Studies that support use of Bisphenol A called into question

[Tonington]

Studies that support use of bisphenol A called into question

MARTIN MITTELSTAEDT

ENVIRONMENT REPORTER
April 5, 2008


The industry group for the widely used plastic compound bisphenol A, currently the subject of a safety assessment by Health Canada, bases its view that low exposures to the chemical are harmless on three studies it funded - research that critics contend contains serious flaws.

The American Chemistry Council, an Arlington, Va.-based lobby group, has submitted the studies to Health Canada for its assessment. But only one of them has been published in a peer-reviewed journal, the process that allows research to be vetted by independent experts.
...
There are approximately 160 non-industry-funded studies by academics and other investigators on low-dose BPA exposures, and about 90 per cent of them have detected harmful effects, says Frederick vom Saal, a University of Missouri researcher who is keeping a running tally on the scientific dispute over the chemical.

He has published a study on the council's rat experiment and, in an interview, said the animals were so insensitive to estrogenic hormones that they wouldn't have reacted even to birth control pills, limiting the value of any findings based on it.

Ahh, industry hacks. Quackery at it's finest.

Story here

 

[karrie]

Part of what bothers me about the studies, and it was paraben studies that really got me thinking about it, is that researching the effect of one chemical ingredient in low doses, doesn't give us anywhere near an accurate picture of what combinations of chemicals will do, when combined and used on a regular basis.

 

[Tonington]

Part of what bothers me about the studies, and it was paraben studies that really got me thinking about it, is that researching the effect of one chemical ingredient in low doses, doesn't give us anywhere near an accurate picture of what combinations of chemicals will do, when combined and used on a regular basis.

Well, I would say the problem with looking at the relationships of so many different chemicals, is that there are so many different chemicals!

It gets pretty difficult to identify a signal from a single component when you start adding more variables. The effect that is measured might be so small for one variable, that when you look at multiple variables, you can't properly pin down what one compound does. And then there is the complex web of interactions.

For that reason, I think it's best to identify single compounds that we shouldn't use because of known consequences. Other compounds might be identified mistakingly when there is a confounding effect.

But you make a good point on the widespread use of chemicals and relationships between them.

 

[karrie]

Well, I would say the problem with looking at the relationships of so many different chemicals, is that there are so many different chemicals!

It gets pretty difficult to identify a signal from a single component when you start adding more variables. The effect that is measured might be so small for one variable, that when you look at multiple variables, you can't properly pin down what one compound does. And then there is the complex web of interactions.

For that reason, I think it's best to identify single compounds that we shouldn't use because of known consequences. Other compounds might be identified mistakingly when there is a confounding effect.

But you make a good point on the widespread use of chemicals and relationships between them.

that makes a certain amount of sense, until you're staring at the ingredient list of the body wash someone got you from a shop famed for its stance against animal testing, and in that list are five different kinds of paraben.

 

[Tonington]

True enough. Also what that stuff is doing to our food (fishies). Tougher regulations would be nice.

 

[karrie]

exactly T. The levels they declare safe don't take into account environmental buildup.

 

[Walter]

There already is a thread regarding things we should worry about.

 

[Tonington]

Which one would that be?

 

[karrie]

There already is a thread regarding things we should worry about.

This isn't a 'things we should worry about' thread. It's more of a 'why there are so many things we need to worry about' thread.