What are the Dangers of Bisphenol A (BPA)
|
|||||
|
|
|||||
Anti-Aging Choices and Healthy Homes
|
|||||
They wouldn't sell it if it wasn't safe .... would they? Did You Know ...... some disturbing facts
The Dangers of Bisphenol A (BPA)
CDC eyes chemicals' level in humans
Dioxins in Shampoos, Skin Creams
Why Perfumes and Fragrances can be Harmful.
Project Censored
#2
Censored Story in 1997
Personal
Care and Cosmetic Products May be Carcinogenic
Personal Care and Cosmetic Products May be Carcinogenic
What is Sodium Lauryl Sulfate (SLS)?
Check the Labels on Your Personal Care Products!
Subscribe to our
Free Newsletter
Over 300 Products - Safe, Effective - Free of carcinogens, Toxins, Dioxins, other potentially Harmful Ingredients
|
Research Links Plastics Containing Bisphenol A to Heart Disease and Diabetes
by Sherry Baker
(see all articles by
this author)
(NaturalNews) If you live in the U.S. and eat any packaged foods at all,
you are probably also consuming the chemical bisphenol A, or BPA. Now,
for the first time, scientists have made a startling discovery about the
chemical that could help explain the epidemic of heart disease and
diabetes in this country.
Previous studies have found BPA causes precancerous conditions, kidney
and developmental problems in animals. But new research, published in
the September 17th edition of the Journal of the American Medical
Association (JAMA),
shows that humans could be walking time bombs of
health
problems due to "normal" exposures to
BPA.
British researcher David Melzer, M.B., Ph.D., of Peninsula Medical
School in Exeter, and colleagues measured the BPA found in the urine of
1,455 adults between the ages of 18 and 74 years, using data from the
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) which was
gathered in 2003 and 2004. Then they looked at the
health status of
these people whom the scientists note in the JAMA report are
"representative of the adult U.S. population".
The results? Dr. Melzer and his team found that average BPA
concentrations, adjusted for age and sex, were higher in those diagnosed
with cardiovascular diseases and
diabetes. In
fact, even a slightly raised BPA concentration was associated with a 39
percent increased risk of having
cardiovascular disease (angina, coronary
heart disease,
or heart attack combined) and diabetes.
Those with the highest BPA concentration had nearly three times the odds
of heart disease and 2.4 times the risk of diabetes when compared with
those with the lowest levels. What's more, higher levels of BPA
concentrations were also associated with abnormally elevated levels of
three liver enzymes.
"These findings add to the evidence suggesting adverse effects of
low-dose BPA in animals. Independent replication and follow-up studies
are needed to confirm these findings and to provide evidence on whether
the associations are causal," the authors said in a statement to the
media. "Given the substantial negative effects on adult health that may
be associated with increased BPA concentrations and also given the
potential for reducing human exposure, our findings deserve scientific
follow-up."
But is it too little too late? And is anyone in Washington going to
listen? They certainly haven't in the past.
There was concern earlier this year that huge numbers of children were
being exposed to BPA because it is known to leach out of hard
polycarbonate plastics that are used widely in
baby bottles,
sippy cups and water
bottles. The Department of Health and Human Services' National
Toxicology Program released a report on the safety of the chemical and
warned BPA could cause health and developmental problems.
"Because these effects in animals occur at
bisphenol A
exposure levels similar to those experienced by humans, the possibility
that bisphenol A may alter human development cannot be dismissed," the
report concluded.
Predictably, this and other warnings about BPA, have been hotly
contested by plastic industry leaders. "Much like the pharmaceutical
industry, the plastics industry wants consumers to believe their
chemicals are so
safe that babies can drink them with impunity," says Mike Adams, a
consumer
health advocate and editor of NaturalNews.com. "This flies in the
face of common sense, and this new research is demonstrating why we need
to be so vigilant about protecting ourselves and our children from
plastic packaging."
Last spring, consumers bombarded the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) with demands to know if BPA-containing baby and
food products
are safe. The government agency claimed to have investigated the matter.
But, despite dozens of animal studies showing the chemical is a danger
to health, the FDA
ruled in August there was insufficient evidence to support banning BPA
from baby and food
products.
However, a new FDA hearing is set to start today, September 16, in
Rockville, Maryland, to discuss the BPA issue once again. In fact, JAMA
issued a press release saying the prestigious medical journal is
releasing the findings of the new human study a day early to coincide
with the FDA hearing.
Clearly, mainstream medicine is now recognizing that the chemical
contaminant is a real health concern.
In the JAMA editorial that accompanies the new BPA study, Frederick S.
von Saal, Ph.D., of the University of Missouri, Columbia, and John
Peterson Myers, Ph.D., of Environmental Health Sciences,
Charlottesville, Va., point out that BPA production has reached about 7
billion pounds per year and the chemical has caused massive planetary
contamination. Why? Consider the fact that products containing BPA, like
microwavable food containers, often end up in landfills and dumped into
water ecosystem. Already, Canada has declared the chemical to be a major
worldwide pollutant.
"The good news is that government action to reduce exposures may offer
an effective intervention for improving health and reducing the burden
of some of the most consequential human health problems. Thus, even
while awaiting confirmation of the findings of Lang et al, decreasing
exposure to BPA and developing alternatives to its use are the logical
next steps to minimize risk to public health," Dr. von Saal and Dr.
Myers state in the editorial.
Considering U.S. citizens have been waiting for years for the government
to even acknowledge that BPA is a health hazard, it makes little sense
to rely on the FDA to to protect us from the chemical. Instead, there
are ways to take control of your and your family's exposure to BPA.
Avoid baby formula as much as possible.
According to the Environmental Working Group (EWG) (http://www.ewg.org/chemindex/chemicals/23297)
, a non-profit organization comprised of scientists, engineers, policy
experts, lawyers and computer programmers who have been in the forefront
of pointing out the potential health and environmental hazards of BPA,
all U.S. manufacturers of formula use a BPA containing lining on the
metal part of their containers. Opt for breastfeeding exclusively if
possible, or use a dry formula that is mixed with filtered water.
Eat fresh, not canned, food.
The EWG has found that food and drink cans are lined with BPA-laden
plastic. Canned soups and spaghettis have the highest levels.
Pay attention to the kind of plastics you use for food and drink.
The plastics that have the most BPA are those made of polycarbonate
plastic -- they are usually rigid and transparent and used for toddler
cups, baby bottles, food storage containers and water bottles. They are
frequently marked on the bottom with the letters "PC" and the
recycling number
7. Plastics with the recycling numbers 1, 2 and 4 on the bottom are
better choices.
Choose safe bottles.
Using glass baby bottles is best. Metal water bottles may not be free
from BPA because many are lined with a plastic coating that contains the
chemical. The EWG advises using stainless steel bottles that don't have
a plastic liner.
Don't use plastic containers to heat food in microwaves.
Ceramic and glass are safe alternatives.
However, avoiding BPA doesn't automatically protect your health. In
fact, consumer health advocate
Mike Adams says
the attention to the plastics issue could be seen as a distraction from
the larger problem -- the danger that is often inside the BPA-laden
containers. "For example, right now some of the top infant formula
products sold in the United States are contaminated with hexane
residues, and many infant products are made with as much as 50 percent
refined sugars and corn syrup solids. Parents need to pay as much
attention to what's inside the bottle as they do the bottle itself."
About the author
Sherry Baker is a widely published writer whose work has appeared in Newsweek, Health, the Atlanta Journal and Constitution, Yoga Journal, Optometry, Atlanta, Arthritis Today, Natural Healing Newsletter, OMNI, UCLA's "Healthy Years" newsletter, Mount Sinai School of Medicine's "Focus on Health Aging" newsletter, the Cleveland Clinic's "Men's Health Advisor" newsletter and many others.
Other Related Links
• Bisphenol A chemical commonly found in canned soup and food storage plastics
Suspicion lingers over bisphenol A and breast cancer (press release)
Chemical used in food containers disrupts brain development (press release)
Estrogen Mimicry of Bisphenol-A Threatens Human and Animal Health
Born Free baby bottles win "Best New Infant Health Product" award at Natural Products Expo West 2007
Bispehnol-A Leaches from 'Microwave Safe' Products
By WH(WH)
The newspaper's test results raise new questions about the chemical and
the safety of an entire inventory of plastic products labeled as
"microwave safe." BPA is a key ingredient in common household plastics,
including baby bottles and ...
Integral Options Cafe -
http://integral-options.blogspot.com
Even the Experts Admit .. This is the Best Way to avoid harmful ingredients in your personal care products ... Period
"NON-TOXIC" and "GREEN LIVING" are the new buzz words in PERSONAL CARE and yet Neways has been doing it for 20 YEARS!It's Time to Make the Switch toNeways Safe, Toxin Free Products! |
|
Protect Your Family
|
Toxin Free Personal Care Products
Neways
Signature Pack Today!
Try 13 Products