Is That a Plastic Bottle You’re Drinking From?
The results appear to range from deformed genitals to premature puberty to obesity and diabetes.
My concern is the chemical variant BPA that is often used for estrogen in plastics and other consumer goods.
The United States makes 2 billion pounds a year-
It turned out to be found in 92% of us.
It is one of many endocrine disruptors that seem to have an adverse effect on the body\'s hormone system.
As I pointed out in the column, the evidence is not conclusive --
It\'s kind of like tobacco in the 1970s S, because hundreds of studies have shown a link to adverse health effects, and scientists understand the mechanisms of these hazards, but there is still a lot of unclear about what dose of BPA will cause any harm at what age.
For example, the chemical industry cited a recent study in which BPA would not-Evans rats.
However, it has been found that this mouse is not very susceptible to endocrine disruptors, while CD-1 mice (
Also used in many experiments)
Are humans more like dragons?
Evans mouse and the like-1 mice? We don’t know.
But a lot of research has shown
The precautionary principle should apply to dose effects in animals and humans: Let\'s try to reduce exposure.
For the impact of reproductive health, the most critical period may be the first three months of pregnancy (
When gender division occurs)
To a lesser extent, the rest of the pregnancy and childhood go all the way to adolescence.
These are times when there are very few body hormones in the life cycle, so some additional estrogen may deceive the body to trigger changes (
Such as early puberty or female male genitals).
After puberty, the body already has so many hormones that a moderate increase in estrogen may have fewer effects.
Nevertheless, recent studies have shown that higher levels of BPA in the blood are associated with obesity, diabetes, miscarriage, and cardiovascular problems, which are still disturbing --
Even in adults with a lot of hormones in their bodies.
To be safe, I avoid BPA as much as possible.
Over the years, especially in the Bush era, the FDA has generally taken lightly in terms of chemical regulation, but it has now reviewed BPA again, and I am more confident that it will follow science in a way that it does not.
Our psychological concept of environmental destruction is often dirty air or dirty water --
What we can see.
But perhaps the most insidious damage today is the hormones in the environment, and even though they are invisible, they have a profound impact on our bodies. Your thoughts?
Comments are no longer accepted.
I think the key in your article is the FDA throwing the ball again.
The bigger question here is whether we will see new legislation governing the FDA (
S. Department of Agriculture and others involved in food production and safety).
Ideally, this legislation will clarify the relationship between the government and the industry and identify who is funding science (
Or, in some cases, \"science \")
This is behind the decision being made, etc.
A supportive study
The cost of the chemical industry is clearly suspicious.
But an organization with the same ideological opposition may also be equally skeptical-transparency is the only real answer.
Hopefully we\'ll start seeing some changes at this level-and before that, we\'ll go through these hidden health issues over and over again.
For example, how to know if there is BPAs in your own plastic food storage container?
The idea of BPAs is the most scary!
Like you, avoid using plastic bottles and microwave equipment!
But if this is found in canned soup, then good Night Nurse!
Where will I find it next?
Thank you, Nick, for putting this on the table.
When I first read Theo Colburn\'s book, The Stolen Future, for 13 years, I realized BPA.
I recommend her work.
It startled me and scared me.
I have tried to reduce contact since then, but it may be somewhat futile.
I tend to avoid canned food, although sometimes it\'s hard, it\'s harder for those who work and have children, or rely on canned and prepared food just because they don\'t have resources (time, money)
Do not do so.
For example, I also don\'t have time to prepare beans from scratch and sometimes eat packaged grains and convenience foods. I believe (
Don\'t quote me though)
Therefore, their products do not contain BPA.
Nonylphenol is also another latent and ubiquitous endocrine disruptor, as is parabens (
Preservatives in creams, shampoo and personal care products), and BHA (
Dibutyl hydroxyanisol)and BHT (
These are used for packing grain boxes-plastic;
They are antioxidants designed to be filtered out from plastic bags in the grain box to keep the product fresh and grease-freerancid.
Even the many metal water bottles you are using (
Including until recently, many of us turned to SIGG brand because they thought it was safe)
There is BPA in their lining. Who to trust? ! ?
Even in products we try to avoid these chemicals.
This is crazy.
Can\'t drink water from the tap-there\'s all the contaminants in it (
According to the water study of the Times itself)
You can\'t drink it in plastic bottles.
I gave up my plastic beverage bottles because they were found to contain BPA and have been using stainless steel all the time.
It is frustrating that BPA is also found in canned foods.
It is impossible for us to have BPA in our body.
I think the government really needs to strengthen and solve the problem of contaminants in food.
