Toxic Chemicals Are Just Fine For Your Baby. The Government Says So.

Did I get your attention? Good. The talented Betty Jo is has written a post just for OMK. Maybe, if we’re nice, she’ll send us more.

By Betty Jo

This article references additional new research about BPA (that plastic coating in most canned foods and soda can containers and (still) some plastic baby bottles). Exposure is near ubiquitous, and links to obesity and type II diabetes are now clear.
There is a reason for the Blunt Amendment in Congress, and it is not just about women’s health. It’s about permitting employers, insurers, and states to deny  health benefits for illness resulting from “life style” choices ( such as, of course, obesity and type II diabetes.) It’s a ‘morality’ issue after all.
The article goes on: “Sure, our lifestyle has changed over the decades in parallel with the increased use of BPA. Yet scientists have noticed the same fattening trend in newborns, lab rodents, pets and wildlife that live in close proximity to humans. Have babies or mice really changed how much they eat or exercise? Experts highlight this as further evidence that more than just caloric intake is driving the current epidemics of obesity and Type 2 diabetes.”
The entire country going to plus sizes, cannot all be explained by ‘well, she asked for it’. We did not all suddenly lose our sense of self control here folks. Now that the evidence is coming in, God Forbid that anyone but the individual be responsible for the medical costs arising from the effects of systematic exposure to toxic chemicals in our environment and our food.
The studies referenced in this article  are pretty appalling. Of the 163 chemicals anayzed in one study, 43 were found in nearly all of the women tested. A recent study led by Tuft’s Vandenberg also shows that exposures to even small doses of a toxic chemical can prove hazardouss — in some cases, the smaller dose actually poses the higher risk. “The consequences of the continued widespread use of BPA could be most dire for pregnant women and developing fetuses, who appear to be particularly sensitive.
Previous studies have suggested that the environmental chemicals in the womb can preprogram weight gain later in life. BPA, for example, may tell a growing fetus to develop more fat cells….. BPA is just one of a larger cocktail of at least 20 endocrine disruptors commonly used in everyday items, including phthalates, nicotine, dioxin, arsenic and tributyltin. Further, obesity and diabetes aren’t the only risks posed by the chemicals. Studies also hint at links with cancer, infertility, heart disease and cognitive problems.
Overall, half of the developed world is now overweight and one in six is obese — about double the numbers of 30 years ago. Approximately 250 million people suffer from diabetes worldwide.
If you are, after the Komen defunding of Planned Parenthood, looking for a new Breast Cancer charity, take a look at The Breast Cancer Fund. We’re longtime supporters.
Their focus is on prevention – expanding the science around causes of breast cancer and how we can avoid it.
Most importantly to me, their work has brought to light the pernicious effects of exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals at every stage of a girl’s life:  prenatal, throughout childhood, during pregnancy, and beyond.  Such chemicals upset the whole system of how our bodies create and manage our hormones.  Not only do they put us and our children at greater risk for breast and other cancers, but they also contribute to the early onset of puberty, (itself a risk factor for breast cancer), which carries all sorts of other risks for girls.  We’re exposed to them constantly in our day to day life – from BPA in plastics and cans, to cosmetics and other personal care products, to household cleaning products, to food.  The Breast Cancer Fund has been instrumental in raising public awareness about these environmental toxins and successful in promoting public policies to reduce our exposure.

News flash: 4/2/12 The FDA has decided to continue to allow use of BPA.
“UPDATE: 3/30 4:00 p.m. — The U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced on Friday that it will continue to allow bisphenol-A (BPA) in food and beverage containers — denying a petition from the Natural Resources Defense Council. Bbisphenol-A (BPA) in food and beverage containers is Americans’ main source of exposure to the chemical implicated in everything from asthma to diabetes.
Studies show that developing fetuses and young children are most vulnerable to the risks. Impoverished kids, whose meals more often come out of BPA-leaching plastic packages and coated metal cans, may bear the brunt of the burden.
“Hormonally active chemicals such as BPA have no place in our kids’ life,” Sarah Janssen, senior scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council, told reporters last week.
The impetus for the FDA’s pending action is a 2008 petition filed by the NRDC. In December, a court ruled that the agency had to answer the NRDC’s request for a ban on BPA by March 31. Other environmental groups and individuals, including Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), have since submitted their own petitions seeking similar action.
Meanwhile, in late February, French lawmakers voted to eliminate the use of the endocrine-mimicking chemical from all food packaging. “
I suppose our own FDA must be excused, they have been so busy approving pink slime after all…

3 responses to “Toxic Chemicals Are Just Fine For Your Baby. The Government Says So.

  1. Sekhmet April 2, 2012 at 3:39 pm

    Urgh! Sorry, working on WordPress settings…. delete! delete!

  2. Jessica April 2, 2012 at 5:47 pm

    And let’s don’t forget the mounting evidence that exposure to toxic chemicals is a factor in autism.

  3. Nicole I April 3, 2012 at 1:46 pm

    I was recently reflecting on BPA and how quickly it has come up on everyone’s radar (apparently to be waived away by the FDA) when going through baby stuff. Even 4 years ago, it was difficult to find BPA free bottles; at least now BPA free bottles seem to be fairly common. So, that is encouraging. But then I read crap like this and I realize we (as a society) never seem to fully grasp the precautionary principle. So demoralizing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: