Posts Tagged bisphenol A

BPA tooth fillings linked to behavior disorders in children

via: NaturalNews
Thursday, August 02, 2012
By: J. D. Heyes

[NaturalNews] Researchers have found a link between dental fillings made using bisphenol A, otherwise known as BPA, and behavior and emotional problems in children.

Scientists from New England Research Institutes in Watertown, Mass., say the effects generally show up a few years later and they were generally small but were nonetheless measurable.

The study’s lead researcher was quick to note that her team did not measure levels of BPA in particular, and did not know if any other chemicals were possibly leaking from the fillings.

“It’s a controversial topic in dental research, how much really does leach (from fillings)… and whether or not that would have an effect,” said study lead Nancy Maserejian. “It’s generally assumed that the amounts leached are tiny.”

Maserejian went onto say that fillings made using the substance are starting to become more popular, in part because they are the same color as teeth – as opposed to earlier, silver-colored amalgam fillings, Reuters reported.

FDA wouldn’t ban chemical’s use in food packaging

According to the Web site “Facts About BPA,” the substance is “the key component used to make epoxy resins and polycarbonate plastic, which are used to make consumer goods that make our lives safer and more convenient.”

In addition, “BPA helps to make epoxy resins durable and to make clear polycarbonate plastic strong, lightweight and resistant to heat and shattering,” the site noted.

Other reports described BPA as a chemical substance that is also found in some food packaging and canned goods. A 2011 study linked prenatal exposure to BPA with hyperactivity and anxiety in girls specifically, though overall its effects are not clear.

In March, the Food and Drug Administration announced it had rejected a petition from the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) asking the agency to ban BPA in food-contact materials.

“The Food and Drug Administration’s assessment is that the scientific evidence at this time does not suggest that the very low levels of human exposure to BPA through the diet are unsafe,” the agency said on its Web site.

For the tooth study, Maserejian and her team examined data on 534 children, ages six to ten, who had cavities and were then randomly chosen to receive amalgam fillings or one of two different so-called composite fillings. BPA was used in the manufacturing of one of those composite fillings.

Five years later, parents and their children answered a number of questions regarding depression and anxiety, including attitudes at school and behavior overall.

Continue Reading At: NaturalNews.com

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

FDA Officially Bans BPA in Baby Bottles

via: NaturalNews
by: Anthony Gucciardi
July 18, 2012

After countless activists and concerned organizations voiced serious concern over the presence of the cancer-linked chemical substance known as BPA in baby bottles, the FDA has finally responded by banning the presence of BPA in baby bottles nationwide. While the decision is highly beneficial for the health of toddlers and parents across the United States and elsewhere, the FDA continues to ignore the mass amount of research linking toxic BPA (also known as bisphenol-a) to a host of diseases such as cancer and diabetes.

BPA in Baby Bottles Officially Banned by FDA, Still in Food Products

During the same round of statements made regarding the ban of BPA in baby bottles within the US, FDA spokesperson Curtis Allen continued to outlandishly assert that the ‘safety of BPA’ used in actual food products is still supported by the organization. Allen even goes on to say that the reason for the ban is more a result of the industry ‘abandonment’ of BPA than actually protecting the health of US citizens. In his statement, Allen told medical reporters:

“FDA’s action is based on industry’s abandonment of these uses of BPA… The agency continues to support the safety of BPA for use in products that hold food.”

Meanwhile, nations like Canada have already taken the initiative to halt the usage of  BPA due to legitimate health concerns. As far back as October of 2010, Canada declared that BPA was a toxic substance and should be heavily regulated as such. Outside of being shown to drastically increase your risk of developing diabetes, BPA has also been linked to breast cancer in more than 130 studies. Other associated conditions include heart disease, infertility disorders, and much more.

So why is the FDA brushing this chemical off as a perfectly ‘safe’ food-grade chemical?

It has been revealed that just after the FDA rejected a recent request to ban BPA as a whole within the United States, BPA makers were set to make a whopping $8 billion in sales. Even more outrageous, these producers launched their subsequent manufacturing campaigns that ultimately accounted for the creation of over 4.7 million metric tons of BPA. Clearly, this industry is quite massive and has not only a large financial backing but also a substantial lobbying wing. In the event that the FDA outright banned BPA, multi-billion dollar corporations would be extremely upset.

Instead of choosing public health over the interests of these companies, the FDA  once again sided with mass industry. The organization noted that while there are very serious scientific concerns regarding BPA, the agency is simply going to wait it out and see how it really impacts humans. In other words, they admit it is potentially causing a widespread wave of cancer, diabetes, and heart disease, but the hundreds of prominent studies and outspoken health experts just aren’t enough for the agency.

“While evidence from some studies have raised questions as to whether BPA may be associated with a variety of health effects, there remain serious questions about these studies, particularly as they relate to humans,” wrote the FDA.

Read More At: NationalSociety.com 

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

Toxic BPA Substitute – BPS Chemical More Dangerous than BPA

via: NaturalSociety
by: Lisa Garber
July 18, 2012

Earlier this year, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration declared bisphenol A relatively safe (cough, cough). But due to the growing awareness that BPA is actually highly toxic, even the FDA’s ‘safe’ statement hasn’t stopped many plastics and papers manufacturers from replacing the estrogen-mimicking compound with its close cousin, bisphenol S.  And the revenue has been worth the change, even if BPS isn’t any safer than BPA. In fact, you may be more exposed to the BPS chemical now than you were to BPA before.

Why BPA is Unsafe

Despite the FDA’s announcement, research continues to raise red flags over BPA. Endocrinology, a publication of The Endocrine Society, featured a study in which mice received low doses of BPA and thereafter experienced effects on the brain and social behaviors.

Because BPA is environmentally persistent, its effects are long-lasting and trans-generational as well. In the aforementioned study, prenatal exposure to mice correlated with raised levels of anxiety, aggression, and cognitive difficulties.

Maybe mice are mice and people are people, but our exposure to BPA is nothing to be overlooked.  We eat food from cans with BPA. We store leftovers in containers with BPA. We drink water from BPA-laden bottles. We handle thermal paper and thereby BPA at the workplace. We essentially live, breathe, and eat BPA.

And now we have to worry about the BPS chemical instead?

Increased BPS Chemical Exposure

Not much is yet known about BPS—the compound replacing BPA in products like thermal paper—but the outlook is gloomy.

In 2005, Japanese scientists compared the hormone-mimicking effects of BPA and 19 similar compounds (including BPS chemical) on human cells. Although they found BPS’s effects to be slightly weaker than its cousin’s, new research shows that we may be absorbing more BPS through our skin than we were absorbing BPA.

Kurunthachalam Kannan of the Wadsworth Center at the New York state Department of Health led a research team in analyzing 16 types of paper from the U.S., Japan, South Korea, and Vietnam.  All receipt paper analyzed contained BPS.

“People who handle thermal paper in their jobs may be absorbing much more BPS,” the analysts said—19 times more, according to their research.

If you’re concerned about your BPS exposure, keep in mind that BPA-free (and BPS-laden) receipts have those telltale red fibers in the paper.  To reduce your exposure:

  • Wash your hands after touching thermal paper.
  • Save paper—and yourself—and tell the cashier to not print the receipt.
  • Avoid putting receipts in bags with food.
  • Store necessary receipts in folders or drawers to avoid unnecessary contact.
  • If you are the cashier, consider investing in gloves.

Additional Sources:

UPI

Environmental Health News

Science Daily

Continue Reading At: NaturalSociety.com

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

Worse than BPA? Toxic BPS chemical found hiding in receipts, recycled paper

via: NaturalNews
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
By: Ethan A. Huff

[NaturalNews] Growing awareness about the prolific presence of the hormone disruptor bisphenol A (BPA) in plastics, receipt paper, money, and various other consumer products and materials has led to the widespread removal of this highly toxic chemical from many products in recent years. But bisphenol S (BPS), the chemical now being used in place of BPA in many “BPA-free” products, may be just as harmful — if not more harmful — than BPA.

A new study published in the ACS journal Environmental Science & Technology is the first to analyze the presence of BPS in consumer products, and particularly in both thermal and recycled paper products. According to Kurunthachalam Kannan and colleagues who conducted the study, BPS is similar to BPA in that it mimics estrogen, and can cause severe endocrine disruption as a result of repeated exposure.

For their study, which was funded in part by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Natural Science Foundation of China, and the Department of Science and Technology of Shandong Province, Kannan and the team tested 16 different types of paper and paper products, including thermal receipt paper, paper currencies, flyers, magazines, newspapers, food contact papers, airplane luggage tags, printing paper, paper towels, and toilet papers.

They found that every single tested sample of thermal receipt paper, which is used by most retailers nowadays to print purchase receipts, tested positive for BPS at concentrations ranging from 0.0000138 milligrams per gram (mg/g) to 22.0 mg/g. This is roughly the same range level that has been observed in thermal receipt paper for BPA in earlier studies.

BPS is up to 19 times more absorbable in the skin than BPA

The research team also found that 87 percent of currency bill samples, which were collected from 21 different countries, contained BPS in varying levels. BPS was also observed in 14 of the other paper products sampled as well, including in 52 percent of recycled paper samples tested, which indicates that this largely unknown chemical is quietly hiding in all sorts of paper products that millions of people are exposed to every single day.

Perhaps the most disturbing finding about BPS; however, is the fact that BPS absorbs into the skin at much higher rates than BPA. According to the study, BPS is capable of absorbing at a rate up to 1900 percent higher than BPA, which makes it potentially much more harmful than BPA at altering hormone levels.

