were obtained using MMAP software controlling for pedigree and age (with the exception of age and spirometric measures, which were controlled for pedigree alone). ABI: ankle-brachial index; BMI: body mass index; DBP: diastolic blood pressure; EKG: electrocardiogram; FEV1: forced expiratory volume in 1 second; FVC: forced vital capacity; LDL-C: low density lipoprotein cholesterol; HDL-C: high density lipoprotein cholesterol; SBP: systolic blood pressure; TG: triglycerides. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354.t002 Table 3. Correlation Between Health Measures and Ordinal Categories of Passive Smoking in Old Order Amish Study Participants from Lancaster County. Adjusted for β (SE) P Interaction P (sex*smoke exposure) FEV1 (liters) Age, Height, Sex, BMI -0.03 (0.03) 0.4 0.8 FVC (liters) Age, Height, Sex, BMI -0.2 (0.06) 0.06 0.09 FEV1/FVC Age, Height, Sex, BMI 0.04 (0.02) 0.052 0.02 BMI (kg/m 2 ) Sex, Age 0.4 (0.2) 0.03 0.5 Waist to Hip Ratio Sex, Age 0.0005 (0.003) 0.8 0.1 Height (cm) Sex, Age -0.05 (0.3) 0.8 0.9 Weight (kg) Sex, Age 1.07 (0.5) 0.05 0.8 HDL-C (mmol/L) Sex, Age, BMI -0.04 (0.02) 0.045 0.4 HDL-C (mmol/L) Sex, Age, BMI, TG -0.04 (0.02) 0.02 0.2 LDL-C (mmol/L) Sex, Age, BMI -0.02 (0.05) 0.6 0.3 TG (mmol/L) Sex, Age, BMI -0.002 (0.02) 0.9 0.3 Glucose (mmol/L) Sex, Age, BMI 0.42 (0.14) 0.003 0.007 SBP (mmHg) Sex, Age, BMI -0.3 (0.5) 0.5 0.3 DBP (mmHg) Sex, Age, BMI -0.3 (0.4) 0.5 0.7 Heart Rate Sex, Age, BMI -3.3 (1.5) 0.02 0.07 Mean ABI (n = 342) Sex, Age, BMI 0.001 (0.01) 0.9 0.2 Aorta (n = 273) Sex, Age, BMI 0.02 (0.02) 0.5 0.4 N = 1056. P values were obtained using regression methods including controls for family structure. ABI: ankle-brachial index; BMI: body mass index; DBP: diastolic blood pressure; FEV1: forced expiratory volume in 1 second; FVC: forced vital capacity; LDL-C: low density lipoprotein cholesterol; HDL-C: high density lipoprotein cholesterol; SBP: systolic blood pressure; TG: triglycerides. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354.t003 Tobacco smoke in the Amish PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 March 31, 2017 7 / 12 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354.t002 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354.t003 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 Pulmonary associations of secondhand smoke Our study found a 2.7% lower spirometric lung function (FEV1%) associated with secondhand smoke in women. The power to detect this difference in the female group was 98%, whereas power was only 65% to detect this difference in the never-smoking men. As such, the lack of signal in men may represent a limitation of power rather than a true gender difference. Power in our study as well as in prior studies could be impaired due to issues of nondifferential mis- classification bias related to ascertainment of smoke exposure, potentially resulting in both diffi- culty detecting effect as well as underestimation of effect size. This might particularly affect studies assessing only one source of tobacco exposure, such as spousal smoking[25–27]. The Surgeon General’s review states, “The evidence is suggestive but not sufficient to infer a causal relationship between chronic secondhand smoke exposure and a small decrement in spiromet- ric lung function in the general population[23]” Notably, a meta-analysis involving 9 cross sec- tional studies reported an estimate similar to ours (-2.7%, 95%CI -4.1 to -1.2%)[28]. Our results bolster that observation and should reduce uncertainty around the association between second- hand smoke exposure and small decrements in spirometric lung function. Cardiometabolic associations of secondhand smoke The cardiovascular risk associated with secondhand smoke exposure is striking and approaches that of smoking[29, 30]. Studies demonstrate a consistent 25–30% increased risk for coronary disease associated with secondhand smoke[23]. The best established mechanisms underlying this effect include endothelial dysfunction and a prothrombotic effect[23]. Our findings suggest the possibility of a significant role for mechanisms less clearly established in secondhand smoking, but recognized in association with active smoking. Such effect media- tors include HDL-C and BMI. We found lower HDL-C levels associated with secondhand smoke exposure in women only. Svendsen described a cohort of 1245 never-smoking men in whom HDL-C levels were not asso- ciated with spousal smoking status[27]. Another study described lower HDL-C in female ado- lescents exposed to secondhand smoke from their parents, but no such association existed in males[31]. Notably, smoking is clearly associated with reduced HDL-C levels in men[32], including in our cohort. As such, it would seem that both men and women manifest reduction in HDL-C levels in response to smoke exposure, but women may have a greater susceptibility for this particular effect. While our study design does not facilitate determination of mecha- nism, it is likely that the differences observed between men and women result from both differ- ences in exposure as well as susceptibility. Differences