BPA and Its Effects on In Vitro Fertilization

Because of its flexible but strong properties, Bisphenol A (or BPA) is a chemical commonly used in a huge array of plastic products. Just how common is it? According to one study, as of 2009, 3.6 million tons of BPA are used by manufacturers yearly. You will find BPA in everything from plastic food containers and baby bottles, to household electronics. This wouldn’t be so bad if BPA didn’t have the nasty habit of leaching into things it comes in contact with. For example, food kept in plastic containers with BPA will absorb the BPA and it doesn’t stop there.  When we consume the food, BPA enters into our bodies and can act as an endocrine disruptor, which behaves like or even blocks hormones. These actions mess with our normal body functions and can result in several different health issues, including (but not limited to) various cancers, thyroid issues, and difficulty conceiving.

Recent research has shed more light on the effects of BPA on one specific health concern: women’s reproductive health. In particular, this new research suggests that higher levels of BPA can reduce women’s chances of conceiving while undergoing in vitro fertilization treatments.  The study followed 137 women seeking fertility treatment at the Massachusetts General Hospital Fertility Center.   BPA concentration levels were measured in each woman’s urine sample.  Background information was collected on each participant, such as race, age, medical history and lifestyle factors.

The researchers followed each woman’s progress as she underwent fertility treatment, recording successful embryo implantations and failures.  After analyzing all of the data they had collected, the researchers saw a clear correlation between increased BPA levels and decreased rates of pregnancy.  Women with the higher levels of BPA in their urine were less likely to be able to conceive, and this trend persisted when the researchers controlled for the background factors, such as age, that they had collected.

This is the first study to look at the role BPA plays in women seeking fertility treatment, and furthermore, it supports the finding of past studies that have looked at the effects of BPA in animals.  For more information on this study and the effects of BPA explore the links below.

~ Jessica

Resource:

http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/newscience/2012/04/2012-0514-bisphenol-a-impacts-female-fertility/

http://health.usnews.com/health-news/family-health/heart/articles/2009/06/10/studies-report-more-harmful-effects-from-bpa

The Balancing Act of Organic Foods

One of the great things about eating organically grown vegetables is that we are treating our bodies well while we are treating the earth well.  Organic vegetables are grown without the use of pesticides.  When pesticides are used to grow vegetables, as humans we are risk of developing a range of health issues. As for the earth, run off water from farms contaminates rivers and streams, impacting the wildlife and their habitats.  As mentioned, organic farms help alleviate these issues…but not without some consequences.

One such possibility in farming is outbreaks of E.Coli, is a bacterium responsible for many illnesses and several deaths in the U.S. over the last decade.  E. Coli is often transmitted through the fecal matter of animals.  The problem can occur on organic farms because of the practice of encouraging ecological diversity.  Avoiding the use of pesticides allows naturally occurring plants to grow alongside crops, and this diversity is better able to support wildlife such as mice, rabbits and even larger animals, which may carry E. Coli.

In 2006 a deadly E. Coli break out lead to changes on such farms that would prevent mice and other small animals from contaminating crops.  This included such actions as weeding out all plants on a farm other than the crop, removing any grassy areas surrounding a field, building fences, and even destroying nearby lakes.  There have not been any large out breaks of E. Coli poisoning since such action were taken, however, some think that these actions go too far and think some of them may even be unnecessary.  One good example is the food safety policy that encourages farmers to take steps to eliminate all wildlife in their fields.  Eliminating wildlife may reduce the chances for E. Coli, but without animals, the presence of mice can infiltrate a farm.

We do not have all of the answers we want now, but the government and several private companies are currently conducting research to determine which policies are best for food safety.  The ultimate goal is to find a way to balance our health with the safety of the environment.

~ Jessica

Resource: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/04/23/151047957/how-making-food-safe-can-harm-wildlife-and-water

Pink Slime and Our Industrial Food System

Lately, you may have heard a lot of buzz in the media about “pink slim”—a light pink goupy substance that has a resemblance to froyo, right?  But despite its “sweet” appearance, pink slime is far from froyo. It is a mixture of fatty beef trimmings that is puréed into a smooth paste and then added to ground beef as a filler, gross. The proper name for pink slime (as it has been dubbed by the media) is lean finely textured beef (LFTB).   The main producer of LFTB in America is Beef Products Inc., and they supply ground beef to everyone from fast food chains, to the National School Lunch Program, to retail grocery stores across the country.  No wonder it’s caught our attention!

If you have not heard of pink slime, you are not alone.  Up until the beginning of last month, LFTB was a relatively unknown term.  However, at the beginning of March an online petition demanding LFTB be removed from school lunches exploded on the scene, receiving hundreds of thousands of signatures.  Fast forward to the present and Beef Products Inc. is closing three of its four plants. Hm…must be something fishy.

Most would view this as a victory.  The people raised their voices and defended themselves against this potentially dangerous and unsavory product.  However, it turns out that the public’s reaction to LFTB may have been a little misguided.  It turns out that Beef Products Inc. prides itself on testing their product more frequently and for more pathogens than the government requires.  It is tested more frequently than other components of ground beef.  So could removing LFTB from ground beef make it less safe?

Not so fast. There are several reasons to object to “pink slime.”  First, LFTB is composed of the less expensive trimmings of the cow, it is not as high in protein as other cuts of beef.  Second, it may contain E. Coli.  Third, why was it not on meat packing labels? What else could be left out?  What are we actually consuming?

Finally, the time has come to properly label meat.

~ Jessica

Resources:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/03/26/149401164/pink-slime-maker-halts-production-but-ground-beef-will-still-have-trimmings

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/03/28/149529235/why-pink-slime-isnt-that-different-from-other-meat

Phthalates and Other Compounds Lead to Infertility

Infertility is a common problem for many couples trying to conceive in the U.S., and statistics show that 1 out of 10 couples will have trouble becoming pregnant at some point.  Recent evidence suggests that this struggle with infertility can be exacerbated by chemical compounds called hormone disruptors in our environment. When in the body these hormone disruptors act like naturally occurring hormones, including sex hormones such as estrogen and testosterone, and can disrupt normal body functions.

From previous research, we already know of several such hormone disruptors that impact fertility including bisphenol A (BPA), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), pesticides, and PCBs.  The newest culprit to join this group is phthalates.  Phthalates are chemicals found in plastics, personal care products, and a variety of building materials and are used to add flexibility, transparency, and durability.  They also have the unfortunate side effect of contributing to infertility.  In women, phthalates can lead to endometriosis, which is a condition related to infertility.  In men, phthalates can lower testosterone levels, leading to lowered sperm quality.

A recent study in Italy examined the levels of phthalates in the urine of couples unsuccessfully attempting to conceive and couples who had recently had children in an effort to determine the impact of phthalates.  Fifty-six couples participated in the study.  After examining the data, the researchers found that the couples who were not yet able to conceive had three to five times higher levels of phthalates in their urine compared to those couples who were able to conceive naturally.   

Because of their properties, phthalates are everywhere in our environment and can be hard to avoid.  However, there are several things we can do to help cut phthalates, and other chemical compounds that impact fertility, out of our lives.  Here are some tips on avoiding hormone disruptors and increasing your family:

·         Out with the old plastic, in with the new glass!  Throw out your old and used plastic containers and replace them with glass containers, that way you avoid phthalates and BPA in one fell swoop!

·         Toss the vinyl products, including faux leather and shower curtains.

·         Invest in stainless steel and cast iron.  Your food will taste better and you will avoid the chemical PFOA used in nonstick pans.

·         Go organic!  Organic fruits and veggies won’t have harmful pesticides on them.  Buying organic personal products such as shampoo, soaps, and lotion will also help you avoid phthalates.

~ Jessica

Resources:

http://www.rodale.com/research-feed/reasons-for-infertility?cm_mmc=TheDailyFixNL-_-826774-_-02272012-_-is_your_shampoo_keeping_you_from_having

http://www.rodale.com/print/8089

http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/newscience/2012/01/2012-0206-infertile-couples-higher-phthalates/

Vitamins: A Cautionary Tale

Do you take any vitamins or supplements?  I do, and given the statistics I list next, sounds like I’m not the only one.

According to survey data collected between 2003 and 2006 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), about 53% of Americans take some sort of supplement.  This is percentage is up from 40% during their previous data collection between 1988 and 1994. 

The marked increase in the percentage of Americans taking supplements can be attributed to several recent supplement fads.  Over the last few years it has become very popular for medical professionals to recommend high doses of vitamin D and E.  Dr. Michael Holick of Boston University is one such advocate for high doses of vitamin D.  “There’s overwhelming evidence…that increasing your vitamin D intake can make substantial improvement in your overall health and welfare,” he explains, “and there is no downside to increasing your vitamin D intake.”  Not only does Dr. Holick argue that high levels of vitamin D will lessen one’s likelihood of developing osteoporosis (which is agreed upon in the scientific community), but he posits that vitamin D may decrease instances of cancer, heart attack, arthritis, Alzheimer’s, diabetes (both types), autism, and even the flu. 

Sounds like a pretty necessary vitamin based on Dr. Holick’s evidence, but it is endorsements like these that lead to the dramatic increase in vitamin intake noted by the CDC. 

Contrary to Dr. Holick’s opinion, there are those who doubt the “overwhelming evidence” of the importance of vitamin D.  Dr. JoAnn Manson, chief of preventive medicine at Harvard-affiliated Brigham and Women’s Hospital points out that nearly all of the studies involving vitamin D are “observational” studies.  Rather than the ideal “experimental” design involving randomized trail groups, “observational” studies simply find people with low and high levels of vitamin D and correlate those levels with the participants’ overall health.  The problem with these studies is that there are many other potential variables not accounted for.  For example, those with high levels of vitamin D could be healthier because they get in the sun and exercise more, and those with low levels of vitamin D could be unhealthy because of bad eating habits…not just because of vitamin D levels.  “We don’t yet have the large-scale, randomized clinical trials showing benefits in terms of prevention of cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, hypertension, cognitive decline, depression, autoimmune disease,” Manson explains.  To further her claim, there are “observational” studies on vitamin D that suggest that large doses may not actually help you.

The Institute of Medicine’s Food and Nutrition Board, which makes official recommendations on dietary intake, says that advocates of high doses of vitamin D are overstating the effectiveness of the vitamin.  Dr. Manson, who is also one of the 14 panel members at the Institute of Medicine, explains their decision to only slightly increase the recommended daily dose of vitamin D compared to the huge increases some are advocating: “The evidence was inconsistent and inconclusive as to a benefit of vitamin D in preventing cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, autoimmune disorders and many other health outcomes beyond bone health.” 

A similar story can be told for another recently popular vitamin: vitamin E.  Past studies have suggested that high doses of vitamin E could help prevent prostate cancer.  However, a new study testing this conclusion found that vitamin E may actually increase the risk of prostate cancer.  What’s more, this new study is the largest such study to test the relationship between vitamin E and prostate cancer using randomized clinical trials.

The fact is that we do not yet have definitive information on the benefits and risks of taking large doses of various vitamins.  In the upcoming years it will be important to keep up with new research on this subject, rather than prescribing to a fad.  It would also be a good idea to take a deeper look at your vitamin jars at home.  The multivitamins we take often have much higher percentages of various vitamins than the daily recommended dose, and if your multivitamin contains a high dose of vitamin E, men should consider changing multivitamins.

Often times we turn to supplements for a quick fix.  We hope that they will prevent disease, make us healthier, and maybe even make up for some of our less than healthy habits.  Unfortunately, we are still uncertain whether large doses of some vitamins will help us, hurt us, or make no difference at all.  Until we have more information, I would suggest slowly adopting healthier eating habits that will supply you with all of the nutrients you need. 

~ Jessica

Resources:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2011/04/13/135379866/more-than-half-of-americans-take-dietary-supplements

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2010/05/12/126773143/huge-vitamin-d-doses-appear-to-hurt-more-than-help

http://www.npr.org/2010/11/29/131668100/medical-panel-don-t-go-overboard-on-vitamin-d

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125226703

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2011/07/11/137761077/vitamin-e-pills-may-raise-not-lower-prostate-cancer-risk

Obesity in America and Obesogens

Obesity rates in the United States have been on the rise for over 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution that brought us away from farms and into factories.  However, in recent decades obesity in America has become more of an epidemic.  Currently, about one-third of adults are obese and about 17% of children are obese, and in 1985 no state had a recorded obesity rate higher than 14%.  Check out this animated map from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) for a visual representation of this change over the last 25 years.

This epidemic has been mainly attributed to poor diet and a lack of exercise, but recent research has pointed toward a third factor: obesogens.  Obesogen is the name given to a category of chemical compounds that have been shown to contribute to weight gain in children and adults.  Included on this list are bisphenol A (BPA), phthalates, and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA).  All of three of these compounds are commonly used in some household items, including kitchen utensils and cookware.

Research on these and other obesogens suggests that different compounds may act differently in our bodies to produce the same result: excess weight.  For example, some compounds affect the number of fat cells, some the size of fat cells, and others affect hormones that control appetite, satiety, metabolism, and even food preferences!

BPA is an obesogenic compound that actually reduces the number of fat cells in humans; however, it programs the remaining individual fat cells to become much larger.  Infants who are exposed to BPA in the womb may be born underweight because of this effect, but eventually the child may put on weight because of enlarged fat cells.

Phthalates, another set of obesogens, are a group of compounds commonly used in plastics to make them more flexible and durable.  Recent studies have shown that increased levels of these compounds are linked to increased weight around the abdomen and a resistance to insulin.

Lastly, PFOA is a compound that potentially acts as an endocrine disruptor, meaning it interferes with our hormones, affecting our appetite, metabolism and more.  This compound lowers the surface tension of liquid, so it is used in nonstick cookware such as Teflon. 

With genetics and our cultural habits stacked against us, the last thing we need is an environment filled with obesogens.  To cut these compounds out of your environment you can start by taking the following steps:

·         BPA is found in the lining of some canned food and plastic food containers.  To reduce BPA exposure in your kitchen get rid of these items by buying fresh fruits and vegetables rather than canned, and switch to glass food containers.

·         Phthalates are also found in some food packaging and containers.  Yet another reason to switch to glass!

·         PFOA is used in nonstick cookware.  To avoid this compound switch to cast ironand stainless steel cookware.   These products produce a better cooked meal and healthier food!

~ Jessica

Resources:

http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/fetchArticle.action?articleURI=info%3Adoi%2F10.1289%2Fehp.120-a62#r31

http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1289%2Fehp.9882

http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.HTML

Tips for Choosing Safe, Less Toxic Cosmetics

Since 2004, the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics has called for government regulation and voluntary transparency in the cosmetic and personal care products industry.  On one hand, many companies have incorrectly labeled their products as “pure”, “natural”, and “organic”, even though there have been no legal standards set for these terms with cosmetics.  Additionally, existing law doesn’t require companies to test for the safety of their products nor does the law have the power to issue mandatory recalls of products that have been proven to contain harmful chemicals.  Due to the flaws in current laws, the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics has made it a priority to find out what some of the most popular personal care products really have in them and the negative effects they may be causing.

Because everything seems so vague and inconclusive in the cosmetics industry, one of the best ways to stay protected from harmful chemicals in cosmetics and personal care products is to be educated on the toxic chemicals commonly found in these products.  To help you stay informed, I’ve put together a sort of “cliff notes” list for you!  Below you will find ten harmful chemicals found in many products in the cosmetics industry.  These chemicals can serve as a “red flag” if you may when looking at a product’s ingredients:

1.      Antibacterials:  Some antibacterials absorbed by the body may be toxic or carcinogenic.  They can also be killing both the “good” and harmful bacteria, increasing your susceptibility to infection.

2.      Coal tar: This human carcinogen is used to soften skin and soothe itchy skin.  Sometimes, it's even used as a colorant.

3.      1,4-dioxane: This chemical is known to cause cancer in animals and is suspected to do the same in humans.

4.      Diethanolamine:  This chemical can be absorbed into the body through the skin.  It is a hormone disruptor that acts as a carcinogen and robs the body of choline, an essential nutrient in fetal brain development.

5.      Formaldehyde:  Already banned in the European Union, it is associated with multiple health concerns including breathing issues, irritation problems, and immune system and genetic damage.  Unfortunately, formaldehyde is not always clearly mentioned on product labels, making it an even greater focal point for safe cosmetic activists.

6.      Fragrance:  This ingredient can encompass number of chemicals, most of which may be toxic.  The term “fragrance” is sometimes used in place of the term phthalate.  Phthalates are obesogens, can cause developmental defects and delays, and can disrupt normal endocrine function (including reproductive health).

7.      Lead:  Lead acetate, a neurotoxin, is an ingredient in some lipsticks and men’s hair dyes.

8.      Mercury: Although the FDA permits the use of a certain amount of mercury compounds in eye makeup, mercury has a record of causing harm to the body as it readily passes through the skin.

9.      Talc: A product used to provide an allusion of sparkle, talc acts as a human carcinogen and has been directly linked to ovarian cancer.  It can also lead to lung tumors if inhaled.

10.  Toluelene:  Used to add gloss, toluelene is a toxic chemical that can decrease a person’s fertility and can cause liver and kidney damage.

You may be asking, what products can we trust if not all are properly labeled? Since regulation for cosmetics and personal care products is currently weak, the best way to find trusted, harm-free brands is to use the companies named “champions and innovators” by the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics.

Hope this helps you find safer cosmetics! If you have any suggestions, please leave a comment in this post. 

~ Ivana

Resources

http://chemistry.about.com/od/healthsafety/tp/toxic-chemicals-in-cosmetics.htm 

http://safecosmetics.org/

New Study Finds Link between Lead Exposure and Pessimistic Outlook

Pessimism is a personality trait characterized by a tendency toward negative outcomes that is associated with higher instances of depression, heart disease, stroke, and reduced cancer survival as compared to optimists.  So what brings along this unattractive characteristic? From one perspective, it has been shown that the lower your socioeconomic status (SES), the more pessimistic you become, but could there be something else influencing this relationship?  It can’t just be SES, obviously! This was one of several questions asked by the VA Normative Aging Study, a longitudinal study of veterans in America.

Past research has suggested that lead could be linked to levels of pessimism; however, this research had limited conclusions because of insufficient information on SES in childhood and adulthood for the participants of the study.  As a result of this inconclusiveness, past research has been unable to confirm that independent of SES, lead helped increase pessimism.  But with new studies and analysis, researchers from the VA Normative Aging Study sought to find a clearer picture.

The VA Normative Study collected data from 412 men in the Boston area between 1991 and 2002 and measured their levels of pessimism using the Life Orientation Test.  Lead exposure levels for these 412 men were then recorded using x-ray fluorescence. 

Why measure lead? Exposure to lead will often result in damage to the nervous system, have negative impacts on memory, behavior, and intelligence, and may increase the risk of heart disease.  These factors are particularly detrimental to you children with developing brains.

With all of their data and research, the researchers were able to determine that lead exposure levels were associated with increased pessimism ratings independent of the participant’s SES.  In other words, even without considering SES, lead is related to levels of.  And on the other end of the spectrum, researched also found that SES had an impact on pessimism independent of lead.  Through these findings they concluded that it seems both lead exposure and SES have an impact on levels of pessimism, independent of one another.

There are several steps you can take to help you and your families avoid lead exposure.

1.       To help reduce lead exposure that may be present in water, run cold tap water for about three minutes in the morning to help clean your home’s plumbing system.  After flushing the pipes, fill a jug with water to use throughout the day for drinking and cooking.

2.       In older homes, lead based paint may be present.  If you are suspicious of your home having lead-based paint or if you have had it tested and lead is present in the paint, try adding a fresh coat of paint to the walls every couple of years and sweep regularly to pick up any paint chips. 

3.       Lead may also be present in ceramic pots and other types of cookware.  We suggest buying food safe cookware made from stainless steel or cast iron.

4.       Traces of lead may also be found in old, imported, or homemade ceramic dishware with a glaze.  To be safe, try using dishware without a glaze like glass or stainless steel.

~ Jessica

Resources:

http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/174/12/1345

http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/newscience/2011/12/2012-0111-higher-lead-increased-pessimism/

Study Finds that Component of Plastic is Associated with Pregnancy Loss

In a study released late last year, researchers from Denmark found a possible link between phthalates in plastics and pregnancy loss:

Women who were exposed to relatively common levels of a particular phthalate were more likely to experience early pregnancy loss than women exposed to lower levels of the phthalate.

Phthalates are compounds used in plastics to make them more flexible, transparent, and durable.  They are commonly used in food packaging, personal products such as perfume and cosmetics, and even children’s toys.  In the Denmark study, the particular phthalate in question is called monoethylhexyl phthalate (MEHP), which is created through metabolic processes as a result of phthalates present in our bodies. 

In the past, studies have examined the results of phthalate exposure in rats and found that such exposure resulted in higher rates of pregnancy loss as well as smaller litters.  This study, however, is the first to look at phthalate exposures in humans. The study began by collecting several urine samples from couples attempting to get pregnant for the first time.  These samples were collected during the women’s last cycle and 10 days after their last cycle before becoming pregnant.  The researchers then tested these samples for levels of different forms of phthalates and collected data on those who experienced pregnancy loss.

After data was collected, the researchers compared the number of women who were exposed to high levels of phthalates to the number of women who experienced pregnancy loss.  Of the 148 women in the study, 48 had experienced pregnancy loss, with 32 of those lost pregnancies were during the first week of pregnancy.  When this data was compared to levels of various phthalates in the urine samples, the researchers found that the women with high levels of MEHP in their urine during the time of conception were more likely to experience pregnancy loss than women with low levels of MEHP in their urine.  However, they found no connection between MEHP levels in urine during their previous cycles and pregnancy loss.  These results lead researchers to deduce that MEHP levels matter the most at the particular time of conception.

For more information on this study, see resources listed below.

While these results are very interesting, this is the first study of phthalates and pregnancy loss involving humans so there is a need for independent studies to test and corroborate these findings.

~ Jessica

Resources:

http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/newscience/2011/12/2012-0111-phthalates-miscarriage/

http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1289%2Fehp.1103552

The National Children’s Study: Addressing the Debate over BPA

The debate over BPA began several years ago when scientific studies were suggesting that BPA present in our environment could have serious negative effects on our health.  Like any debate, there are at least two sides to a story, or in this case, a study.  In the case against BPA, preliminary research suggests that BPA may cause several health issues; however, most of these studies involve animal test subjects rather than humans, and for this reason some scientists do not believe that BPA could affect us to the same degree.

At ESP, we believe there may be a connection between BPA exposure and our health, which is why we are doing our best to educate consumers and give families a place where they can purchase non-toxic products based on their own beliefs and lifestyles. Our take on BPA can be categorized under the Precautionary Principle: “When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically.” In other words, we like to think it’s the “Better Safe than Sorry” principle where based on the research currently available, there are several proactive steps we as consumers can take to reduce our exposure to BPA. 

Currently, there is research underway to give us more insight into BPA under the National Children’s Study.  What makes this study different than one in the past is that it has an observational study that focuses on humans more so than animals.

The goal of this study, which began in 2000, is to “improve the health and well-being of children and contribute to understanding the role various factors have on health and disease.”  These factors include water, diet, environmental pollutants, and more.  The National Children’s Study will be the largest long-term of children’s health ever conducted in the United States.  Over the course of 21 years the study will follow 100,000 children, recording details about their environments and their habits.  The study will be conducted in a variety of locations across the country, including rural and urban populations and populations from different ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds.  All in all, 105 different locations will be used.  With this information scientists will have a wealth of information to draw links between our environment and our health, including the effects of BPA.

After 7 years of planning, the piloting of their study design began in 2007.  Beginning this month the National Children’s Study is ready to begin the first year of their main study.  This is the first major step toward gaining observational data on BPA and our health…and we’ll be keeping our ears and eyes open for any new findings!

~ Jessica

Resources:

http://www.nationalchildrensstudy.gov/Pages/default.aspx

http://healthychild.org/blog/comments/what_the_national_childrens_study_means_to_you/

http://www.sehn.org/wing.html

The Link Between Chemicals and Obesity

Since 2008, about one-third of U.S. adults and almost one-fifth of children and adolescents ages 2 to 19 have been classified as obese—both staggering and shocking statistics.  But what if working out and watching what you eat isn’t paying off?  Is there anything else causing obesity out there besides overeating and genetics?  As it turns out, there may be more.  Harmful chemicals, called obesogens, are sneaking into our homes and diets…and ultimately changing the way our body controls weight.

            Obesogens are either natural or man-made chemicals that can alter the way one’s body controls weight, especially during fetal and early development.  Obesogens do this by causing an increase in the number of fat cells, a decrease in calories burned, a resistance to insulin in the liver, and a release of less leptin (responsible for telling your body you are full) from fat cells.  Luckily, the federal government has taken obesogens head on, funding $20 million for further studies on this topic.  But as we wait for updates and new findings, there’s no hurt in starting to avoid obesogens today—starting right at home!   Here is a list of obesogens to help you and your family on the path towards a healthier body and environment!

1.       BPA:  BPA (Bisphenol-A) is commonly found in hard plastics, cans, and, interestingly enough, cashier receipts.  A few simple ways to help reduce your exposure to BPA include choosing glass or stainless steel bottles over plastic, avoiding canned foods, and letting the cashier know you won’t be needing a receipt (which also helps reduce waste!).

2.       Pesticides: The chemicals found in pesticides used for farming are often linked to obesity and diabetes.  To reduce your intake of pesticides, start choosing organic foods!  Studies have shown that after just 5 days of eating organic, you can cleanse your body of almost all pesticide residues.

3.       Atrazine: Faucet water has been found carrying pesticides from the soil surrounding water sources.  The main obesogen pesticide found in tap water, atrazine, slows thyroid hormone metabolism.  Install a granular activated carbon filter on your faucet to filter out that unnecessary weight gain.

4.       High fructose corn syrup: High fructose corn syrup can cause your liver to resist insulin and lessens the amount of leptin released from your fat cells to alert you that you’re full.  Organic and natural sweeteners are better ingredients to be found on food labels.

5.       Polybrominated biphenyls (PCBs):  PCBs work through estrogen receptor pathways and affect the liver—not to mention PCBs have been shown to cause cancer.  Their release into the environment has caused them to bioaccumulate in fish and other animals, so eating lower on the food chain a bit more in your diet can protect you from harmful levels of exposure. Why not try the growing trend of Meatless Monday? This would be a great start!

6.       Soy: Despite its high levels of protein and other healthy attributes, soy promotes fat-cell growth because of its plant-based estrogenic properties.  High doses of this legume and its form of drink cause weight gain.  Babies and children are mostly affected, so it’s best to keep soy away from young children and to offer breast milk to babies over other supplemental drinks.

7.       Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA): If you use non-stick pans coated with PTFE, PFOA may be leaching into your foods.  Found even in microwaveable popcorn bags, PFOA can have a negative impact on your thyroid gland.  Stainless steel and/or cast iron pans are great alternatives to PTFE-coated pans.

8.       Phthalates: Phthalates, hormone-disrupting chemicals, are common in personal-care products, especially synthetically fragranced products.  Besides being linked to obesity, high levels of phthalates can affect the growth of children.  Take a quick look at the ingredients in your favorite personal care products for “fragrance” or “parfum” and toss them if you find those listed.  Air fresheners and scented candles are culprits too, so natural beeswax candles are a safer alternative.

9.       Organotins:  Harmful organotins can be found in vinyl (some flooring, purses, and shower curtains) and PVC plastics (pipes).  According to a recent study, mice that were exposed to organotin tributyltin bore mice that were predisposed to weight problems.  That said, try to avoid this obesogen by paying attention to what is in your household and cleaning your home on a regular basis, since PVC can hang around household dust.

10.   Nicotene: Babies born to mothers who smoke throughout pregnancy face an increased risk of being obese during their developmental years.  Second-hand smoke is just as important to avoid, and from third-hand-smoke, the toxins that linger in a cigarette after it has been put out still pose health risks, especially to babies and young children.  “There are no safe levels of this stuff,” says Jonathan Winickoff, MD, MPH, at the Center for Child and Adolescent Health Policy at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston.

          I hope this list helps because any step you can take to keep your body obesogen-free is progress towards a healthier and more successful diet.

~ Ivana

Relax! Stress Could Increase Toxic Risks

Here at ESP we are dedicated to keeping you informed on any new chemical research that can help you make educated decisions when purchasing non-toxic products!  So, the most obvious means helping you avoid exposure to chemicals like BPA and PFCs in your food and drink is to purchase non-toxic products like stainless steel cookware, food safe containers, BPA free water bottles, and more kitchen and on-the-go type products.  But because of obvious environmental repercussions and a lifetime of inevitable exposure to some chemicals, we all have traces of toxins in our body.  Yes, it’s a harsh reality but not one that can’t be managed! So now, in addition to being more conscious about what we put into our bodies, we can also be conscious about what’s already in our system.

The answer to helping minimize the effects of toxins in our body is to simply RELAX. 

It is already widely known that stress has the potential to weaken our immune systems, thereby making us sick.  However, as Jane E. Clougherty of the University of Pittsburgh Department of Environmental and Occupational Health explains, “…stress is a nonspecific constellation of physiological effects.”  In other words, stress has the capacity to affect our health in a variety of different and unrelated ways…so stress may facilitate the potentially negative effects of chemicals in our bodies.  Recent research has found that stress can influence the way environmental pollutants and chemicals act in our bodies.  Clougherty and colleagues published research in June of 2010 showing that laboratory rats exposed to pollutants experienced greater respiratory effects when consequently exposed to stress as compared to rats not exposed to pollutants.  The stress made a difference.

While stress can negatively impact us all, children and pregnant women are most vulnerable.  As Dr. Rosalind J. Wright of Harvard Medical Schools explains, “both epidemiological and animal studies show that stress may impact key regulatory systems in the body, throwing them out of balance.  This can happen at any period in life, but if it occurs in a critical stage of development when rapid changes are already taking place—like pregnancy or adolescence—it might have particularly measurable as well as lasting effects.” 

The issue of stress is still largely unexplored in pregnant women and children’s health research.  In January of 2011 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) gave the field a shot in the arm, so to speak, by awarding seven Science to Achieve Results (STAR) research grants to scientists studying the interactions between stress and environmental exposures.  The grants totaled $7 million.

While we wait for the researchers to report back, we can start practicing smarter ways to deal with our stress.  Here are some of my favorite methods:

1.      Exercise – run around and burn off some steam!

2.      Breathe deep – it will give your body and mind time to relax

3.      Smile – you might feel silly, but I guarantee you will also feel happy J

4.      Take a walk – sometimes the best way to deal with a stressful situation is to take a break from it

5.      Cut back on the java – caffeine affects our quality of sleep, which in turn will lead to more stress

Good luck staying stress and chemical free!  And let us know if you have any good relaxation inducing tips!

~ Jessica

Resources:

http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1289%2Fehp.119-a430

BPA and the Risk of Heart Attack in Women

It seems like more often than not we are learning more about the potentially negative effects of BPA on our health, and a recent study has added to the list of potential causes linked to BPA exposure.  The study, published in the journal PLoS ONE, suggests that BPA may send signals to female heart cells, causing those cells to beat erratically.  This condition is known as arrhythmia and it can result in cardiac death.

BPA, or bisphenol A, is a compound commonly used in a variety of household products, especially those made with plastic and canned foods.  By using products that have BPA in them, we can become exposed to the chemical, and once the BPA is in our systems it has the potential to mimic estrogen.  This is dangerous because the human body maintains a delicate balance of hormones to regulate all of its functions.  In this study, for example, estrogen has been show to alter contraction rates in heart cells.  When estrogen mimicking BPA is in our bodies, this effect is multiplied and becomes potentially harmful to a normally functioning heart.  BPA throws the balance of the hormone estrogen out of whack and the heart suffers as a result.

Laura Vandenberg of Tufts University explained that, “though not flashy, this study is excellent at revealing nuances of how cardiovascular tissue can respond differently than cells elsewhere in the body to estrogen – and to BPA.”  Furthermore, she explains that this effect is found even with very low doses of BPA, “the most effective dose was very close to – if not completely overlapping – what’s been reported in humans.”

Scientists have debated whether BPA levels are high enough in humans to cause the potential health risks associated with its exposure.  In this case, the level of BPA commonly found in females has the potential to cause heart problems.

To avoid this serious risk and any other lurking issues resulting from BPA, throw out your old and used plastics and buy BPA-free water bottles and food containers.  It’s a “whole-hearted” investment worth making!

~ Jessica

Resources:

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/337035/title/BPA_sends_false_signals_to_female_hearts

http://www.rodale.com/bpa-and-heart-attacks?cm_mmc=TheDailyFixNL-_-759528-_-12212011-_-common_plastic_chemical_could_cause_fatal_heart_flaw