Plastic chemical is unhealthy for children and other living things

BPA study: Plastic chemical is unhealthy for children and other living things

So? Where do I but drinkable water if not in a plastic bottle? Is there a safer form of plastic? What if we wash the bottle first? Are old bottles safer, less safe?

Anyone? Anyone?
M

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

From the article....

So I guess someone has to establish a causal link between BPA and adverse health effects, ie. that a chemical that mimics estrogens can cause heart disease and diabetes. :shrug:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

OK, I suppose there are two ways to go about this...

1) Use CHM until shown to be deadly ... or....
2) Use CHM that are better proven to be safe....

Haaa! And we point our fingers at China... tisk tisk...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Bpa

While Bisphenol A was first synthesized in 1891, the first evidence of its estrogenicity came from experiments in the 1930's feeding BPA to ovariectomised rats (Dodds and Lawson 1936, 1938).

BPA is detected in human plasma, cord sera, and even fetal tissues. The estrogenicity of BPA has been demonstrated in a number of in vitro and in vivo assays. BPA was detected predominantly in the lung, followed by kidneys, thyroid, stomach, heart, spleen, testes, liver, and brain. Ratios of the organ to serum BPA concentrations exceeded unity for all organs examined (ratio range, 2.0–5.8), except for brain (ratio, 0.75). Thus, BPA has the potential to interfere with thyroid hormone action in each organ accumulated by BPA.

BPA, which is one of the most prevalent chemicals for daily use materials, suppresses transcriptional activity by inhibiting T3 binding to the TR and by recruiting N-CoR on the promoter.

 

Are you sire water bottle contain BPA, Bisphenol A is an expensive compound , I will assume in water bottle is used polyethylen, which is a low cost chemical . BPA is used in can coating I doubt they use it in soft drinks

 

Thank you for the detail analysis
I remember BPA used in epoxy coating for at least 35 years it was or it is now used in beer cans an beverage . I suppose if it would be so harmful there would be an epidemic, I am beyond retirement age and I am fine.

 

well obviously there are alternatives, glass and stainless steel being the 2 most obvious (though I suppose you could have a wooden bottle). Bottled water is bad for the environment ANYWAY in spite of any health effects it may have on you and the water is effectively no different from what your getting out of the tap anyway

 

20 years back there were not plastic drinkable water , and we survived with the old plumbing meaning the pipes were lead pipes . We the old ones with lead in our brains raised the imbecile that now carry a plastic bottle and think they have pure water

 

Why buy water for $1 or $2? Turn on the tap and fill a glass! If you want to take water with you but you are scared of plastic use a glass bottle.

 

Plastic BPA free bottles have been on the market for ages.

 

The paper is dated to September 2008 - so it is hardly news of any sort. All chemicals used in making plastics have toxic effects - the question to be answered is "Do they enter the environment in sufficient concentration to pose a risk to humans, to other animals, to plants or to the environment?

Do they leach out from the plastic, or are they bound to it? Do they leach out as the plastic degrades in sunlight?

Bisphenyls, pthalates, and, most recently, titanium dioxide are all chemicals used in making plastic which have been implicated as hazardous. But take a look at the data upon which those claims is made - is it credible?

The point is not whether it is credible, the point is to ask if you have even looked at the data before jumping on the bandwagon one way or the other.

Rich

 

From the CDC

Bisphenol A (BPA) is used to manufacture polycarbonate plastics. This type of plastic is used to make some types of beverage containers, compact disks, plastic dinnerware, impact-resistant safety equipment, automobile parts, and toys. BPA epoxy resins are used in the protective linings of food cans, in dental sealants, and in other products.

How People Are Exposed to BPA
General exposure to BPA at low levels comes from eating food or drinking water stored in containers that have BPA. Small children may be exposed by hand-to-mouth and direct oral (mouth) contact with materials containing BPA. Dental treatment with BPA-containing sealants also results in short-term exposure. In addition, workers who manufacture products that contain BPA can be exposed.

How BPA Affects People's Health
Human health effects from BPA at low environmental exposures are unknown. BPA has been shown to affect the reproductive systems of laboratory animals. More research is needed to understand the human health effects of exposure to BPA.

Levels of BPA in the U.S. Population
In the Fourth National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals (Fourth Report), CDC scientists measured BPA in the urine of 2,517 participants aged six years and older who took part in CDC's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) during 2003–2004. By measuring BPA in urine, scientists can estimate the amount of BPA that has entered peoples' bodies.

CDC scientists found BPA in the urine of nearly all of the people tested, which indicates widespread exposure to BPA in the U.S. population.

Finding a measurable amount of BPA in the urine does not mean that the levels of BPA cause an adverse health effect. Biomonitoring studies on levels of BPA provide physicians and public health officials with reference values so that they can determine whether people have been exposed to higher levels of BPA than are found in the general population. Biomonitoring data can also help scientists plan and conduct research on exposure and health effects.

 

2010 study: Perinatal Exposure to Oestradiol and Bisphenol A Alters the Prostate Epigenome and Increases Susceptibility to Carcinogenesis.

ScienceWatch interview with Dr. Gail Prins PhD, Professor of Physiology in the Department of Urology and the Department of Physiology and Biophysics at the University of Illinois at Chicago.


Would you please describe the significance of your paper and why it is highly cited?

The significance of this work is twofold. First, it is the first study to show that exposure to an environmental disrupting chemical (EDC), in this case Bisphenol A (BPA), an environmental estrogen, during early development could increase the sensitivity of the prostate gland to develop precancerous prostate lesions in response to elevated hormones with aging. Previous studies had not found prostate pathology after early-life exposure to BPA and thus it was assumed that this widely used chemical, which leaches from polycarbonate plastics and expoxy resins, did not pose any harm to this cancer-prone tissue. Our work found that while it did not drive cancer by itself, it markedly increased the sensitivity of the prostate to develop neoplastic lesions following a second estrogenic exposure as adults.

The second significant aspect of this study was that it went on to identify the molecular process whereby a brief early-life exposure can cause life-long effects. We found that the epigenetic memory of the prostate cells had been altered through permanent changes in the DNA methylation patterns of several genes. Thus we conclude that early-life chemical exposures reprogram the epigenome of the developing prostate gland and, in so doing, predispose to prostate disease with aging.

What are the implications of your work for this field?

The implications of this work revolve around epigenetic memory. We now have evidence that something as common as an environmentally relevant dose of BPA, a ubiquitous environmental contaminant found in most humans, can alter epigenetic memories that determine our fate. Even if they appear to have no "harm" in the present, it appears that repressed epigenetic memories may loom in our genes, only to be triggered by future events that may drive disease. This work emphasizes the complexity of gene-environmental interactions and the role they play in complex diseases.

 

One of the things about analysis is the thresholding. I'd like to see their P-value and relative risk coefficients.

 

Forget my question about the thresholds: P < 0.001 is plenty strong, RR ballpark 1.4. Happy happy. Do need a causal link but it's enough to start using the word "suggest".

 

Well, it was news back in September of 2008, when it was posted...before being resurrected by servant's pointless copy-pasted (that appears to be the work of a bot?)

 

Do your own homework people. Don't take my word (or anyone else’s word) for the truth. Call or write Dr. Gail Prins PhD, the CDC, Mayo Clinic, FDA...

 

FR you know demineralized water puts you at greater risk of water intoxication don't you?