Discussion:
Tomatoes are rich in bisphenol-A
(too old to reply)
Taka
2015-04-01 06:40:14 UTC
Permalink
Canned Tomatoes

Many canned foods and obviously found in cans. Most cans are lined with a chemical called bisphenol-A or BPA. Study about 2 years ago showed that BPA's affect the way genes worked inside rats' brains. The FDA seems to agree this is a problem and is supporting efforts to reduce, replace or eliminate the amounts found in canned foods.

The high acidity leaves tomatoes more dangerous because they can leech the BPA more readily from the can lining.

SOURCE: http://bulletindailynews.com/2015/03/10/10-top-foods-that-might-be-causing-cancer/14/

-------------------

OMG so much for the "healthy" vegetables ....

Taka
Taka
2015-04-03 06:19:23 UTC
Permalink
BPA in Cans and Plastic Bottles Linked to Quick Rise in Blood Pressure

People who regularly drink from cans and plastic bottles may want to reconsider: A new study shows that a common chemical in the containers can seep into beverages and raise blood pressure within a few hours.

The research raises new concerns about the chemical bisphenol A, or BPA, which is widely found in plastic bottles, plastic packaging and the linings of food and beverage cans. Chronic exposure to BPA, as it is commonly known, has been associated with heart disease, cancer and other health problems. But the new study is among the first to show that a single exposure to the chemical can have a direct and fairly immediate impact on cardiovascular health.

The study found that when people drank soy milk from a can, the levels of BPA in their urine rose dramatically within two hours - and so did their blood pressure. But on days when they drank the same beverage from glass bottles, which don't use BPA linings, there was no significant change in their BPA levels or blood pressure.

A single instance of increased blood pressure may not be particularly harmful. But the findings suggest that for people who drink from multiple cans or plastic bottles every day, the repeated exposure over time could contribute to hypertension, said Dr. Karin B. Michels, an expert on BPA who was not involved in the new research.

Dr. Michels said that the design of the new study was impressive and its findings "concerning." About 30 percent of adults nationwide have hypertension, and BPA exposure is ubiquitous.

"I think this is a very interesting and important study that adds to the concern about bisphenol A," said Dr. Michels, an associate professor at Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women's Hospital. "It raises a lot of questions. We have such a high rate of hypertension in this country, which has risen, and we haven't really thought of bisphenol A and its use in cans as one of the causes of that. "

BPA has been used since the 1960s to make countless everyday products like plastic bottles, food containers, contact lenses, and even sippy cups and baby bottles. The chemical can leach into food, and studies show that the vast majority of Americans who are tested have BPA in their urine.

The chemical is an endocrine disrupter that can mimic estrogen. In 2012, the Food and Drug Administration said BPA could no longer be used in baby bottles and children's drinking cups. Canadian regulators formally declared BPA a toxic substance in 2010 and banned it from all children's products.

Not everyone is convinced that BPA poses a risk to consumers. The American Chemistry Council, an industry trade group, has said BPA is safe and has opposed federal and state legislative proposals to ban it.

Much of the evidence against BPA comes from large population studies rather than controlled clinical trials. A number have linked high urinary levels of BPA to a greater risk of hypertension and heart and peripheral artery disease. But those studies simply show correlations, and do not provide evidence that BPA is the cause.

The latest study, published in Hypertension, a journal of the American Heart Association, was a randomized controlled trial. The authors, a team from Seoul National University's department of preventive medicine in Korea, recruited 60 older subjects, most of whom were women, and assigned them to drink soy milk from cans or glass bottles on three separate occasions, weeks apart. A majority had no history of high blood pressure, though some did.

The researchers chose soy milk because it does not have any properties that are known to increase blood pressure. And unlike soda, fruit juice and other acidic beverages, which are more likely to leach BPA from containers, soy milk is considered fairly neutral.

When the subjects drank from glass bottles, the study found, their urinary BPA levels remained fairly low. But within two hours of drinking from a can, their levels of BPA were about 16 times higher.

As BPA levels rose, so too did systolic blood pressure readings - on average by about five millimeters of mercury. In general, every 20 millimeter increase in systolic blood pressure doubles the risk of cardiovascular disease.

BPA is known to block certain estrogen receptors that are thought to be responsible for repairing blood vessels and controlling blood pressure. The chemical may also affect blood pressure indirectly by disrupting thyroid hormone, the authors noted.