in susceptibility are supported by biologic plausibility. Smoke exposure has been shown to influence sex hormone profiles in women[33], and sex hormone profiles in turn correlate with levels of HDL-cholesterol, independently of smoking[34]. We found more familial sources of secondhand smoke to correlate with higher BMI in both men and women without apparent differential effect according to gender. A higher BMI has been associated with secondhand smoke in a number of large studies[17, 27, 35–38]. It has been suggested that tobacco smoke is a source of a variety of “obesogens”, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, which are produced by incomplete combustion of organic materials [38]. These polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons are produced from other sources as well, and may function synergistically with secondhand smoke to promote obesity[38]. Heart rate in our cohort was higher in smoking men, lower in men exposed to secondhand smoke, and unassociated with secondhand smoke exposure in women. Our findings in smokers reflect prior observations consistent with increased adrenergic tone associated with smoking [32]. The observation of paradoxically lower heart rates in men in and absence of association Tobacco smoke in the Amish PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 March 31, 2017 8 / 12 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 women exposed to secondhand smoke is not easily explained, although a murine model has shown estrogen to modulate chronotropic effects of nicotine[39]. Notably, the possibility of confounding attributable to use of medications that would affect the heart rate is possible but unlikely in our cohort as medication use is not common in the Amish, with rates of beta blocker use under 5%[40]. Smoking has been associated with insulin resistance and increased risk for the development of type 2 diabetes in both men and women[6, 32, 41, 42]with an apparent dose-reponse relationship. Secondhand smoke has also been associated with increased risk for type 2 diabetes[6, 42]. A large meta-analysis showed a stronger correlation between smoke exposure and elevated glucose levels in men[42], possibly suggestive of a differential susceptibil- ity according to sex. Supporting this possibility, we found more family sources of secondhand smoke exposure to be associated with higher glucose levels in men, but not women. Strengths and limitations Our methods for assessment of secondhand smoke exposure involved questioning family members about their smoking history and then extrapolating exposure through pedigree rather than questioning study participants about secondhand smoke exposure directly. While this approach mitigates recall bias, it led to some data points missing due to nonrandom inabil- ity to capture all family members (older participants were less likely to have parents enrolled) that was not possible to meaningfully address through imputation. The methods also did not permit differentiation between acute exposure versus chronic or past exposure. It is likely that the different categories of potential sources comprising the exposure score reflect exposures occuring primarily at different periods of life such that exposure from a father would be more likely to occur during childhood whereas exposure from a spouse would more likely represent a more recent or current source. Power was insufficient to meaningfully distinguish differ- ences between these potential sources of exposure. Workplace exposure was also not captured in our data and represents a possible source of misclassification bias that would likely be non- differential and thus bias towards the null in analyses stratified by sex, but could represent a source of differential exposure between men and women.Finally, the cross-sectional nature of our study is suceptible to survivorship bias. We would, however, expect mortality related to smoke exposure to preferentially affect those with high exposure or susceptibility and as such would result in underestimation of the true magnitude of effect. Conclusions In a unique population controlling for maternal tobacco use, smoking is associated with sub- clinical cardiovascular disease and secondhand smoke exposure primarily from cigar and pipe use is associated with a greater burden of risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Sex differences are suggested in the correlation between smoke exposure and HDL-C levels, and glucose levels. Acknowledgments The authors thank the Amish research coordinators and study participants for making this work possible. Author Contributions Conceptualization: RMR MTD ME MM GN SMS DS BDM. Data curation: RMR MP TIP ARS BDM. Tobacco smoke in the Amish PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 March 31, 2017 9 / 12 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 Formal analysis: RMR MP BDM. Funding acquisition: RMR TIP ARS BDM. Investigation: RMR MP TIP ARS BDM. Methodology: RMR GN BDM. Project administration: RMR MP TIP ARS BDM. Resources: RMR TIP ARS BDM. Supervision: RMR TIP ARS BDM. Writing – original draft: RMR. Writing – review & editing: RMR MTD ME MM GN MP TIP SMS ARS DS BDM. References 1. Services USDoHaH, Prevention CfDCa. The Health Consequences of Smoking—50 Years of Progress: A Report of the Surgeon General. Office of the Surgeon General. 