(NaturalNews) The controversial chemical bisphenol-A (BPA), already linked to a wide array of health problems, may also increase the risk of asthma in children, according to a study conducted by researchers from the University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston and published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.
BPA is an industrial chemical widely used in the manufacture of hard, clear plastics like those used in water and baby bottles, as well as in resins used to line cans of food, beverages and infant formula. Exposure has been linked to an increased risk of cancer, heart disease, birth defects, and hormonal and reproductive problems. Its use in products for young children has been banned in a number of countries and in three U.S. states.
After years of insisting that the chemical was safe, the FDA recently changed its position and called for more research.
Researchers fed pregnant mice BPA for a week before they were due to give birth, until the mice had a body burden of BPA equivalent to that regularly found in pregnant U.S. women. They then exposed the pups of these mice to a common allergy inducer, and compared their response to that of mice who had not been exposed to BPA in utero. They found a significantly greater asthma reaction in the BPA-exposed mice.
"All four of our indicators of asthma response showed up in the BPA group, much more so than in the pups of the non-exposed mice," co-author Randall Goldblum said.
Steve Georas of the Mary Parkes Center for Asthma, Allergy and Pulmonary Care at the University of Rochester, who was not involved in the study, said he found the results compelling.
"They're using what are probably going to be reasonable estimates of human neonatal exposure, and that seems to have an effect on the developing immune system or sensitivity to asthma," he said. "If you take it together with some epidemiologic studies, I would consider it cause for concern."
Sources for this story include: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/gre... http://www.businessweek.com/lifesty....
Showing posts with label BPA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BPA. Show all posts
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Friday, June 18, 2010
FDA reverses position on BPA in plastics, now admits concern over the chemical
(NaturalNews) Following its 2008 declaration that the chemical bisphenol-A (BPA) is a safe additive in food and beverage plastics, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) received criticism from consumer advocacy groups and others for neglecting scientific evidence that indicated the contrary. The agency reluctantly agreed to review its position and recently reversed its position, declaring that it now has concerns about the safety of BPA.
Several scientific studies have verified that BPA is a highly toxic endocrine disruptor that can impede proper reproductive function and lead to cardiovascular disease, liver problems, and diabetes. It is especially harmful during the early developmental stages because it hinders the proper development of organ tissues and glands and inhibits proper sexual maturity.
A 2009 Harvard University study found that people who drank from polycarbonate bottles containing BPA for just one week experienced a two-thirds increase of BPA in their urine. Published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, the study verified that the BPA used in containers leaches very easily into food and beverages, especially when heated.
Manufacturers of plastic containers have been using BPA since the 1960s because it helps to harden plastic and make it more durable. It is also used in food can linings and other packaging materials where it leaches into food. According to many studies, nearly everyone is exposed to BPA, including unborn babies still in the womb.
Despite mounting evidence concerning its dangers, FDA officials, in conjunction with chemical industry spokesmen, have long denied that BPA is dangerous. After giving the chemical a thumb's up in 2008, the FDA submitted its report to an independent panel of scientific advisors which lambasted the agency for failing to properly evaluate important evidence that indicated the dangers associated with BPA. Recognizing that scrutiny of its failure was only intensifying, the FDA finally conceded that BPA is dangerous and that further research is needed to verify just how dangerous it really is.
Many manufacturers have already begun to voluntarily remove BPA from their products, particularly those that produce products for babies and young children. Chicago, Suffolk County, New York, and Canada have all outlawed BPA from being used children's products.
The FDA officially recognizes BPA as a food additive, a difficult category for which to make regulatory changes. FDA officials have expressed support for reclassifying BPA as a "food contact substance" which would allow the agency more control over how it is regulated.
Sources for this story include:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/16/h...
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/pr...
Several scientific studies have verified that BPA is a highly toxic endocrine disruptor that can impede proper reproductive function and lead to cardiovascular disease, liver problems, and diabetes. It is especially harmful during the early developmental stages because it hinders the proper development of organ tissues and glands and inhibits proper sexual maturity.
A 2009 Harvard University study found that people who drank from polycarbonate bottles containing BPA for just one week experienced a two-thirds increase of BPA in their urine. Published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, the study verified that the BPA used in containers leaches very easily into food and beverages, especially when heated.
Manufacturers of plastic containers have been using BPA since the 1960s because it helps to harden plastic and make it more durable. It is also used in food can linings and other packaging materials where it leaches into food. According to many studies, nearly everyone is exposed to BPA, including unborn babies still in the womb.
Despite mounting evidence concerning its dangers, FDA officials, in conjunction with chemical industry spokesmen, have long denied that BPA is dangerous. After giving the chemical a thumb's up in 2008, the FDA submitted its report to an independent panel of scientific advisors which lambasted the agency for failing to properly evaluate important evidence that indicated the dangers associated with BPA. Recognizing that scrutiny of its failure was only intensifying, the FDA finally conceded that BPA is dangerous and that further research is needed to verify just how dangerous it really is.
Many manufacturers have already begun to voluntarily remove BPA from their products, particularly those that produce products for babies and young children. Chicago, Suffolk County, New York, and Canada have all outlawed BPA from being used children's products.
The FDA officially recognizes BPA as a food additive, a difficult category for which to make regulatory changes. FDA officials have expressed support for reclassifying BPA as a "food contact substance" which would allow the agency more control over how it is regulated.
Sources for this story include:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/16/h...
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/pr...
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
BPA plastics chemical damages intestines, study shows
(NaturalNews) The widespread toxin bisphenol-A (BPA) damages the intestines and may lead to a painful condition known as leaky gut syndrome, according to a study conducted by researchers from the National Institute of Agronomic Research researchers in Toulouse, France, and published in the Proceedings of the National Academy Sciences.
The study "shows the very high sensitivity on the intestine of BPA," the National Institute of Agronomic Research said.
BPA is used to make hard clear plastics for products such as water and baby bottles. It is also used to make dental sealants and composites, and is in the liners food cans, beverages and infant formula. More than 130 studies have linked the hormone-mimicking chemical to a wide variety of health problems, including cancers, birth and reproductive defects, obesity, early puberty onset, behavior disorders and brain damage.
In the new study, researchers exposed both living rats and human intestinal cells to a dose of BPA 10 times lower than that currently considered safe by most governments. They found that the permeability of intestinal cells in both humans and rats decreased upon exposure to the chemical. The intestinal lining developed damage characteristic of the condition known both as "poor intestinal permeability" and "leaky gut syndrome."
Normally, a mucus lining prevents undigested substances from passing through the intestinal lining and into the bloodstream. When this lining is damaged, however, toxic substances and foreign pathogens can enter the body more easily. Because the intestinal lining also contains immunoglobin A, its disruption can affect the entire body's immune system.
People with leaky gut syndrome often experience abdominal pain, digestive upset, rashes, hampered immune function and chronic muscle pain. Damage to the intestinal lining can cause poor nutrient absorption, leading to vitamin and mineral deficiencies.
Adding to the body of evidence that BPA is particularly dangerous to developing fetuses and children, the researchers found that exposure to BPA in utero or immediately after birth significantly increased rats' risk of developing severe intestinal inflammation as adults.
Sources for this story include: sg.news.yahoo.com.
The study "shows the very high sensitivity on the intestine of BPA," the National Institute of Agronomic Research said.
BPA is used to make hard clear plastics for products such as water and baby bottles. It is also used to make dental sealants and composites, and is in the liners food cans, beverages and infant formula. More than 130 studies have linked the hormone-mimicking chemical to a wide variety of health problems, including cancers, birth and reproductive defects, obesity, early puberty onset, behavior disorders and brain damage.
In the new study, researchers exposed both living rats and human intestinal cells to a dose of BPA 10 times lower than that currently considered safe by most governments. They found that the permeability of intestinal cells in both humans and rats decreased upon exposure to the chemical. The intestinal lining developed damage characteristic of the condition known both as "poor intestinal permeability" and "leaky gut syndrome."
Normally, a mucus lining prevents undigested substances from passing through the intestinal lining and into the bloodstream. When this lining is damaged, however, toxic substances and foreign pathogens can enter the body more easily. Because the intestinal lining also contains immunoglobin A, its disruption can affect the entire body's immune system.
People with leaky gut syndrome often experience abdominal pain, digestive upset, rashes, hampered immune function and chronic muscle pain. Damage to the intestinal lining can cause poor nutrient absorption, leading to vitamin and mineral deficiencies.
Adding to the body of evidence that BPA is particularly dangerous to developing fetuses and children, the researchers found that exposure to BPA in utero or immediately after birth significantly increased rats' risk of developing severe intestinal inflammation as adults.
Sources for this story include: sg.news.yahoo.com.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Call for ban on BPA chemical in baby bottles
(NaturalNews) Seven leading scientists have sent a letter to the United Kingdom's Health Secretary, Andy Burnham, urging him to ban the use of the endocrine-disrupting chemical bisphenol-A (BPA) in products intended for use in feeding infants.
"We urge you now to adopt a standpoint consistent with the approach taken by other governments who have ended the use of BPA in food contact products marketed at children," they wrote.
BPA is used to make hard, clear plastics for products such as baby bottles, food containers and water bottles. It is also used to make resins that line cans of food and infant formula.
Numerous studies have linked the chemical to reproductive harm, especially in fetuses and infants. It has also been shown to increase the risk of heart disease, diabetes and cancer, and to cause cognitive damage and abnormal behavior. The Canadian government has banned its use in baby bottles, a number of retailers throughout North America have pledged to stop carrying infant products that contain it, and some North American manufacturers have voluntarily ceased using it.
Like the U.S. FDA, however, the U.K.'s Food Standards Agency continues to insist that BPA is safe.
"Keeping BPA baby bottles on the shelves is not an option," said Clare Dimmer of Breast Cancer UK. "It should be very simple, if there is serious scientific evidence that a chemical in baby bottles could increase the risk of life-limiting illness, it shouldn't be used. It is time government stepped in to ban the bottle."
According to a recent poll, two-thirds of U.K. residents believe that the use of BPA in baby bottles should be prohibited.
"As a medically qualified pathologist and parent to an eight-month-old baby boy, I feel that it is essential for the government to heed our call for precautionary measures to limit exposure of BPA to very young children," said Vyvyan Howard of Ulster University, one of the letter's signatories.
Sources for this story include: www.telegraph.co.uk.
"We urge you now to adopt a standpoint consistent with the approach taken by other governments who have ended the use of BPA in food contact products marketed at children," they wrote.
BPA is used to make hard, clear plastics for products such as baby bottles, food containers and water bottles. It is also used to make resins that line cans of food and infant formula.
Numerous studies have linked the chemical to reproductive harm, especially in fetuses and infants. It has also been shown to increase the risk of heart disease, diabetes and cancer, and to cause cognitive damage and abnormal behavior. The Canadian government has banned its use in baby bottles, a number of retailers throughout North America have pledged to stop carrying infant products that contain it, and some North American manufacturers have voluntarily ceased using it.
Like the U.S. FDA, however, the U.K.'s Food Standards Agency continues to insist that BPA is safe.
"Keeping BPA baby bottles on the shelves is not an option," said Clare Dimmer of Breast Cancer UK. "It should be very simple, if there is serious scientific evidence that a chemical in baby bottles could increase the risk of life-limiting illness, it shouldn't be used. It is time government stepped in to ban the bottle."
According to a recent poll, two-thirds of U.K. residents believe that the use of BPA in baby bottles should be prohibited.
"As a medically qualified pathologist and parent to an eight-month-old baby boy, I feel that it is essential for the government to heed our call for precautionary measures to limit exposure of BPA to very young children," said Vyvyan Howard of Ulster University, one of the letter's signatories.
Sources for this story include: www.telegraph.co.uk.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
BPA Plastic Chemical Linked to Aggression, Hyperactivity in Toddlers
(NaturalNews) Prenatal exposure to the endocrine-disrupting chemical bisphenol A (BPA) may increase aggressive behavior in toddler girls, according to a study conducted by researchers from the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill and published in the journalEnvironmental Health Perspectives.
