Skip to comments.BPA Exposure and Obesity in Children: Just a Correlation?
Posted on 09/09/2013 6:19:41 PM PDT by Pharmboy
KidsChemicalSafety.org provides up-to-date health information on chemical hazards and safe use of chemicals around children, so we asked Dr. Micheal Dourson, of Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment (TERA), to comment on a recent article, Eng et al. (2013) that found higher levels of bisphenol A were associated with several measures of obesity in children.
Specifically, children exposed to higher levels of bisphenol A had increased odds of having a body mass index in the 95th percentile (i.e., greater than 95% of all children) and a waist circumference to height ratio (WC) greater than a value of 0.5. However, several other measures of obesity were unaffected, such as abnormal body fat percentage, BMI and WC thresholds below 95th percentile, and other laboratory measurements of cardiovascular disease and diabetes (e.g., total cholesterol, HDL, LDL, fasting triglycerides, insulin resistance, and fasting glucose).
(Excerpt) Read more at sciencedaily.com ...
Ping your list, please, Black Agnes.
Beware the junk science. Saw this earlier and there are several red lights. Advocacy <> Science. Grain of salt ya know? Just sayin.
This is a pretty good study:
Any estrogen mimic, particularly during pregnancy, has long term consequences for the germline. Multigenerational effects in fact. Epigenetics is much bad mojo to mess up.
I’m not aware of another group of animals that has a more limited and weighed, measured and counted diet.
The calories that was sufficient, but no more, for the same lab animals 40 years ago. Makes them fat today...
I’ve never seen a coke machine hooked up to a lab cage. Or a video game in one either.
Environmental compounds are known to promote epigenetic transgenerational inheritance of adult onset disease in subsequent generations (F1F3) following ancestral exposure during fetal gonadal sex determination.
The only issue I have so far is there is no mention of Brawndo :)
When the authors offer many cautions about their own study and point out the shortcomings, it is good science and up to community standards.
And, as they importantly point out with an illustrative story about ice cream, association does NOT mean causality; however, it can point one in the direction of truth (although not always).
Thanks Pharm I should have indicated you are preaching to the choir on BPA. I get it. I just objected (lightly) to the min-hype of another org claiming objectivity in a sea of subjectivity. Science no longer matters of course. If it did, we would not be having this conversation right?
Yep. And drinking soda pop from cans that are lined with this stuff, as if the sugar isn’t bad enough.
From the details revealed about the “study” it is easy see that it is not really a “study”. It is lacking so much methodology that it is laughable.
This is no more than a paper postulating that BPA and obesity should be studied.
Reminds me of the fish oil “study” that supposedly shows aggressive prostate cancer resulting from fish oil consumption. I did some further investigation on that one and it is absolutely worthless on a number of levels.
There are a whole lot of things necessary to constitute a good scientific study, this has none of them.
This is just another bit of correlative data that says, "keep looking, there may be something there."
This is just one correlative study that should not be over-interpreted, but the totality of evidence deserves respect. Have a look for yourself.
This would explain the weight loss/soda studies that indicated weight GAIN regardless of the soda sugar content. Even diet soda is linked to weight gain. Of course, the containers are all lined with a weight promoting estrogen mimic.
I’m convinced enough that my family avoids wherever it might be found.
You wouldn’t believe how darned inconvenient that is too.
There are serious weight problems in my family and my husband and I are both overweight.
My kids have avoided the stuff for the past 4 years and, strangely enough, for a ‘genetic’ affliction they’re not overweight. Any of them.
The rat study was interesting.
I want an multi-generational primate study.
And it makes me wonder just what other ‘GRAS’ compounds affect us epigenetically for the worse...
I’m not stating an opinion on BPA, just the incorrect and over use of the term “study”.
Frankly, I don’t care anymore about much of this. I’ve got “study fatigue”.
It’s tough to fight your genes, that’s for certain.
You want to live a long and healthy life? Pick the right parents before you are born.
Nonetheless, the aforementioned doesn’t constitute a study. BPA may be a bad thing, but that is not relevant to the fact that this is not a real study. It is someone suggesting that studies ought to be considered.
The paper in the link with the ‘plosone’ in the http that I posted IS a real study.
A multigenerational study.
Complete with sac’d and autopsied animals.