2014. 2. Hagstad S, Bjerg A, Ekerljung L, Backman H, Lindberg A, Ronmark E, et al. Passive smoking exposure is associated with increased risk of COPD in never smokers. Chest. 2014; 145(6):1298–304. https://doi. org/10.1378/chest.13-1349 PMID: 24356778 3. Dockery DW, Trichopoulos D. Risk of lung cancer from environmental exposures to tobacco smoke. Cancer Causes Control. 1997; 8(3):333–45. PMID: 9498897 4. Zhang X, Shu XO, Yang G, Li HL, Xiang YB, Gao YT, et al. Association of passive smoking by husbands with prevalence of stroke among Chinese women nonsmokers. Am J Epidemiol. 2005; 161(3):213–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwi028 PMID: 15671253 5. Spitzer WO, Lawrence V, Dales R, Hill G, Archer MC, Clark P, et al. Links between passive smoking and disease: a best-evidence synthesis. A report of the Working Group on Passive Smoking. Clin Invest Med. 1990; 13(1):17–42. PMID: 2138069 6. Eze IC, Schaffner E, Zemp E, von EA, Turk A, Bettschart R, et al. Environmental tobacco smoke expo- sure and diabetes in adult never-smokers. Environ Health. 2014; 13:74. https://doi.org/10.1186/1476- 069X-13-74 PMID: 25253088 7. Durmus B, Kruithof CJ, Gillman MH, Willemsen SP, Hofman A, Raat H, et al. Parental smoking during pregnancy, early growth, and risk of obesity in preschool children: the Generation R Study. Am J Clin Nutr. 2011; 94(1):164–71. https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.110.009225 PMID: 21593510 8. Simonetti GD, Schwertz R, Klett M, Hoffmann GF, Schaefer F, Wuhl E. Determinants of blood pressure in preschool children: the role of parental smoking. Circulation. 2011; 123(3):292–8. https://doi.org/10. 1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.958769 PMID: 21220729 9. Fingerhut LA, Kleinman JC, Kendrick JS. Smoking before, during, and after pregnancy. Am J Public Health. 1990; 80(5):541–4. PMID: 2327529 10. Carson AP, Rose KM, Catellier DJ, Kaufman JS, Wyatt SB, Diez-Roux AV, et al. Cumulative socioeco- nomic status across the life course and subclinical atherosclerosis. Ann Epidemiol. 2007; 17(4):296– 303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2006.07.009 PMID: 17027292 11. DB K, KM J-W, SM N. The Amish. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press; 2013 2013. 12. Nugent KL, Million-Mrkva A, Backman J, Stephens SH, Reed RM, Kochunov P, et al. Familial aggrega- tion of tobacco use behaviors among amish men. Nicotine Tob Res. 2014; 16(7):923–30. https://doi. org/10.1093/ntr/ntu006 PMID: 24583363 13. Ferketich AK, Katz ML, Kauffman RM, Paskett ED, Lemeshow S, Westman JA, et al. Tobacco use among the Amish in Holmes County, Ohio. J Rural Health. 2008; 24(1):84–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/j. 1748-0361.2008.00141.x PMID: 18257875 14. National Cancer Institute (NCI), Cigars: Health Effects and Trends, Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 9, 1998 2016 [updated 3/22/2016]. Available from: http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/tcrb/ monographs/9/index.html. 15. Post W, Bielak LF, Ryan KA, Cheng YC, Shen H, Rumberger JA, et al. Determinants of coronary artery and aortic calcification in the Old Order Amish. Circulation. 2007; 115(6):717–24. https://doi.org/10. 1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.637512 PMID: 17261661 Tobacco smoke in the Amish PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 March 31, 2017 10 / 12 https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.13-1349 https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.13-1349 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24356778 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9498897 https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwi028 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15671253 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2138069 https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-13-74 https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-13-74 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25253088 https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.110.009225 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21593510 https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.958769 https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.958769 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21220729 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2327529 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2006.07.009 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17027292 https://doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntu006 https://doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntu006 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24583363 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-0361.2008.00141.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-0361.2008.00141.x http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18257875 http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/tcrb/monographs/9/index.html http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/tcrb/monographs/9/index.html https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.637512 https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.637512 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17261661 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 16. Sorkin J, Post W, Pollin TI, O’Connell JR, Mitchell BD, Shuldiner AR. Exploring the genetics of longevity in the Old Order Amish. Mech Ageing Dev. 2005; 126(2):347–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mad.2004. 08.027 PMID: 15621217 17. Geerts CC, Bots ML, Grobbee DE, Uiterwaal CS. Parental smoking and vascular damage in young adult offspring: is early life exposure critical? The atherosclerosis risk in young adults study. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2008; 28(12):2296–302. https://doi.org/10.1161/ATVBAHA.108.173229 PMID: 19020316 18. Miller MR, Hankinson J, Brusasco V, Burgos F, Casaburi R, Coates A, et al. Standardisation of spirome- try. Eur Respir J. 2005; 26(2):319–38. https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.05.00034805 PMID: 16055882 19. Sun C, VanRaden PM, Cole JB, O’Connell JR. Improvement of prediction ability for genomic selection of dairy cattle by including dominance effects. PLoS One. 2014; 9(8):e103934. https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0103934 PMID: 25084281 20. Armstrong RA. When to use the Bonferroni correction. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2014; 34(5):502–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/opo.12131 PMID: 24697967 21. Administration SAaMHS. Results from the 2006 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: National Findings. Rockville, MD: Office of Applied Studies; 2007. 22. Wald NJ, Watt HC. Prospective study of effect of switching from cigarettes to pipes or cigars on mortality from three smoking related diseases. BMJ. 1997; 314(7098):1860–3. PMID: 9224127 23. Services UDoHaH. The health consequences of involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke: a report of the Surgeon General. 2006 2006. Report No. 24. Law MR, Wald NJ. Environmental tobacco smoke and ischemic heart disease. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2003; 46(1):31–8. PMID: 12920699 25. Kauffmann F, Dockery DW, Speizer FE, Ferris BG Jr. Respiratory symptoms and lung function in rela- tion to passive smoking: a comparative study of American and French women. Int J Epidemiol. 1989; 18 (2):334–44. PMID: 2767847 26. Schilling RS, Letai AD, Hui SL, Beck GJ, Schoenberg JB, Bouhuys A. Lung function, respiratory dis- ease, and smoking in families. Am J Epidemiol. 1977; 106(4):274–83. PMID: 910796 27. Svendsen KH, Kuller LH, Martin MJ, Ockene JK. Effects of passive smoking in the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial. Am J Epidemiol. 1987; 126(5):783–95. PMID: 3661526 28. Carey IM, Cook DG, Strachan DP. The effects of environmental tobacco smoke exposure on lung func- tion in a longitudinal study of British adults. Epidemiology. 1999; 10(3):319–26. PMID: 10230845 29. Barnoya J, Glantz SA. Cardiovascular effects of secondhand smoke: nearly as large as smoking. Circu- lation. 2005; 111(20):2684–98. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.104.492215 PMID: 15911719 30. Lu L, Mackay DF, Newby DE, Pell JP. Association between salivary cotinine and cardiovascular bio- markers among nonsmokers and current smokers: cross-sectional study of 10,081 participants. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2014; 48(6):703–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2014.09.008 PMID: 25454789 31. Le-Ha C, Beilin LJ, Burrows S, Huang RC, Oddy WH, Hands B, et al. Gender difference in the relation- ship between passive smoking exposure and HDL-cholesterol levels in late adolescence. J Clin Endo- crinol Metab. 2013; 98(5):2126–35. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2013-1016 PMID: 23633198 32. (US) CfDCaP, (US) NCfCDPaHP, (US) OoSaH. How Tobacco Smoke Causes Disease: The Biology and Behavioral Basis for Smoking-Attributable Disease: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2010 2010. 33. Brand JS, Chan MF, Dowsett M, Folkerd E, Wareham NJ, Luben RN, et al. Cigarette smoking and endogenous sex hormones in postmenopausal women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011; 96(10):3184– 92. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2011-1165 PMID: 21832108 34. Semmens J, Rouse I, Beilin LJ, Masarei JR. Relationship of plasma HDL-cholesterol to testosterone, estradiol, and sex-hormone-binding globulin levels in men and women. Metabolism. 1983; 32(5):428– 32. PMID: 6682470 35. McConnell R, Shen E, Gilliland FD, Jerrett M, Wolch J, Chang CC, et al. A longitudinal cohort study of body mass index and childhood exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke and air pollution: the Southern California Children’s Health Study. Environ Health Perspect. 2015; 123(4):360–6. https://doi.org/10. 1289/ehp.1307031 PMID: 25389275 36. Jefferis BJ, Lowe GD, Welsh P, Rumley A, Lawlor DA, Ebrahim S, et al. Secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure is associated with circulating markers of inflammation and endothelial function in adult men and women. Atherosclerosis. 2010; 208(2):550–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2009.07. 044 PMID: 19700161 Tobacco smoke in the Amish PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 March 31, 2017 11 / 12 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mad.2004.08.027 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mad.2004.08.027 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15621217 https://doi.org/10.1161/ATVBAHA.108.173229 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19020316 https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.05.00034805 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16055882 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0103934 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0103934 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25084281 https://doi.org/10.1111/opo.12131 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24697967 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9224127 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12920699 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2767847 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/910796 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3661526 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10230845 https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.104.492215 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15911719 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2014.09.008 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25454789 https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2013-1016 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23633198 https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2011-1165 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21832108 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6682470 https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1307031 https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1307031 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25389275 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2009.07.044 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2009.07.044 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19700161 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 37. Hamer M, Stamatakis E, Batty GD. Objectively assessed secondhand smoke exposure and mental health in adults: cross-sectional and prospective evidence from the Scottish Health Survey. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2010; 67(8):850–5. https://doi.org/10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2010.76 PMID: 20529994 38. Kim HW, Kam S, Lee DH. Synergistic interaction between polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and envi- ronmental tobacco smoke on the risk of obesity in children and adolescents: The U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2003–2008. Environ Res. 2014; 135:354–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.envres.2014.08.032 PMID: 25462685 39. El-Mas MM, El-Gowelli HM, El-Gowilly SM, Fouda MA, Helmy MM. Estrogen provokes the depressant effect of chronic nicotine on vagally mediated reflex chronotropism in female rats. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2012; 342(2):568–75. https://doi.org/10.1124/jpet.112.191940 PMID: 22619254 40. Reed RM, Reed AW, McArdle PF, Miller M, Pollin TI, Shuldiner AR, et al. Vitamin and Supplement Use among Old Order Amish: Sex-Specific Prevalence and Associations with Use. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2014. 41. Willi C, Bodenmann P, Ghali WA, Faris PD, Cornuz J. Active smoking and the risk of type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2007; 298(22):2654–64. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama. 298.22.2654 PMID: 18073361 42. Pan A, Wang Y, Talaei M, Hu FB, Wu T. Relation of active, passive, and quitting smoking with incident type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2015. Tobacco smoke in the Amish PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354 March 31, 2017 12 / 12 https://doi.org/10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2010.76 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20529994 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2014.08.032 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2014.08.032 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25462685 https://doi.org/10.1124/jpet.112.191940 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22619254 https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.298.22.2654 https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.298.22.2654 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18073361 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174354