Researchers measured bodily levels of BPA in 249 pregnant women, then followed their daughters for two years. Children who had been exposed to the highest levels of the chemical before the 16th week of gestation had significantly higher scores on tests for aggression than girls of the same age with less exposure.
The study is the first to examine the effect of BPA on behavior in human children. It is consistent with the results of prior animal studies, which have also found that BPA can affect the brain and reproductive system. The National Toxicology Program concluded in 2008 that there was evidence to support the chemical's effects on human children.
Because BPA mimics the effect of estrogen, which plays a critical role in the male brain during the 11th and 12th weeks of pregnancy, researchers believe that the chemical might be "masculinizing" the female brain.
"In the developing brain, timing is everything," said neuropsychiatrist Louann Brizendine, author of The Female Brain.
"I'm worried that tiny amounts of this stuff, given at just the wrong time, could partly masculinize the female brain."
Although the study found no change in male behavior and no increase in behavioral disorders among girls, scientists noted that the population effects may be much greater than those seen in the study. Michelle Macias, spokesperson for the American Academy of Pediatrics, noted that children in the study came from predominantly well-educated families, which tend to have lower aggression and hyperactivity rates than the average. In addition, neurologist David Bellinger noted that a population can become more aggressive as a whole without there being strong observable effects in individual children.
The researchers intend to continue studying the children until the age of five.
Sources for this story include: www.usatoday.com.
Researchers measured bodily levels of BPA in 249 pregnant women, then followed their daughters for two years. Children who had been exposed to the highest levels of the chemical before the 16th week of gestation had significantly higher scores on tests for aggression than girls of the same age with less exposure.
The study is the first to examine the effect of BPA on behavior in human children. It is consistent with the results of prior animal studies, which have also found that BPA can affect the brain and reproductive system. The National Toxicology Program concluded in 2008 that there was evidence to support the chemical's effects on human children.
Because BPA mimics the effect of estrogen, which plays a critical role in the male brain during the 11th and 12th weeks of pregnancy, researchers believe that the chemical might be "masculinizing" the female brain.
"In the developing brain, timing is everything," said neuropsychiatrist Louann Brizendine, author of The Female Brain.
"I'm worried that tiny amounts of this stuff, given at just the wrong time, could partly masculinize the female brain."
Although the study found no change in male behavior and no increase in behavioral disorders among girls, scientists noted that the population effects may be much greater than those seen in the study. Michelle Macias, spokesperson for the American Academy of Pediatrics, noted that children in the study came from predominantly well-educated families, which tend to have lower aggression and hyperactivity rates than the average. In addition, neurologist David Bellinger noted that a population can become more aggressive as a whole without there being strong observable effects in individual children.
The researchers intend to continue studying the children until the age of five.
Sources for this story include: www.usatoday.com.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
90 Percent of Cord Blood from U.S. Babies Tests Positive for BPA
(NaturalNews) For the first time in the history of its testing, the Environmental Working Group (EWG) has found bisphenol A (BPA) in the umbilical cord blood of American babies. Nine out of ten samples tested positive for the chemical, a shocking number when considering the laundry list of chronic illnesses that are associated with BPA exposure.
Used in the production of polycarbonate plastics and epoxy resins, BPA has come under increasing scrutiny over the past several years for its role in contributing to the development of cancer, endocrine damage, reproductive problems, and neurological dysfunction. Many plastics manufacturers have begun removing the additive from their products, despite continued reassurances by the FDA that the chemical is safe.
Studies continue to show that BPA is dangerous, even at minimal levels, and that it should not be used in consumer products. Several groups, including the Endocrine Society and the American Medical Association (AMA), have expressed opposition to the use of BPA. Scientists are finding that low-dose exposure, especially during early developmental years, can actually cause more endocrine and reproductive problems than larger-dose exposure due to the way the body recognizes the chemical.
Not only was BPA found in babies, but 231 other chemicals were detected as well, indicating that human beings are exposed to more toxic chemicals than ever. Experts fear that such an onslaught of toxicity may cause permanent damage to the next generation of Americans.
