Print 34 comment(s) - last by AnnihilatorX.. on Jan 25 at 7:28 PM

BPA alternative may cause just as many problems

A little over four years ago, BPA was linked to a number of medical conditions including diabetes, asthma, and cancer among others. The chemical was commercially introduced in 1957, and was used in a wide range of products including food containers and bottles. Due to the backlash over BPA-related health risks, many manufacturers stopped using the chemical in their products.

In response, companies that offered plastic products containing BPA switched to Bisphenol S (BPS). BPA and BPS are very similar structurally, making the latter a good “drop-in replacement” for the former.

Researchers at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston are now reporting that widespread human exposure to BPS was confirmed in 2012 during the analysis of urine samples taken in the U.S., Japan, and China. The research study found that BPS disrupts cellular responses to the hormone estrogen, changing the pattern of cell growth -- even low levels of BPS exposure were enough to interfere with hormones.

"Our studies show that BPS is active at femtomolar to picomolar concentrations just like endogenous hormones -- that's in the range of parts per trillion to quadrillion," said UTMB professor Cheryl Watson, senior author of a paper on the study now online in the advance publications section of Environmental Health Perspectives. "Those are levels likely to be produced by BPS leaching from containers into their contents."

The backlash against BPA was fast and furious, but it may take some more time (and additional studies) to determine if BPS will encounter the same fate.

Source: Science Daily

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Here's a thought...
By EricMartello on 1/25/2013 12:55:20 AM , Rating: -1
You're an imbecile. I registered for this site specifically to call you out.

DailyTech really needs to start compensating me for all these extra members I get for them.

Really? Freaking, REALLY? Are you kidding me?

After a "bold" opening statement you immediately link to wikipedia, a highly subjective source of information. In doing so you've indicated that you do not know what you are talking about but you are sure you disagree with me.

I suggest you follow the source links on the wikipedia article. There have been dozens upon dozens of peer-reviewed studies that show links to an incredible variety of health problems from BPA. Sure, some of these studies have had methodological problems, but many more have not. Regardless, there IS real science implicating this chemical in myriad health problems.

No, there has not been any CONCLUSIVE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE that shows a direct link between BPA and health issues. What there is, is a lot of left wing non-profits who depend on fear mongering to validate their existence and continue getting their charitable handouts.

You, the wikipedia linker, are in no position to declare what is "real" science and what is not. You could not even formulate your own argument.

Taking in excess sugar on a regular basis, as another poster noted -- and as Americans are wont to do -- is bad for you; REALLY bad. There's all kinds of research to support this, and a basic understanding of metabolic processes makes it obvious.

This is not limited to sugar. Eating something to excess does not cause that something to be "bad". Please stop making generalized references to "all kinds of research". If you don't know why it is good or bad for you just shut up and don't say anything. You're really just proving my point - lots of stupid people who will believe just about anything as long as it isn't true.

The problem is that many people in the US don't eat "balanced" diets, which include more vegetables than meat -- they focus on heavy red meats and lean meats like chicken and rabbit, which don't provide the nutrients or dietary fiber that a person needs. Vegan diets (and less so vegetarian diets) have their own problems, but a diet laden with meats, grains, and starches to the exclusion of other things (fruits and vegetables, among them) is even worse.

Stereotype much? I like how you're being racist and assuming that black people only eat meat because you lefties believe they "just got done evolving into humans" and don't know no better. Nice.

This is so brain-dead I don't even know where to begin. Yes, 100% deionized water is a pretty good solvent, but it's still not harmful to your body in anything approaching realistic levels of consumption.

You mean brain dead like bringing up deionized water when DISTILLED water and heavily filtered 0 TDS water was specifically mentioned? Yeah, it's a L2Read issue on your part. Do they still make hooked on phonics? Give them a call.

Yes, "they" have been saying this for a long time -- and they would have been right if they hadn't been! Measures have been put in place to protect many natural habitats in areas of extensive deforestation, and it is because of the efforts of these activists that these places still exist at all.

I'm sure they'd like to take credit for fixing the world while at the very same time claiming that the problems they've fixed...or mitigated...are even more dire now than they were before. The majority of these "activist" groups rarely do much more than make noise and whine. The people who are actually doing something don't have time to beg for money - they just do what they believe they gotta do.

I'm not even sure what point you're trying to make with this, but there's nothing stating that symptoms can't themselves be harmful. Excessive sinus drainage is a symptom of infection, and yet the drainage itself can cause damage to your throat and lungs. Bronchitis is an inflammation often spoken of as if it were its own illness, and certainly it is a condition of note, but it is also a symptom, as you don't "catch" bronchitis -- it's caused by something else, usually an infection.

The point is that "inflammation" is not a medical condition. It is a symptom or reaction to some other affliction...but there are now snake oil hucksters who have decided that "inflammation" on its own is a treatable condition and are happy to sell you pills for $30 a bottle / month.

I'm not sure how you could miss that point. Isn't American your first language or do I need to type this up in chinese or something?

This one is dicier, but there is real, peer-reviewed science that supports (not proves) the idea of human impact on global climate. The fact that some people believe whatever the TV tells them does not invalidate the genuine concerns of the informed.

Man has been able to affect localized areas, i.e. smog over LA back in the 80s...but globally, no...and the so-called science that "supports" the notion of man-made global warming is tied to scientists and professors whose egos and paychecks depend on people believing their prophecies. One good volcanic eruption spews more gases and particulates into the air then decades of human industry has.

Refer to my prior remarks about rational and informed people. The concerns about fresh water are actually linked to concerns about climate change; read up on "desertification" if you really want to be informed.

You are neither rational nor informed so why do you keep bringing up the people who agreed with me and didn't reply?

I like it when dumb people tell me to "read up" on something they themselves do not understand. Climate change is heavily rooted in pseudo-science which validates my point that the "concerns" for depletion of our fresh water supply are unrealistic at best. Climate change is also frequently sold to irrational, uninformed folks such as yourself using wild doomsday "predictions".

Ranting about "liberals" on a tech site is pointless. Whatever your political leanings, it just makes you look like a backwards Fox News devotee

I like Fox News as far as mainstream media outlets are concerned, as they still conduct journalism and not simply fanboism...however I'm hardly devoted to them.

Liberalism is not a political class; it's a state of mental retardation that often goes unchecked and undetected.

an impression only strengthened by trotting out unrelated tirades on artificially controversial issues that were never really in question in the first place.

Pseudo-science and contrived controversy are tenets of the left wing manifesto...but you'd have completely libtarded to believe any of that.

I'm no "liberal" myself (as a stalwart gun owner and small government devotee), but people like you disgust me. If you really want to be a skeptic,

Why is it that liberals like yourself feel the need to pretend they are not actually liberals in order to give themselves a sense of legitimacy? Is that your way of acknowledging that to rational and informed people you come across as someone struggling with certain mental challenges?

learn to look up peer-reviewed articles and recognize real research, instead of simply decrying all of science as "junk".

All that I listed in my original post is valid...and despite some disagreements there has not been any compelling argument made that suggests anything I said was inaccurate.

BTW You may just want to learn how to quote.

"This is about the Internet.  Everything on the Internet is encrypted. This is not a BlackBerry-only issue. If they can't deal with the Internet, they should shut it off." -- RIM co-CEO Michael Lazaridis

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
No More Turtlenecks - Try Snakables
September 19, 2016, 7:44 AM
ADHD Diagnosis and Treatment in Children: Problem or Paranoia?
September 19, 2016, 5:30 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
Automaker Porsche may expand range of Panamera Coupe design.
September 18, 2016, 11:00 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki