Yes, it was a very high dose, but why did it cause obesity? That was not obvious. With similar tests on mice, it was found to cause prostate cancer, breast cancer and insulin resistance, all are problems which have grown sharply over the last 4 decades. Why did it happen that all the health problems which we are facing can be duplicated on mice with a large dose of the same two chemicals which we have been exposed to during the same four decades? And how about early puberty among girls and the fish feminization problem? It's hard to call this all a coincidence?

I think forcing plastic manufacturers to look for other chemicals is necessary. Fortunately some of them have already done that.

OK one more thing I was thinking about while lying in bed last night ... those PVC clothes ... they're softened too. hehehe

I know it's a stretch, but you just don't know when it comes to plastics ... if you sweat in them (which everyone seems to), does this provide a pathway for plastic to travel onto your now moist and open-poured skin?

e

It may have caused obesity at a high dose, but feed those rats equivalent quantity to what we are exposed to, and see if they get obese. I'm guessing you wouldn't see anything happen. There is such a thing as a dose/response curve. Using such a high dose in the rats and not following up with reasonable doasges, is irresponsible. Its just them using scare tactics to stir up the masses and procure more funding.

Another point about man and the lack of adaptation to carbs that I thought of last night. Fruits of the season back in Paleolithis times didn't resemble modern varieties. Much lower in carbs, probably lkike some of our modern vegetables in terms of carb content. So man may have been exposed to carbs seasonally, but he was NEVER exposed to the amount of carbs we can get now if we choose. Speaking of dose/response, the reaction of our systems to high levels of easily digestible carbs may not even have an origin in some normal function. It may well be an abnormal reaction to what is amounts to a poison to our systems.

Bsheets, get naked! Hey I'm just trying to save your life.

You have already got a good advice!

Seriously, we should not worry. Although there are new actions almost everyday concerning this problem, we should not be alarmed. One reason, is that what could happen has already happened. Another reason, is that no matter if the problem with plastic was real or not, it will be gone in a few years since plastic manufacturers are already working on eliminating the suspected chemicals.

The only item we may worry about is water pipes. Some houses contain PVC pipes for their water source. If the state governments become convinced of the importance of this problem, they may force home owners to replace them with copper pipes. This could be extremely costy since many walls will have to be torn down and some underground pipes may also need to be replaced.

I think worrying about it, is more detrimental to health than the stuff itself.

I bought an older home with copper pipes, guess I can rest easy. But wait there's lead in the solder. Ack!

Discussing a ban on BPA in Canada

Lac St. Louis MP Francis Scarpaleggia, introduced a private member’s bill to the House of Commons last Friday calling for a ban on bisphenol A

http://thesuburban.com/content.jsp?...00&cnid=1011493

The fact that this has become a political issue, in no way implies that there is legitimate data showing a real health threat. The food pyramid is evidence of that, or the banning of trans-fats. All its doing is misdirecting our attention and keeing us from dealing with the real problem at hand.

Phthalate Free nail polish!



http://www.greenoptions.com/blog/20..._phthalate_free

Without the phthalates, I won't feel like I NEED the polish.

But I might continue with the tea tree oil, thanks for the tip Nancy!

Canada in full may ban Bisphenol-A

The Star Phoenix recently reported that some Canadian government scientists have classified BPA (Bisphenol A) as “inherently toxic” and it was selected as one of the 200 substances deemed as possibly dangerous and in need of further research. Now executive director of Toronto-based Environmental Defense, Rick Smith, is urging the government to ban the alleged harmful toxin. This would make Canada the first country to do so.

http://www.canada.com/saskatoonstar...32-6106f771e6d1

"In need of further research", I could agree with that.

Fish feminization problem


Problem has been found in Washington, Nevada, California, England, Japan and Denmark.

http://sexualevolution.blogspot.com/

And how does this relate to BPA or phthalates? Nothing in the article suggested these compounds played any role, they are talking about birth control pills being the source of the problem. So if we are going to ban phthalates and BPA for having mild estrogenic properties, then why the heck aren't you screaming for a ban on birth control pills? After all they are the real McCoy. As a male I have a right not to be subjected to these poisons. At least with plastics I have the ability to limit my intake by foregoing their use. But its hard not to drink water.

The original assumption was that estrogen in birth control pills gets into a woman's urine and due to possible leaks in underground pipes it can leak into soil then can get into rivers. Recently, they added another assumption which is that people dump plastic bottles and other containers into rivers. Both assumptions mean that the amounts of estrogen leaking into rivers are extremely small. Unfortunately, estrogen which is a hormone can be effective at an unbelievably small dose and this makes it extremely dangerous.

http://born2luv.blogspot.com/

Monday, May 14, 2007
Exposure to bisphenol A is associated with recurrent miscarriage
Sugiura-Ogasawara, M, Y Ozaki, S Sonta, T Makino and Kaoru Suzumori 2005.

Exposure to bisphenol A is associated with recurrent miscarriage. Human Reproduction 20:2325-2329.

In 2003, Hunt et al. reported that bisphenol A causes meiotic aneuploidy in mice. This report stimulated concern and speculation about its relevance to humans, because meiotic aneuploidy is the largest known cause of spontaneous miscarriage in people and because human exposure to bisphenol A is so widespread, thanks to its use in consumer products. The exposure level sufficient to cause the effect in mice was within the range people experience in the general population.

With this study, Sugiura- Ogasawara et al. provide the first, indication that BPA is associated with recurrent miscarriage in people, as predicted by Hunt et al.'s results. They found higher levels of BPA in women with a history of recurrent miscarriage, and evidence of meiotic aneuploidy in their miscarried fetuses.

This is the second study to be published within a month to test the impacts of endocrine disrupting chemicals in people based on animal studies. Just two weeks ago, Swan et al. showed a highly significant relationship between elevated phthalate levels and genital abnormalities in boys, as predicted by work on rodents.

Skeptics of human impacts of EDCs have repeatedly claimed that 'we have decades of experience with X or Y and there is no evidence of harm in people.' The flaw in that argument is that the relevant human studies haven't been done; they are confusing absence of data with proof of safety. Now that epidemiologists are using animal data to guide their research, we have direct contradictions of those assertions.