The government\'s policy is basically support.
The food industry and the FDA have done a terrible job of protecting food supplies.
Thank you for your attention.
Thank you, thank you, for writing this article!
Beth Terry\'s blog \"fake plastic fish\" has a lot of information and resources about plastics, BPA and alternatives.
Here is a link:/fakeplasticfish.
ComI\'s blog about plastic, but I\'m a bad writer, a worse researcher.
Nevertheless, if you would like to know how I can avoid using plastic at one time in New York City, here is:/plasticless nyc. blogspot.
Why do we have to wait for Canada to declare something illegal before we can take action . . . . . . Maybe we should outsource our government to Canada and get rid of our corrupt politicians? ? ?
We use chemicals in our food, which is absolutely disturbing
Storage products (
And personal care products)
I don\'t know what it is.
They will have a long-term impact on our health and our environment.
I don\'t think the FDA should approve them (
Or a neutral third party)
No thorough test of short timeterm, long-
And cumulative effects.
It\'s too much to ask consumers to try to decipher what\'s listed on the ingredient label to make sure they don\'t come into contact with anything harmful. I agree.
Why do plastics take risks?
I put the leftovers in the glass jar, put the microwave food in a glass bowl, the plate as the lid, and put the water in the glass bottle.
Most of us throw away so many glass containers every week, but it makes sense to reuse them.
Manufacturing and storage is a problem that requires information/regulations/enforcement?
I used to complain to a store manager in the US who put mineral plastic bottles in the sun and didn\'t listen to me.
I think the release of chemicals will increase as the sun/heat increases.
I usually throw bottles. contents)
I forgot in the car in the sun
We never heat anything in a microwave unless it\'s in glass.
We try to avoid canned food with plastic lining.
Use as much organic food as possible if you can avoid using plastic (
Especially plastic No. 7)
Fresh or frozen vegetables and less prepared food.
I find it ironic that most people have decided to put these chemicals into our food and environment, which poses a lot of problems for future people.
It\'s too bad, it\'s not that they will suffer because of their decision, and it\'s very shortsightedness.
The rest of us will and are suffering.
We all need universal health care, but that\'s not fast enough.
Of course, I bet most of these men and their family ate fresh and/or organic.
You know they know about these issues because they know there is a \"data gap\" in their tests or, rather, no. testing.
Oh, I have to add that this is another legacy that the policies of the right wing have brought to us, they have frantically relaxed everything they have in their hands and released the greedy cry, no matter who they hurt, it will try to make a profit on anything.
They allowed the wealthy criminals to run rampant without conscience.
Family values, rights.
What a pile of rubbish!
While in fact, it is undisputed to take preventive measures without the FDA\'s effective regulation of BPA, in the end, putting pressure on official food and drug safety government regulators is the best
Widely promote this obvious and serious dereliction of duty on the FDA side
What Kristof is doing seems to be the most appropriate contribution to public discussion about this health hazard.
I drink water with plastic bottles over the years
So much, one year my students gave me a box of bottled water as a gift at the end of the semester.
Interestingly, during this time, I found what the doctor thought was polycystic ovary syndrome, filled with hot flashes, cold fights, etc. , —
Except I\'m in the middle of me. thirties.
When I started reading about possible chemicals from plastic bottles to the water I was drinking, I started looking for other ways to transport the water, I bought a fridge and filtered the water for me. Guess what?
Hot flashes and cold fights almost completely stopped and my menstruation returned to normal again, feeling much better.
Since then, I have avoided drinks or food that have been sitting in plastic for a long time.
You mentioned that PBA is used in American factories.
What about container and food producers in other countries?
Is this a global problem or is it a unique problem in the United States?
Indirectly, your column points out that it is almost certain that BPA is completely safe.
At any time, chemicals can be associated with a large number of different conditions, as your column is trying to do, and the result is almost always the result of the experimenter\'s bias, not the real one.
It should also be noted that food, especially plants
Derivative food containing toxic chemicals.
There are many reasons why plants put them there, the most important of which is that they don\'t want to be eaten and want to kill anything that is eating them.
In fact, none of these compounds have been safely tested like BPA.
As described below, if we test these natural compounds in this way, many foods/plants will have to be banned according to the logic of your column.
There is an interesting parallel between the current irrational fear of BPA and the fear of carcinogens in the environment.
If a test is a carcinogenic \"synthetic\" chemical found in the environment, then a large part of the test in animal research is positive-oh my God, let\'s ban all
But if one tests \"natural\" chemicals (
For example, those products that are found rich in organic grown produce)
In the carcinogenic environment of animal research, it was found that most of the similar tests were positive for cancer-Oh!
