XPost: alt.politics.homosexuality, sac.politics, alt.activism.children   
   XPost: rec.food.cooking   
   From: chem.queers@gladd.org   
      
   Most folks have heard of Bisphenol A (BPA), a chemical found in   
   many plastics and in the epoxy resins used to coat metal cans.   
   Some research has linked the chemical compound has been linked   
   to cancer, infertility, asthma, heart disease, developmental   
   disorders and other health problems. As a result, many   
   manufacturers have removed it from their products. But a new   
   study adds to a growing body of evidence that one common   
   alternative could be just as problematic.   
      
   The latest study, published recently in the journal   
   Endocrinology, compared the effects of BPA on zebrafish embryos   
   with the effects of Bisphenol S (BPS), a common alternative used   
   in some (though not all) plastics labeled "BPA-Free."   
      
   "Back in 2007, when my lab did its first work looking at effects   
   the of BPA on embryonic development, what we saw was rather   
   shocking to us," senior author Nancy Wayne, a reproductive   
   endocrinologist and a professor of physiology at the David   
   Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, told The Post.   
      
   Wayne saw what many endocrinologists have reported: The chemical   
   had an immediate and profound effect on (non-human) embryos   
   exposed to it.   
      
   [How to avoid products with toxic bisphenol-s]   
      
   "It scared us," Wayne said. "It scared all of us, and I couldn’t   
   get funding from the federal government to study it." The FDA   
   still states that the level of BPA that humans are exposed to is   
   safe, and several other agencies across the world stand by the   
   same conclusion. But the American Endocrine Society disputes   
   these findings.   
      
   "BPA is a huge business, huge," Wayne said. "Sometimes I wonder   
   who the government is representing."   
      
   Wayne wasn't able to do much work on BPA without federal   
   funding. Then along came Wenhui Qiu, a visiting graduate student   
   from Shanghai University who wanted to study BPA and embryo   
   development. She brought with her funding from her own   
   government, and she and Wayne set to work exposing the embryos   
   of zebrafish – commonly used for such experiments because their   
   see-through embryos make it easy to observe cell growth – to BPA.   
      
   Because a few studies have suggested that the common alternative   
   BPS might have harmful effects as well, Qiu and Wayne decided to   
   compare the two chemicals in action.   
      
   In both sets of embryos, which were exposed to levels of BPA and   
   BPS comparable to what one would find in a polluted river, the   
   researchers saw an acceleration in hatching times leading to   
   premature births. They also saw abnormal growth in the brain   
   cells that would eventually control reproduction in the fish, as   
   well as other signs that genes associated with reproduction were   
   working overtime.   
      
   "We were really surprised to see how similar the responses   
   were," Wayne said. "It was rather shocking to us."   
      
   BPS seemed to be acting as an endocrine disrupter, just as BPA   
   did. Endocrine disrupters cause harm by mimicking, blocking or   
   otherwise interfering with the naturally occurring chemical   
   hormones of the body.   
      
   [BPA alternative disrupts normal brain-cell growth, is tied to   
   hyperactivity, study says]   
      
   "It’s not the way that people think of a classic toxin, it’s not   
   like you’re exposed and you die," Wayne explained. But many in   
   her field are concerned that these chemicals could be tied to a   
   whole host of human issues: Cancers of the reproductive organs,   
   premature births, early puberty and genital malformation, just   
   to name a few.   
      
   "The message here is that BPS is not necessarily safer," Wayne   
   said.   
      
   The American Chemical Council has previously expressed   
   skepticism towards BPA and BPS experiments using zebrafish,   
   arguing that humans are only exposed to trace amounts of the   
   chemicals through their diet, and that these compounds don't   
   accumulate in the body. And it's true: A zebrafish is not a   
   human, and we don't know how directly human embryos are even   
   exposed. But since ethical roadblocks prevent endocrinologists   
   from exposing human embryos and infants to the chemicals, it's   
   unlikely we'll get more direct evidence that these substances   
   cause us harm.   
      
   Now that Wayne is back to having limited funding for BPA   
   projects, she hopes other groups will continue looking at BPS.   
      
   "I don’t have funding for this, and it takes money," she said.   
   "I’ve been supported by UCLA, and I’ll continue to do a little   
   bit of work on this. But I’m hoping the endocrine community will   
   pick it up and take it forward. It’s going to take the whole   
   community."   
      
   https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-   
   science/wp/2016/02/02/more-evidence-that-bpa-free-plastic-may-   
   still-pose-risk/   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)