Public outcry over the FDA's continued approval of BPA despite numerous studies revealing its dangers has led the agency to express that it will reevaluate its position. The agency was supposed to issue an updated review about BPA safety on November 30 but it never actually followed through. The FDA most recently claimed that the report will be made available before the end of the year.
Experts and analysts believe the food industry is behind the push to keep BPA legal, exerting influence on the FDA to conceal the truth about its dangers. Many manufacturers have voluntarily been able to eliminate BPA from their products, illustrating that there is no reason why it should continue to be used by anyone.
The AMA, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists have all endorsed a resolution that calls on Congress to minimize or eliminate the use of BPA in consumer products. The EWG hopes that top priority will be given to the issue in light of the group's recent discovery.
Sources for this story include: http://www.ewg.org/minoritycordbloo...
Used in the production of polycarbonate plastics and epoxy resins, BPA has come under increasing scrutiny over the past several years for its role in contributing to the development of cancer, endocrine damage, reproductive problems, and neurological dysfunction. Many plastics manufacturers have begun removing the additive from their products, despite continued reassurances by the FDA that the chemical is safe.
Studies continue to show that BPA is dangerous, even at minimal levels, and that it should not be used in consumer products. Several groups, including the Endocrine Society and the American Medical Association (AMA), have expressed opposition to the use of BPA. Scientists are finding that low-dose exposure, especially during early developmental years, can actually cause more endocrine and reproductive problems than larger-dose exposure due to the way the body recognizes the chemical.
Not only was BPA found in babies, but 231 other chemicals were detected as well, indicating that human beings are exposed to more toxic chemicals than ever. Experts fear that such an onslaught of toxicity may cause permanent damage to the next generation of Americans.
Public outcry over the FDA's continued approval of BPA despite numerous studies revealing its dangers has led the agency to express that it will reevaluate its position. The agency was supposed to issue an updated review about BPA safety on November 30 but it never actually followed through. The FDA most recently claimed that the report will be made available before the end of the year.
Experts and analysts believe the food industry is behind the push to keep BPA legal, exerting influence on the FDA to conceal the truth about its dangers. Many manufacturers have voluntarily been able to eliminate BPA from their products, illustrating that there is no reason why it should continue to be used by anyone.
The AMA, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists have all endorsed a resolution that calls on Congress to minimize or eliminate the use of BPA in consumer products. The EWG hopes that top priority will be given to the issue in light of the group's recent discovery.
Sources for this story include: http://www.ewg.org/minoritycordbloo...
Friday, January 22, 2010
Despite FDA concern, American Chemistry Council insists Bisphenol A is safe for everyone
(NaturalNews) The American Chemistry Council (ACC) has never met a chemical it didn't like. The organization is a chemical advocacy group whose members include all the largest chemical producers such as Monsanto, Bayer, Merck, Chevron, DuPont and many more. It's like a Who's Who of companies whose products pollute the world, in my opinion.
Much like Big Tobacco did with nicotine -- "It's not addictive, we swear!" -- the ACC says bisphenol A (BPA) is perfectly safe for you. Drink all you want!
As the ACC's Lisa Harrison told CBS News, "What's important to remember is the FDA indicated that the BPA has not been proven harmful to children or adults."
This is the default position of all the chemical companies who poison our bodies and our planet: All synthetic chemicals are "safe" until you prove them dangerous.
It's a hazardous assumption to make, of course. The more reasonable assumption would be that all synthetic chemicals are dangerous until proven safe, but that position wouldn't allow these companies to sell very many chemicals, would it?
That's how the FDA operates across the board: Ignore all the science you don't like, and cherry-pick the science you want to believe, even if it's all been funded by the chemical companies. By relying on that gimmick, the FDA was able to maintain its intellectually dishonest position that BPA posed no risk to human health.
There's also evidence of corruption and fraud in the FDA's position on BPA. Did you know, for example, that the chairman of the FDA panel making a key decision on BPA "safety" -- Martin Philbert -- also sits at the top of a company that received a secret $5 million payment (http://www.naturalnews.com/026400_B...).