But, do this. Have a look at highschool yearbooks from this country, rural ones, from the 1930’s. Look at the 18yr old high school senior boys. They have square jaws, stubble and chest hair. Broad shoulders too.
They also had deep voices.
Now, look at the same senior boys in the class of 2013. Completely different. They’re all MUCH more effete, physically. And NONE of them have deep voices like their grandfathers had. And in this year’s yearbook you’ll find a surprising number of broad shouldered individuals. Sadly, most of them are the senior GIRLS.
Something is turning a large number of our male offspring into effete shadows of their former selves. Male sperm counts around the world have fallen off a cliff over the past 2 generations. WHO has had to redefine the number below what’s considered ‘infertile’ several times.
What hasn’t been done yet is a primate study or human study of the same kind. Human study would take decades due to the generational time gap between f0’s and f3’s. A monkey study, on the other hand, should have already been started.
But, the elites are hell bent on controlling OUR population (so their offspring can inherit an unspoiled planet!), so I don’t really expect much to become of any study, whether it’s relevant and well thought out or not.
There are different types of studies; there are pre-clinical studies, clinical studies and observational studies. This was the latter. Scientists understand the strengths and weaknesses of all types of studies (and there are many sub-groups of the ones I mentioned). Chill.
Though it's not scientific, I can certainly agree with the above statement. But IMO, at the least, a lot of the feminizing of the adolescent male is socially induced from early on, along with the blurring of the sexes.
That fish oil “study” just pushed my button. I haven’t quite calmed down from that.
So your argument is that it’s ‘socially’ possible to influence sperm counts and male secondary sexual characteristics?
BTW, it’s also suspected that BPA masculinizes the women.
Noticed any aggressive masculine women in the under 40 age group?
Yes, they do.
Our family avoids all of them. Particularly ones that are involved with food in some manner.
What makes this particularly aggravating are the media who jump up and down and wave their arms regarding the flimsiest of evidence...and people like Dr. Oz are even worse (he should know better).
But this is just one piece of data that does add to the data from other studies...all it tells me is 'be aware.'
When Black Agnes began sending me stuff on this I was very skeptical, but then I did my own search on PubMed and found some very disturbing material. Bisphenol A may not be as innocent as the FDA and other 'experts' tells us it is.
No, I didn't say that. I was referring to feminizing in a behavioral sense.
I had been pooh-poohing questions about BPA (Bisphenol A, a component that leaches out of many plastics) that [wife's name] had been putting to me over the years after she received email warning her of the dangers (leaving water bottles in a hot car, etc.).
Well, she was right and I was wrong (not the first time).
There is a science forum on a website that I frequent (free republic) and I have followed the discussions on this subject. They got my interest, and research has convinced me that there may very well be something to this. The biggest danger appears to be heating or storing hot food in the bad plastic (plastic with the 3, 6 or 7 in the recyclable-labeling triangles).
For children and newborns especially, one should avoid these plastics. There are significant and increasing amounts of data (animal and human) that BPAs can lead to sexual hormone issues and obesity.
If they’re having fewer swimmers and overall ‘issues’ wrt their male parts (see the plosone study), it would make sense that they would be increasingly behaviorally feminized.
There are times in a males development when testosterone surges. And the brain is subsequently masculinized. Prenatally, from 2-4m, right around the time they start school, and of course puberty. Inadequate boy parts would be unable to sufficiently or adequately perform this surge and subsequent masculinization.
Seen all the little boys who want to play dress up princess? How many boys in your generation could have been ‘made’ to behave in such a way and go to school dressed like that? Even IF your mom had ‘made you’?
Depending on generational structure, the little boys today are either f1, f2 or in some cases f3 from the original introduction of BPA into the food supply (via containers and serving pieces) in the late 1960’s.
“Kids are fat today because they’re sitting on their a$$es playing video games,doing facebook and watching 300 channels.Fifty years ago kids were riding bikes and playing ball.”
Yeah, I would say that would have a much higher correlation.
People avoid canned food because of the BPA can lining, but cash register receipts have 250 to 1,000 times more BPA. It is what makes the inkless heat-activated printing work.
Do not let kids touch receipts!
Interesting and scary.
This is an interesting thread that Pharmboy posted this morning (9/10/13):