"Clinicians and patients - particularly hypertension or cardiovascular disease patients - should be aware of the potential clinical problems for blood pressure elevation when consuming canned food and beverages," said Dr. Yun-Chul Hong, an author of the study and director of the Institute of Environmental Medicine at Seoul National University.

He recommended that people choose fresh foods and glass bottles over cans and plastic containers, and he urged manufacturers "to develop and use healthy alternatives to BPA for the inner lining of can containers."

Because of growing consumer concerns, some bottles and packaged food products now carry "BPA free" claims on their labels. However, these products often contain chemically similar alternatives - like bisphenol S. One study in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives found that plastic products advertised as BPA-free still leached chemicals with estrogenic activity - and some of these chemicals were even more potent than BPA.

Dr. Michels, at Harvard, who published a prominent study on BPA exposure , said she tries to avoid eating or drinking foods from cans and plastic bottles, and drinks carbonated water from glass bottles. She said labels that say "BPA free" do nothing to assuage her concerns.

"It doesn't have bisphenol A, but on the other hand I worry that the new chemical they put in there may also be a problem," she said. "Exchanging one chemical for another doesn't make me feel comfortable."

SOURCE: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/12/08/bpa-in-cans-and-plastic-bottles-linked-to-quick-rise-in-blood-pressure
Taka
2015-04-03 06:20:22 UTC
Permalink
Bisphenol A link to heart disease confirmed

Second study supports an association between the chemical and cardiovascular problems.

Scientists have once again found that people with higher levels of bisphenol A (BPA) in their urine are more likely to have heart disease than those with lower urinary BPA levels.

Used to make some plastic drinks bottles and the inner coatings of food cans, BPA can mimic the effects of oestrogen and has been associated with a number of conditions in animal studies, including low sperm count, prostate cancer and fetal developmental problems. In 2008, researchers first linked BPA to diabetes and heart disease in humans1, but industry lobby groups such as the American Chemistry Council in Arlington, Virginia, have vigorously disputed those findings.

Now, the same researchers are back with a second report in PLoS ONE2, which uses an independent data set to come up with broadly similar, if weaker, results. "It's only the second data set from a big population to be released," says lead author David Melzer of the Peninsula Medical School at the University of Exeter, UK. "It shows that our first paper wasn't a statistical blip."
Divided opinion

Melzer and his co-authors analysed data from the 2005-06 US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey of 1,493 adults, who provided urine samples and completed questionnaires about their health. Higher concentrations of BPA in the subjects' urine were associated with cardiovascular disease, but not with diabetes or high levels of liver enzymes, which indicate liver damage. However, BPA concentrations were 30% lower in this survey than in the 2003-04 survey used in the team's previous study, although when the two samples were pooled, diabetes and liver-enzyme associations remained statistically significant. Based on the data, a 60-year-old man with the lowest levels of BPA in the survey had about a 7.2% chance of developing cardiovascular disease whereas a similar subject with levels three times higher faced about a 10.2% risk.

The results add to a limited number of human studies on the effects of BPA, but are unlikely to bring together the two sides of the highly charged debate on the chemical's safety. Toxicologist Frederick vom Saal of the University of Missouri in Columbia, a long-time critic of the regulations governing the use of BPA, says that identifying such an association from epidemiological data is alarming. "The important issue is there have got to be 100 plus factors involved in any one of these diseases, and you are looking at one chemical, one time in a spot urine collection, and it's popping up as a significant variable," he says, "That's impressive because that's something you can do something about."

But Steven Hentges of the American Chemical Council says that the fact that some of the team's original results were not independently supported raises more questions than it answers. "The weight of scientific evidence continues to support the view that BPA is not a health concern," he says. "If you think that this study raises a hypothesis - fair enough - but the fact that they have not been able to replicate most of what they reported before is very telling."
Missing mechanism

Indeed, other scientists agree that what is still missing from the research is a demonstration of the mechanism of action. "Association studies show something really is going on, but getting to a definite mechanism of cause and effect is what we can add with animal studies," says Scott Belcher of the University of Cincinnati in Ohio, who has begun a series of studies on mice and rats funded by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

ADVERTISEMENT

Scientists have long known that oestrogen has the potential to affect heart function through the oestrogen beta receptor, and Belcher is looking at how BPA affects calcium levels, which control heart contractions. His early results show that BPA, like oestrogen, causes an irregular heartbeat in female rats, which could increase the risk of a heart attack. Belcher is planning further studies in rodents to look directly at the risks of heart attack, obesity and changes in the cardiovascular system.