But the scientific evidence against BPA is now so large than even the FDA can't continue to stonewall the public on this issue. BPA is dangerous to human health, and it should be banned from all items that come into contact with foods (which includes soup can linings, food packaging, water bottles and much more...).
As Kelly Wallace from CBC News discovered, just eating one tuna sandwich caused BPA levels in her blood to soar to over five times the average BPA level found in the blood of American consumers (and that "average" level is dangerous to begin with). (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010...)
Sources for this story include:
Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...
CBS News:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010...
LA Times:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/gre...
NaturalNews:
http://www.naturalnews.com/bispheno...
Or, simply send a tweet from your Twitter account as follows:
#shortyawards @HealthRanger #health (because... write your short supporting comment here)
(You must insert a comment of WHY you vote for the Health Ranger in order for your vote to count.)
Thank you for your support!
Much like Big Tobacco did with nicotine -- "It's not addictive, we swear!" -- the ACC says bisphenol A (BPA) is perfectly safe for you. Drink all you want!
As the ACC's Lisa Harrison told CBS News, "What's important to remember is the FDA indicated that the BPA has not been proven harmful to children or adults."
This is the default position of all the chemical companies who poison our bodies and our planet: All synthetic chemicals are "safe" until you prove them dangerous.
It's a hazardous assumption to make, of course. The more reasonable assumption would be that all synthetic chemicals are dangerous until proven safe, but that position wouldn't allow these companies to sell very many chemicals, would it?
The FDA's conspiracy to promote dangerous chemicals
The FDA, for its part, has been engaged in a conspiracy of silence to avoid admitting that BPA is dangerous for human health. This conspiracy was recently shattered when the FDA's own science advisors blasted the agency for ignoring over 100 published studies showing BPA was dangerous. The FDA, you see, had discarded those 100+ studies and, instead, based its conclusions on just two studies that happened to be funded by the chemical industry.That's how the FDA operates across the board: Ignore all the science you don't like, and cherry-pick the science you want to believe, even if it's all been funded by the chemical companies. By relying on that gimmick, the FDA was able to maintain its intellectually dishonest position that BPA posed no risk to human health.
There's also evidence of corruption and fraud in the FDA's position on BPA. Did you know, for example, that the chairman of the FDA panel making a key decision on BPA "safety" -- Martin Philbert -- also sits at the top of a company that received a secret $5 million payment (http://www.naturalnews.com/026400_B...).
But the scientific evidence against BPA is now so large than even the FDA can't continue to stonewall the public on this issue. BPA is dangerous to human health, and it should be banned from all items that come into contact with foods (which includes soup can linings, food packaging, water bottles and much more...).
As Kelly Wallace from CBC News discovered, just eating one tuna sandwich caused BPA levels in her blood to soar to over five times the average BPA level found in the blood of American consumers (and that "average" level is dangerous to begin with). (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010...)
Sources for this story include:
Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...
CBS News:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010...
LA Times:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/gre...
NaturalNews:
http://www.naturalnews.com/bispheno...
Support the Health Ranger: Vote for him with the Shorty Awards!
Help the Health Ranger (the author of this article) win the Shorty Awards for the category of health! Any Twitter user can vote from this page: http://shortyawards.com/healthrangerOr, simply send a tweet from your Twitter account as follows:
#shortyawards @HealthRanger #health (because... write your short supporting comment here)
(You must insert a comment of WHY you vote for the Health Ranger in order for your vote to count.)
Thank you for your support!
New study confirms bisphenol A found in plastic is linked to heart disease
(NaturalNews) According to the American Heart Association, cardiovascular disease is the number one killer in the U.S. Various forms of the disease take the lives of over 80 million Americans a year. And while we've all heard about the risk factors for cardiovascular disease -- including smoking, being overweight, high cholesterol and lack of exercise -- it appears it's time to add bisphenol A, better known as BPA, to that list.
This chemical has been used for decades in polycarbonate plastic products including refillable drink containers, plastic eating utensils and baby bottles as well as the epoxy resins that line most food and soft-drink cans. Now a new study just published in the journal PLoS ONE provides the most compelling evidence so far that BPA exposure is dangerous to the cardiovascular system.
Using 2006 data from the US government's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), researchers from the Peninsula Medical School at the University of Exeter in the UK studied urinary BPA concentrations and found a significantly strong link between BPA exposure and heart disease. In 2008, these same scientists discovered that higher urinary BPA concentrations were associated with a long list of medical problems in adults, including liver dysfunction, diabetes and obesity. This research team was also the first to report evidence that BPA was linked to cardiovascular disease -- and their new research offers further confirmation of a strong connection between BPA and heart ailments.
Despite the fact the new study found that urinary BPA concentrations were one third lower than those measured from 2003 to 2004, higher concentrations of BPA were still associated with heart disease. "This is only the second analysis of BPA in a large human population sample. It has allowed us to largely confirm our original analysis and exclude the possibility that our original findings were a statistical 'blip'," David Melzer, Professor of Epidemiology and Public Health at the Peninsula Medical School and the research team leader, said in a statement to the media.
"We now need to investigate what causes these health risk associations in more detail and to clarify whether they are caused by BPA itself or by some other factor linked to BPA exposure. The risks associated with exposure to BPA may be small, but they are relevant to very large numbers of people. This information is important since it provides a great opportunity for intervention to reduce the risks," added scientist Tamara Galloway, Professor of Ecotoxicology at the University of Exeter and senior author of the paper.
As NaturalNews has previously reported, BPA exposure has been shown in other studies to be associated with neurological problems (http://www.naturalnews.com/025801_B...), diabetes and aggressive behavior in little girls (http://www.naturalnews.com/027382_B...). Unfortunately, the FDA has demonstrated little ability or interest in taking decisive measures to protect consumers from this chemical (http://www.naturalnews.com/024593_t...).Your best strategy to avoid BPA? Eat natural, fresh foods and stay away from cans, bottles and other plastic containing products that are not certified BPA-free.
For more information:
http://www.pms.ac.uk/news.php?id=85
http://www.naturalnews.com/BPA.html
This chemical has been used for decades in polycarbonate plastic products including refillable drink containers, plastic eating utensils and baby bottles as well as the epoxy resins that line most food and soft-drink cans. Now a new study just published in the journal PLoS ONE provides the most compelling evidence so far that BPA exposure is dangerous to the cardiovascular system.
Using 2006 data from the US government's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), researchers from the Peninsula Medical School at the University of Exeter in the UK studied urinary BPA concentrations and found a significantly strong link between BPA exposure and heart disease. In 2008, these same scientists discovered that higher urinary BPA concentrations were associated with a long list of medical problems in adults, including liver dysfunction, diabetes and obesity. This research team was also the first to report evidence that BPA was linked to cardiovascular disease -- and their new research offers further confirmation of a strong connection between BPA and heart ailments.
Despite the fact the new study found that urinary BPA concentrations were one third lower than those measured from 2003 to 2004, higher concentrations of BPA were still associated with heart disease. "This is only the second analysis of BPA in a large human population sample. It has allowed us to largely confirm our original analysis and exclude the possibility that our original findings were a statistical 'blip'," David Melzer, Professor of Epidemiology and Public Health at the Peninsula Medical School and the research team leader, said in a statement to the media.
"We now need to investigate what causes these health risk associations in more detail and to clarify whether they are caused by BPA itself or by some other factor linked to BPA exposure. The risks associated with exposure to BPA may be small, but they are relevant to very large numbers of people. This information is important since it provides a great opportunity for intervention to reduce the risks," added scientist Tamara Galloway, Professor of Ecotoxicology at the University of Exeter and senior author of the paper.
As NaturalNews has previously reported, BPA exposure has been shown in other studies to be associated with neurological problems (http://www.naturalnews.com/025801_B...), diabetes and aggressive behavior in little girls (http://www.naturalnews.com/027382_B...). Unfortunately, the FDA has demonstrated little ability or interest in taking decisive measures to protect consumers from this chemical (http://www.naturalnews.com/024593_t...).Your best strategy to avoid BPA? Eat natural, fresh foods and stay away from cans, bottles and other plastic containing products that are not certified BPA-free.
For more information:
http://www.pms.ac.uk/news.php?id=85
http://www.naturalnews.com/BPA.html
Friday, December 11, 2009
"BPA-free" foods found to contain BPA
(NaturalNews) A recent analysis of canned foods revealed that, across the board, the cans contained measurable levels of bisphenol A, also known as BPA, a toxin known to cause hormonal problems, sexual dysfunction, cancer, and other abnormalities. Even among products labeled "BPA-free", tests revealed levels of BPA significant enough to cause problems.
Released by the Consumers Union, a non-profit organization in charge of publishing Consumer Reports, the report adds fuel to the fire in the growing opposition to BPA's use in food products. Consumer advocacy groups are demanding that the FDA ban BPA from being used in any products that come into contact with food and beverages.
For years, the FDA has denied that BPA is dangerous, basing its non-concern upon flawed studies and incomplete evidence. When compelled to reinvestigate the issue, the FDA began reviewing the evidence once again. When question about the current report, an FDA spokesman had no response other than that the review was almost complete and that a "decision [about] how to proceed" would be made soon.
Manufacturers often use BPA in their food linings because it works as an effective food preservative. Yet the levels found in many of the consumer products tested were high enough to cause serious abnormalities in people, especially children.
Several supposed BPA-free items, including tuna cans that did not have the typical epoxy lining that is the primary source of BPA leeching, is concerning. It is unclear how the BPA made its way into these particular cans. Dr. Urvashi Rangan, director of technical policy at Consumers Union, believes it could have come from the factory where the product was made, from seawater, or from the fish itself. The company's owner has indicated that it will work to find the source and fix the problem.
Public outcry over the dangers of BPA has led to many manufacturers removing the additive from their product containers. Several major retailers have removed all items containing BPA from their shelves as well as six baby bottle manufacturers who eliminated the additive from their bottle ingredients last March. The city of Chicago and Suffolk County, New York, have also made provisions banning all baby bottles and other baby beverage containers made with BPA.
Thanks to consumer advocacy groups who continue to sound the alarm about the dangers of BPA, it is slowly disappearing from product labels. Hopefully, as continued investigation and exposure holds manufacturers' feet to the fire, BPA will be eliminated from "BPA-free" items as well.
Sources for this story include
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw...
Released by the Consumers Union, a non-profit organization in charge of publishing Consumer Reports, the report adds fuel to the fire in the growing opposition to BPA's use in food products. Consumer advocacy groups are demanding that the FDA ban BPA from being used in any products that come into contact with food and beverages.
For years, the FDA has denied that BPA is dangerous, basing its non-concern upon flawed studies and incomplete evidence. When compelled to reinvestigate the issue, the FDA began reviewing the evidence once again. When question about the current report, an FDA spokesman had no response other than that the review was almost complete and that a "decision [about] how to proceed" would be made soon.
Manufacturers often use BPA in their food linings because it works as an effective food preservative. Yet the levels found in many of the consumer products tested were high enough to cause serious abnormalities in people, especially children.
Several supposed BPA-free items, including tuna cans that did not have the typical epoxy lining that is the primary source of BPA leeching, is concerning. It is unclear how the BPA made its way into these particular cans. Dr. Urvashi Rangan, director of technical policy at Consumers Union, believes it could have come from the factory where the product was made, from seawater, or from the fish itself. The company's owner has indicated that it will work to find the source and fix the problem.
Public outcry over the dangers of BPA has led to many manufacturers removing the additive from their product containers. Several major retailers have removed all items containing BPA from their shelves as well as six baby bottle manufacturers who eliminated the additive from their bottle ingredients last March. The city of Chicago and Suffolk County, New York, have also made provisions banning all baby bottles and other baby beverage containers made with BPA.
Thanks to consumer advocacy groups who continue to sound the alarm about the dangers of BPA, it is slowly disappearing from product labels. Hopefully, as continued investigation and exposure holds manufacturers' feet to the fire, BPA will be eliminated from "BPA-free" items as well.
Sources for this story include
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