According to a 2005 study out of Japan, BPS is only slightly less potent than BPA at mimicking the female hormone estrogen in the body. However, other studies have shown that BPS is far less biodegradable than BPA, and is actually the most persistent bisphenol compound among eight of the most common bisphenol compounds tested. (http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org)

Sources for this article include:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/07/120711210241.htm

http://www.naturalnews.com/031858_store_receipts_BPA.html

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

Fake Food [GMO] and Pesticides Making You Gain Weight?

via: GreenMedInfo
by: Anne Gordon, RN
July 16, 2012

Frankly, there is a frightening coincidence glaring at us, right before our eyes. Obesity has become pandemic in the past 30 years, paralleling the use of genetic engineering, and increased pesticide use. More than 60% of Americans are overweight, and obesity has doubled in the past 20 years, globally. Our intestines may be colonized with new microbes, making us very sick. Something is seriously wrong here and has not been seen before.

It doesn’t matter how much we wash an ear of corn. We’re eating pesticides, chemicals, and new ‘foods’. Some people truly believe, that the food source of today is the safest it has ever been. They embrace Genetically Modified (GM) food wholeheartedly, accept irradiation of food, and blindly stuff themselves with the latest food experiment….That is, the human food experiment.

Everyday, the average American is exposed to 10 to 13 different pesticides through food, beverages and drinking water. Nine of the 10 most common pesticides are endocrine-disrupting, which have been linked to weight gain.

Genetic engineering has produced bizarre toxins, and those toxins are in the GM food that we dish up. It has increased the level of allergens, altered the composition of protein and other nutrients, increasing the GM crop’s absorption of pesticides and other chemicals.

A study in the International Journal of Obesity from researchers at 10 different universities, found that the use of hormones in factory meat production could be a possible contributor to the obesity epidemic. It is known that many toxins preferentially accumulate in fat cells. Fat-soluble pesticides are attracted to the fat stores in the body.  In the United States, 88 percent of the corn, 93 percent of the canola, and 94 percent of the soybeans are genetically-modified, and are heavily sprayed with biocides such as glyphosate.  So, when eating the tofu, or drinking the soy milk, think about what you’re consuming.

Continue Reading At: GreenMedInfo.com

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

Bisphenol A Exposure Linked to Brain Tumor Diagnosis

via: Environmental Health News
by: Lesliam Quirós-Alcalá and Wendy Hessler
June 27, 2012
Exposure to bisphenol A may be a risk factor for a common type of brain tumor called meningioma, reports a study from China. This is the first study to suggest a link between brain cancer and the chemical, which is widely used in consumer products.

Those with the highest urine BPA levels were about 1.6 times more likely to be diagnosed with meningioma compared to those with lower concentrations.

This link was observed even after accounting for other factors associated with meningioma. More research is needed to confirm the findings.

Continue Reading At: EnvironmentalHealthNews.org


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

Corporations Add Equally Toxic ‘BPS’ to BPA-Free Products

via: NaturalSociety
Elizabeth Renter
June 22, 2012
We’ve all seen the “BPA-free” labels affixed prominently to new plastic products. And many of us have fallen for the ruse, purchasing these new water bottles and food storage containers thinking we can still enjoy the convenience of plastics without the hormone-altering BPA. But what manufacturers are using in place of BPA might not be any safer. It’s known as ‘BPS‘ and as a matter of fact, it could be even worse.

Bisphenol-A (BPA) has made headlines over the past several years for the growing awareness of its dangers. Namely, it mimics estrogen in the body, throwing hormones out of whack. Although the United States and Europe have banned BPA in baby bottles, Canada remains the only country that has officially declared BPA as a “toxic substance.” Because of this, many people have smartly begun shunning plastics, opting for glass or metal, or choosing the new slick and expensive drinking bottles labeled “BPA-free”.

In place of BPA, manufacturers have begun using something called bisphenol-S (BPS). Unfortunately, there is no indication that BPS is any safer. On the contrary, it could be even worse than the villainized BPA. So, why are manufacturers using it? Well, because they can!

Read: The BPA Solution | How to Naturally Reverse the Effects

There is little information available on BPS at this point. Scientific research is lacking, and because there is little to say that it’s bad for you, manufacturers don’t have to worry (yet) about the repercussions of putting it in their products and selling it to unknowing consumers.

According to the Environmental Science and Technology, BPS is actually of a “comparable potency” to BPAAlso, it is “less biodegradable, and more heat-stable and photo-resistant” than its predecessor BPA. What does this mean? Well, it has the same estrogen-mimicking qualities and it doesn’t degrade as quickly as BPA, so it can stick around in your body for longer periods of time.

This isn’t a new practice—skirting public fears by playing on their ignorance. Plastic manufacturers know that the information about BPS is still in an infancy stage. They know they can get a few good years off of this “BPA-free” label craze before science catches up with them. So, in the meantime, they will keep selling you their new supposedly-safer products and probably even sell them at a higher price!

The bottom line is that we don’t know everything that is now being included in plastics. They are likely an “alphabet soup of toxic chemicals,” according to Mercola. Even canned goods are lined with BPA. Your best bet is to stick with glass whenever possible for food storage, drinking water, and microwaving (if you still do that).

Source: NaturalSociety.com

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 303 other followers