Politically incorrect and inconvenient results.
Everything around us is made up of chemicals, we are just a bunch of chemicals and our bodies are absolutely great in dealing with them.
Rachel Carson is right!
How can I find out if the plastic container I drink and the plastic container I use to store food are contaminated?
Should I throw them all away?
Better life through chemistry?
Maybe not that much.
This is not good news, but I like reading very much.
It also gave me courage.
So, effective today, my wife and I, our family will be careful, especially plastic bottled water.
By the way, the FDA needs the White House to send a message to change the standards of the Bush/Cheney directive to ease industrial pressure.
Michael Zullo, Upper East Side of Manhattan, my husband is a scientist, so we already know about the canned orange juice and BPA in the plastic lining (in boxes)
For a long time.
I have stopped using things in jars as much as I can.
I try to replace it with fresh, but it\'s complicated when making something that needs food in a can.
The key, I think, is moderation.
So, don\'t eat canned soup every day for lunch, you may be fine.
Our government should protect us.
Isn\'t that why we have the FDA, the FBI, the CIA, etc?
It seems that we are not protected at all because greed rules the country and anything happens as long as the company makes a lot of money, so what if there is collateral damage.
No one really cares.
So, I think we have to arm ourselves with common sense and stop and think about what message the media and marketing giants have conveyed to us.
We are not protected by anyone.
This is the sad fact.
We can\'t believe them.
They are dishonest.
It may not make sense if it doesn\'t seem to make sense.
Even these so-called scientific studies have been polluted by money.
If you go along the trajectory of money, they will all go back to the big companies that funded these studies.
You can find a scientist, a doctor of medicine or anyone who looks credible to say anything at the right price. Buyer, beware!
I have a PhD in organic chemistry and biochemistry and have extensive research experience in food safety.
I retired and taught chemistry.
This is an important topic and I have personally taken steps in the past few years to minimize BPA exposure to my child.
Unfortunately, due to certain lies, the article did not advance the understanding of this important issue.
First, BPA is not an artificial estrogen.
BPA is a plasticizer.
To some extent, BPA does tend to mimic estrogen.
Our food contains millions of compounds (
Imitate estrogen to some extent.
Tofu/bean products, for example, contain many natural
Estrogen that is happeninglike compounds.
Things that have caused discontent with the FDA/EPA and many scientists
Guard has always been our ability to detect substances at very diluted concentrations-ppb, ppt, etc.
There are many harmful substances in food. man-
At ppb and ppt levels.
Of course, exposure to the most dangerous environment should be minimized.
Why are we using plastic bottles containing BPA for our children?
A: Because consumers don\'t like glass.
How is the threat of BPA compared to children cut with broken glass?
Compared to botulinum poisoning caused by poor sealing in cans, what is the threat of BPA in cans?
These are all helpful questions.
Risk will never go away, but risk can be traded for others.
For everyone who wants to completely remove BPA from everything-please let us know the New Alternative (s)will be.
Let\'s confirm the replacement first (s)
Safer than we get rid.
Okay. -you can drink it in a metal bottle.
I know these also have traces of chemicals, and frankly Aluminum is also comfortable because there are reports that aluminum is a health problem.
If we expand the plastic problem: we drink and eat from the plastic, diabetes patients inject insulin with plastic needles, our clothes (
Wear a few hours a day)
Contains plastic fiber.
Plastic is everywhere in our lives, and all of this can contribute to the 92% figure to some extent.
Looks like we\'re back on the glass.
It can be disinfected, reused and recycled.
Because the glass is very heavy, the cost of transporting the product is a problem that needs to be overcome.
This blog has expanded on Nicholas Kristoff twice.
Weekly column, share ideas that shape writing, but don\'t always go into 800word text.
It is also the place where the reader makes a sound.
As parents of mixed-blood children, we shudder. But we have to.
Read more . . . . . . Participate in my poetry contest about our time and President Trump\'s term.
In recent months, several states have taken action to strengthen laws against child marriage.
Nicholas Kristoff met Abel when he was 17. year-
Old orphan, effective head of a family.
I caught up with him seven years later.
More . . . . . . The supply of sanitary products is not just a matter of budget items and purchase orders.
This has to do with power.
When you can start an NGO in the basement, why wait for the government or a well-known charity?
The reader submitted a photo of the woman\'s empowerment to the magazine.
Nicholas Kristoff talked in the magazine about how educating girls can help eradicate poverty.