The policy on BPA in the United States seems to be caught in a loop. The Food and Drug Administration has delayed a promised 'update' on its position that the chemical is safe. "We'll be making an announcement soon," says agency spokeswoman Meghan Scott, although she was unable to be more specific about the timing of the announcement.

SOURCE: http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100113/full/news.2010.7.html
Taka
2015-04-03 06:22:08 UTC
Permalink
BPA Lurks in Canned Soups and Drinks

A new study by Harvard researchers may provide another reason to skip the canned pumpkin and cranberry sauce this Thanksgiving. People who ate one serving of canned food daily over the course of five days, the study found, had significantly elevated levels — more than a tenfold increase — of bisphenol-A, or BPA, a substance that lines most food and drink cans.

Most of the research on BPA, a so-called endocrine disruptor that can mimic the body’s hormones, has focused on its use in plastic bottles. It has been linked in some studies to a higher risk of cancer, heart disease, diabetes and obesity, and health officials in the United States have come under increasing pressure to regulate it. Some researchers, though, counter that its reputation as a health threat to people is exaggerated.

The new study, which was published Tuesday in The Journal of the American Medical Association, is the first to measure the amounts that are ingested when people eat food that comes directly out of a can, in this case soup. The spike in BPA levels that the researchers recorded is one of the highest seen in any study.

“We cannot say from our research what the consequences are,” said Karin Michels, an associate professor of epidemiology at Harvard Medical School and an author of the study. “But the very high levels that we found are very surprising. We would have never expected a thousand-percent increase in their levels of BPA.”

As part of the study, Dr. Michels and her colleagues recruited a group of 75 staff members and students at the Harvard School of Public Health, split them into two groups, and then followed them for two weeks. During the first week, one group ate a 12-ounce serving of vegetarian soup from a common brand of canned soup every day for five days; the other group, meanwhile, ate 12 ounces of vegetarian soup made from fresh ingredients each day. Then, after a two-day soup-free “wash out” period, the groups switched roles and were followed for five more days. At the end of each five-day period, the subjects provided urine samples.

Dr. Michels noted that all the participants were fed amounts of soup that were smaller than what people probably would consume on their own. “One serving of soup is a not a lot,” she said. “They were actually telling us that that wasn’t even enough for their lunch.”

In general, most studies have found that urinary BPA levels in typical adults average somewhere around 2 micrograms per liter. That was roughly the levels the Harvard researchers found in the subjects after a week of eating the soup made from fresh ingredients. After eating the canned soup, though, their levels rose above 20 micrograms per liter, a 1,221 percent increase.

Dr. Michels said that her co-authors, including one researcher at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention who regularly analyzes BPA levels in studies, were stunned when the results came back. “She called me and said something’s funny with these levels,” she said. “She didn’t know what she was looking at.”

Dr. Michels said that the increases in BPA were most likely temporary and would go down after hours or days. “We don’t know what health effects these transient increases in BPA may have,” she added

But she also pointed out that the findings were probably applicable to other canned goods, including soda and juices. “The sodas are concerning, because some people have a habit of consuming a lot of them throughout the day,” she said. “My guess is that with other canned foods, you would see similar increases in bisphenol-A. But we only tested soups, so we wouldn’t be able to predict the absolute size of the increase.”

Many companies began phasing out BPA in baby bottles and other plastic food containers in recent years to ease public anxieties, but it is still widely used in the linings of metal cans because it helps prevent corrosion and is resistant to high heat during the sterilization process.

“I don’t know how important bisphenol-A is to the lining of these metal cans,” Dr. Michels said. “Can you make the lining to protect the contents of the can without bisphenol-A? If this is the case, then we would suggest taking it out, because then you would eliminate the problem.”

SOURCE: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/22/bpa-lurks-in-canned-soups-and-drinks/

Consumption of 1 serving of canned soup daily over 5 days was associated with a more than 1000% increase in urinary BPA. Generalizability is limited due to selection of participants from 1 school and testing of a single soup brand; however, generalizability to canned goods with similar BPA content is expected. The increase in urinary BPA concentrations following canned soup consumption is likely a transient peak of yet uncertain duration. The effect of such intermittent elevations in urinary BPA concentration is unknown. The absolute urinary BPA concentrations observed following canned soup consumption are among the most extreme reported in a nonoccupational setting. For comparison, the 95th percentile unadjusted urinary BPA in the 2007-2008 National Health and Examination Survey was 13.0 μg/L (95% CI, 10.0-15.4 μg/L).1 The observed increase in urinary BPA concentrations following canned soup consumption, even if not sustained, may be important, especially in light of available or proposed alternatives to epoxy resins linings for most canned goods.

SOURCE: http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=201917
Taka
2015-04-03 06:26:01 UTC
Permalink
Substitutes for Bisphenol A Could Be More Harmful

Four years ago, when Sarah Janssen was pregnant, she was unsure which plastic baby bottles would be safe for her child. "I have a Ph.D. and an M.P.H. and didn't know what to buy," she said, referring to a master's degree in public health.

In her work as a senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council in San Francisco, she recently discovered that the bottles she had chosen contained Bisphenol S, which is chemically similar to Bisphenol A, or BPA, a synthetic estrogen used to harden plastic. While the evidence remains inconclusive, BPA may be linked to a range of health disorders. "That's incredibly frustrating," she said.

A growing body of science suggests that even at low doses, BPA binds to estrogen receptors in the human body and may be linked to infertility, birth defects, autism, early puberty, obesity, diabetes, and hormone-related cancers. Other studies show that phthalates, another common ingredient in plastics, may have similar effects.

Health activists have focused their efforts to reduce use of BPA mainly on products that hold food or drink, like water bottles, baby bottles and epoxy-lined food and beverage cans. Restrictions on BPA use have been imposed in the European Union, Canada and some U.S. states. But a recent study published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives found that alternative chemicals might not be much safer. Almost all commercial plastic products sampled in the study, including products advertised as BPA-free, leached chemicals that had estrogenic activity. Some of the BPA-free products showed more estrogenic activity than products with BPA.

"Consumers need to understand that products advertised as BPA-free or phthalate-free is a marketing solution rather than a health solution," said George Bittner, a chemist and neurobiologist who helped write the study.

Even biodegradable, plant-based bioplastic products are mostly made with processes using the same chemicals.

A spokeswoman for the American Chemistry Council, Kathryn St. John, said products used for food were safe. "All types of plastics intended for use in food-contact products, including polycarbonate plastics made with BPA, are scrutinized by federal regulators at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration before they can be used in any consumer products," she said.

Dr. Janssen said, however, that thousands of chemicals approved by the F.D.A. are classified as "generally regarded as safe," meaning the manufacturer told the F.D.A. they were safe or they benefited from a presumption of safety when the agency passed its Food Additives Amendment of 1958. BPA and certain phthalates were in those categories, she said.

For Richard A. Denison, a biochemist and molecular biophysicist who is a senior scientist for the Environmental Defense Fund in Washington, this is just one example of a broader problem -- the weakness of policies governing chemicals.

The U.S. Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 accepted the vast majority of chemicals still on the market without requiring any safety assessment, he noted. It also allows the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to require companies to test their own chemicals and report results case by case.
Continue reading the main story Continue reading the main story
Continue reading the main story

"Of the many tens of thousands of chemicals on the market today, only a few hundred have been required to be tested for their effect on health and environment," Mr. Denison said.

It is difficult, moreover, to find out which chemicals are in which products. Companies file thousands of claims annually to protect chemical recipes as trade secrets. Most such claims have never been reviewed by the E.P.A.

Democrats introduced bills in both the House and Senate last year to change the toxic substances act but they were not adopted. Last week, Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg, a Democrat from New Jersey, introduced an updated bill, the Safe Chemicals Act of 2011.

The E.P.A., meanwhile has said that it will in future review claims as they come in, effectively reversing a previous presumption of entitlement to confidentiality. It has also said it will review as many past claims as possible -- a major undertaking, since there is a backlog of about 22,000 untested claims, said Barbara Cunningham, deputy director of the E.P.A.'s Office of Pollution Prevention & Toxics.

The American Chemistry Council agrees that the toxic substances act should be modernized and has a 10-point proposal for reform on its Web site. "The system needs to be updated to keep up with advancing science and technology and to make sure that chemical management policy protects American innovation," Ms. St. John said.

As the United States has delayed, other countries have passed laws that would put the burden of proving safety upon companies. The European Union is beginning to implement its 2006 law Reach (Registration, Evaluation, Authorization, and Restriction of Chemicals), which requires companies to register the chemicals it uses.

Japan, Korea, Canada, Australia and other countries have also made significant changes in chemical policies, said Mr. Denison, who specializes in chemical regulation. However, some policies apply only to chemicals but not to imported products containing those chemicals.

"That's a pretty big loophole in the laws when we have increasing globalization of production," Mr. Denison said.

SOURCE: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/18/business/global/18iht-rbog-plastic-18.html
John H. Gohde
2015-04-03 11:58:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Taka
Canned Tomatoes
Many canned foods and obviously found in cans. Most cans are lined with a chemical called bisphenol-A or BPA. Study about 2 years ago showed that BPA's affect the way genes worked inside rats' brains. The FDA seems to agree this is a problem and is supporting efforts to reduce, replace or eliminate the amounts found in canned foods.
The high acidity leaves tomatoes more dangerous because they can leech the BPA more readily from the can lining.
SOURCE: http://bulletindailynews.com/2015/03/10/10-top-foods-that-might-be-causing-cancer/14/
-------------------
OMG so much for the "healthy" vegetables ....
Taka
Nah! So much for the insanity of Taka.

Even though tomatoes have been eaten by humanity for less than 200 years, this nightshade veggie is one of the healthiest foods around.

Allegedly, nightshades disagree with some people, but Moi is blessed with a cast-iron stomach.

As far as can leeching the BPA more readily from can linings, have you ever tried to make your own tomato sauce from whole tomatoes??? Buy can tomatoes from stores with a rapid product turnover. Avoid tomato sauce that has been sitting on the shelf for a couple of years.

Je suis Moi, posted from Mint.

Taka
2015-04-12 07:15:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by John H. Gohde
Post by Taka
Canned Tomatoes
Many canned foods and obviously found in cans. Most cans are lined with a chemical called bisphenol-A or BPA. Study about 2 years ago showed that BPA's affect the way genes worked inside rats' brains. The FDA seems to agree this is a problem and is supporting efforts to reduce, replace or eliminate the amounts found in canned foods.
The high acidity leaves tomatoes more dangerous because they can leech the BPA more readily from the can lining.
SOURCE: http://bulletindailynews.com/2015/03/10/10-top-foods-that-might-be-causing-cancer/14/
-------------------
OMG so much for the "healthy" vegetables ....
Taka
Nah! So much for the insanity of Taka.
Even though tomatoes have been eaten by humanity for less than 200 years, this nightshade veggie is one of the healthiest foods around.
"There's a lot of evidence from animals indicating that nightshade vegetables cause all kinds of joint and bone problems, mostly because of the way the animals' bodies process the form of Vitamin D in the nightshades. Vitamin D is crucial for proper bone formation, but the extremely potent form of Vitamin D3 in nightshade vegetables actually prevents proper calcium metabolism, causing the body to deposit calcium in the soft tissue (where you don't want it) instead of in the bones (where you do)."

SOURCE: http://paleoleap.com/nightshades/

MORE: http://noarthritis.com/vitaminD3.htm

http://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/nightshades/

Everybody, get real!
Post by John H. Gohde
Allegedly, nightshades disagree with some people, but Moi is blessed with a cast-iron stomach.
Moi blessed with rotting teeth, uDick and narcissistic personality disorder ...
Post by John H. Gohde
As far as can leeching the BPA more readily from can linings, have you ever tried to make your own tomato sauce from whole tomatoes??? Buy can tomatoes from stores with a rapid product turnover. Avoid tomato sauce that has been sitting on the shelf for a couple of years.
Je suis Moi, posted from Mint.
'cos he cannot do more ...
Post by John H. Gohde
http://youtu.be/8bVDQ4rVrM4
Taka
2015-04-12 07:17:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Taka
Canned Tomatoes
Most cans are lined with a chemical called bisphenol-A or BPA.
The high acidity leaves tomatoes more dangerous because they can leech the BPA more readily from the can lining.
Well, ketchup is more healthy than canned tomatoes then!

Loading...