Chemicals May Play Role in Rise in Obesity

by Elizabeth Grossman
The Washington Post
March 12, 2007

Too many calories and too little exercise are undeniably the major factors contributing to the obesity epidemic, but several recent animal studies suggest that environmental exposure to widely used chemicals may also help make people fat.

The evidence is preliminary, but a number of researchers are pursuing indications that the chemicals, which have been shown to cause abnormal changes in animals' sexual development, can also trigger fat-cell activity -- a process scientists call adipogenesis.

The chemicals under scrutiny are used in products from marine paints and pesticides to food and beverage containers. A study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found one chemical, bisphenol A, in 95 percent of the people tested, at levels at or above those that affected development in animals.

These findings were presented at last month's annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. A spokesman for the chemical industry later dismissed the concerns, but Jerry Heindel, a top official of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), who chaired the AAAS session, said the suspected link between obesity and exposure to "endocrine disrupters," as the chemicals are called because of their hormone-like effects, is "plausible and possible."

Bruce Blumberg, a developmental and cell biologist at the University of California at Irvine, one of those presenting research at the meeting, called them "obesogens" -- chemicals that promote obesity.

Obesity has become a major health concern as people in the United States and around the world have become increasingly overweight, raising their risk of cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, stroke and certain cancers. The World Health Organization estimates that more than a billion adults worldwide are overweight and 300 million are obese. Scientists have begun examining a wide range of possible causes beyond eating too much and exercising too little -- including possible chemical exposures.

Blumberg began to suspect a link while trying to pinpoint how one endocrine disrupter, tributyltin, affects genetic mechanisms in the reproductive system. Tributyltin is used as a marine and agricultural fungicide, an antimicrobial agent in industrial water systems, and in plastics; it can cause serious sexual abnormalities in marine animals.

"What we discovered," Blumberg said, is that tributyltin disrupted genetic interactions that regulate fat-cell activity in animals. "Exposure to tributyltin is increasing the number of fat cells, so the individual will get fatter faster as these cells produce more of the hormones that say 'feed me,'" Blumberg said. The exposed animals, he added, remain predisposed to obesity for life.

Retha R. Newbold, a developmental biologist at the NIEHS, has seen similar lifetime effects in her work with diethylstilbestrol (DES), a potent synthetic estrogen she has studied for 30 years.

Newbold's research has shown that mice exposed to DES during early development produced more fat cells, larger fat cells, and more abdominal fat than those not exposed. Exposed mice became obese adults and remained obese even on reduced calorie and increased exercise regimes. Like tributyltin, DES appeared to permanently disrupt the hormonal mechanisms regulating body weight.

"Once these genetic changes happen in utero, they are irreversible and with the individual for life," Newbold said.

DES was widely prescribed for women during pregnancy from the 1940s until 1971, when it was withdrawn after being linked to cancer. Taken by perhaps 8 million women, DES has caused reproductive abnormalities in children and grandchildren of women who took it. Whether its effects include promoting obesity has yet to be determined, but its effects on animal metabolism -- it is also used to fatten livestock -- are similar to those caused by bisphenol A, a chemical most people now encounter daily.

"Exposure to bisphenol A is continuous," said Frederick vom Saal, professor of biological sciences at the University of Missouri at Columbia. Bisphenol A is an ingredient in polycarbonate plastics used in many products, including refillable water containers and baby bottles, and in epoxy resins that line the inside of food cans and are used as dental sealants. In 2003, U.S. industry consumed about 2 billion pounds of bisphenol A.

Researchers have studied bisphenol A's effects on estrogen function for more than a decade. Vom Saal's research indicates that developmental exposure to low doses of bisphenol A activates genetic mechanisms that promote fat-cell activity. "These in-utero effects are lifetime effects, and they occur at phenomenally small levels" of exposure, vom Saal said.

Steven Hentges of the American Chemistry Council said his organization's review of the scientific literature found that a preponderance of the bisphenol A studies have shown no adverse effects, including no increased body weight. "Our conclusion is that there is no risk to human health," said Hentges.

But many scientists disagree, including vom Saal, who called the ACC's statements a "blatant lie."

Research into the impact of endocrine-disrupting chemicals on obesity has been done only in laboratory animals, but the genetic receptors that control fat cell activity are functionally identical across species. "They work virtually the same way in fish as they do in rodents and humans," Blumberg said. "Fat cells are an endocrine organ."

Ongoing studies are monitoring human levels of bisphenol A, but none have been done of tributyltin, which has been used since the 1960s and is persistent in the marine food web. "Tributyltin is the only endocrine disrupting chemical that has been shown without substantial argument to have an effect at levels at which it's found in the environment," Blumberg said.

Concern over tributyltin's reproductive effects on marine animals has resulted in an international agreement discontinuing its use in anti-fouling paints used on ships. The EPA has said it plans next year to assess its other applications, including as an antimicrobial agent in livestock operations, fish hatcheries and hospitals.

Bisphenol A is approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in consumer products, and the agency says the amount of bisphenol A or tributyltin that might leach from products is too low to be of concern. But the National Toxicology Program, part of the National Institutes of Health, is reviewing bisphenol A, and concerns about its estrogenic effects prompted California legislators to propose banning it from certain products sold in-state, a move industry has fought vigorously.

Researchers said the next step is to learn if these apparent animal "obesogens" are affecting people.

"Our job is to follow the science, and based on these animal studies, this is worth taking a look at," said Heindel of the NIEHS.

© 2007 The Washington Post Company

California Bill Would Ban Certain Toxic Chemicals in Child Products

by Jane Kay
San Francisco Chronicle
February 28, 2007

Toys and child care products that contain certain chemicals would be banned in California under a bill introduced Tuesday by a San Francisco assemblywoman.

Democrat Fiona Ma's "toxic toy'' bill, which mirrors a San Francisco law, would ban the manufacture, sale and distribution of the products beginning in 2009 if they contain bisphenol A. The chemical is a building block of hard, polycarbonate plastic.

The legislation would also limit chemicals called phthalates, which soften polyvinyl chloride, or PVC, in products intended for children 3 and under.

Environmental groups support the bill; chemical manufacturers and some toymakers and retailers oppose it.

Also this week, activist group Environment California released results of a test it ordered from an independent lab, which found that name-brand baby bottles leach one of the chemicals restricted under Ma's bill.

Those test results are consistent with other data showing new polycarbonate bottles leach small amounts of bisphenol A in levels that have caused abnormalities in the mammary and prostate glands and the female eggs of laboratory animals, scientists say. Animal tests also show bisphenol A can speed up puberty and add to weight gain.

For its tests, Environment California purchased three bottles from Dr. Brown's by Handi-craft Co., Evenflo, Gerber, Philips Avent and Playtex. At the lab, technicians tested the bottles after filling them with 176-degree water for 24 hours to simulate 50 to 75 sanitizing cycles in a dishwasher.

Representatives of the bottle companies said their products meet federal standards and argued that exposure from plastic bottles, cups and other food containers doesn't pose any known risk to human health. Bisphenol A, a chemical that mimics estrogen, is also used in liners of food cans, some anti-cavity sealants for children and electronics.

Steve Hentges, an industry spokesman at the American Chemistry Council, criticized the tests ordered by Environment California and performed at the University of Missouri, one of the few labs that can do the tests.

The tests didn't adequately simulate the real use of bottles and the exposure to babies, he said. In any case, the leached amounts were low, he said.

On Tuesday, leading university bisphenol A researchers disagreed with Hentges. In the last several years, dozens of independent studies, most sponsored by government agencies, have shown that the chemical can cause serious problems in lab animals at low doses, they said.

Pat Hunt, a biosciences professor at Washington State University at Pullman who has studied the effects of bisphenol A on lab animals, said the simulation used in the test contracted by Environment California was appropriate. There is no single protocol for the leach tests, she said. Consumers heat, wash and store liquid in the bottles in many different ways, she said.

Frederick vom Saal, a biological science professor at the University of Missouri, said the amounts of bisphenol A that leached from the bottles were 1,000 times higher than levels associated with changes to mammary glands, disruption of hormones and the early onset of puberty in lab animals. Vom Saal was not directly involved in conducting the tests.

© 2007 Hearst Communications Inc.

Hot Liquids Dramatically Increase Release of Toxins From Plastic Bottles

by Alok Jha
The Guardian
January 30, 2008

Hot liquids dramatically increase the amount of harmful chemicals released by plastic bottles, according to a study.

Scientists found that polycarbonate plastic bottles released a known environmental pollutant 55 times more quickly when filled with boiling water.

Polycarbonate is used to make everything from compact discs to milk bottles for babies. The plastic is made from bisphenol A, a chemical produced in large volumes across the world. But over time, the plastic leaches its raw ingredient back into the environment.

"There are a lot of concerns surrounding bisphenol A," said David Santillo, senior scientist at the Greenpeace research laboratory in Exeter. "It is a hormone disrupter able to mimic and interfere with hormone systems in animals."

In the experiment, Scott Belcher, of the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, wanted to work out how bisphenol A leaked out of polycarbonates and whether the temperature of the liquid stored in the bottle affected the rate.

"Previous studies have shown that if you repeatedly scrub, dish-wash and boil polycarbonate baby bottles, they release bisphenol A. But we wanted to know if 'normal' use caused increased release from something that we all use, and to identify what was the most important factor that impacts release," he said.

Belcher took reusable water bottles and tested them for seven days with room temperature water and then boiling water, simulating normal usage during backpacking, mountaineering and other outdoor adventure activities.

He found that boiling water released bisphenol A from the bottles up to 55 times more quickly than the lower-temperature water.

The results, published in the latest edition of the journal Toxicology Letters, found that with room temperature water the rate of release from individual bottles ranged from 0.2 to 0.8 nanograms of bisphenol A an hour. After exposure to boiling water, rates increased to 8 to 32 nanograms an hour.

"A nanogram is a fairly small amount but, given that a lot of hormones work at levels far below that, even if it's not as potent as a natural hormone, you are in the range there which could be contributing to adverse effects," said Santillo.

He added that Belcher's research should renew calls to develop alternative materials for baby milk bottles.

"Newborn babies are at a very sensitive stage of their development and the last thing you want to be doing is dosing them with a very potent hormone disruptor," he said. "If there are ways of avoiding that, the time has come for the public to know about those."

© Guardian News and Media Limited 2008

Click here to see other posts in Green Prudence regarding bisphenol A.

Eden Avoids Toxins in Their Canned Foods

by Sandra K. Baker
Eden Foods
April 30, 2008

Eden cans have "crimped" seams, using no solder. Eden Organic Beans are packed in steel cans coated with a baked on oleoresinous (a natural mixture of an oil and a resin extracted from various plants, such as pine or balsam fir) c-enamel lining, that does not contain bisphenol-A.

These cans cost 14% more than the industry standard cans, which do contain bisphenol-A. Eden Foods learned through reading and customer feedback that bisphenol-A was an issue in Europe. Immediately upon learning of this we contacted our can manufacturers and settled on supply from the Ball Corporation, the only company to address this issue with a solution. To the best of our knowledge, to date we are the only US manufacturer doing so, and have been told this by Ball Corp.

Eden began using the BPA-free can lining for EDEN Organic Beans in 1999. Ball first made this can for us April 22, 1999. All Eden Organic Beans are produced at our AIB International 'Superior Rated' (the highest rating) kosher cannery, Meridian Foods in Indiana.

Products include:
12 varieties of EDEN Organic Unseasoned Beans in 15 ounce cans
4 varieties of EDEN Organic Unseasoned Beans in 108 ounce cans
6 varieties of EDEN Organic Refried Beans in 15 and 16 ounce cans
5 varieties of EDEN Organic Seasoned Beans in 15 ounce cans
6 varieties of EDEN Organic Rice & Beans in 15 ounce cans

Eden Organic Canned Tomatoes are packed by a co-packer. They are packed in steel cans coated with a baked on r-enamel lining. Due to the acidity of tomatoes, (to prevent the can from rusting) the lining is epoxy based and contains a minute amount of bisphenol-A. In extraction test on the r-enamel lined can bisphenol-A was found to be in the “non-detectable” range. The test was based on a detection limit of 5 ppb (parts per billion).

Is It In Us?

by the Commonweal Biomonitoring Resource Center and the Body Burden Work Group

From the Executive Summary:

Toxic chemicals from everyday products contaminate the bodies of every person in this country. Shower curtains, water bottles, baby bottles, toys, shampoo, cosmetics, couch cushions, computers, and hundreds of other common products that ordinary people use every day contain toxic chemical ingredients that leach out of the products and into our bodies.

Thirty-five Americans from seven states participated in a national biomonitoring project in the spring of 2007. This is the broadest non-governmental project of its kind to measure toxic chemicals in the bodies of average Americans.

Each participant was tested for contamination by twenty toxic chemicals from three chemical families: phthalates, bisphenol A, and polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs).

The project found toxic chemicals in every person tested.

• All 35 participants had at least 7 of the 20 chemicals in their bodies.
• All 33 participants who contributed urine samples had phthalates in their bodies.
• All 33 participants who contributed urine samples had bisphenol A in their urine.
• All 35 participants had six types of PBDEs in their bodies, and all but one had decaBDE.

Human and animal studies link the three families of chemicals detected in this project to birth defects, asthma, cancer, learning disabilities, and other health impacts. For some toxic chemicals, the levels found in people are near or above levels linked to health impacts in laboratory animals. Consider that scientists estimate that 95% of Americans are contaminated with bisphenol A at levels thought to cause harm in laboratory animals.

Our nation’s chemical safety system has failed. Three-quarters of the 80,000 chemicals in commerce today have not been tested for safety.We know next to nothing about how the interactions of multiple chemicals may affect our health. Manufacturers of products containing known toxics are not even required to list those contents on the label.

The problem is a Jurassic-era law regulating space-age chemicals. The federal Toxic Substances Control Act was enacted in 1976 and has not been updated to reflect recent research, including evidence that even tiny doses of toxic chemicals may cause harm. U.S. standards are so weak that even well-known toxic hazards, like asbestos and lead, are not banned from commerce.

No one can shop, eat or exercise his or her way to a body free from toxic chemicals. We shouldn’t be exposed to unnecessary, dangerous chemicals as we go about our daily routines. We can improve our health and the health of our communities by adopting these common sense policies, which are already advancing at the state and federal levels:

• Phase-out the most harmful chemicals and switch to safer alternatives;
• Require that all chemicals are screened for safety and that toxicity data and product ingredients be made publicly available;
• Promote the development of safer alternatives and environmentally friendly “green” technologies;
• Protect workers and communities where toxic chemicals are produced, used, and disposed.

Americans need a new, comprehensive federal policy to raise the standards governing chemical use in society. Some states are taking the lead to create new solutions that could be applied nationally. To learn more about what is happening in your state or in Congress, visit www.IsItInUs.org.

© 2007 Coming Clean

Nalgene Polycarbonate Bottles Nixed Due to Consumer Health Concerns

Victory for Consumer Health Advocates
(such as Green Prudence!)

by Ben Dobbin
The Associated Press
April 18, 2008

Hard-plastic Nalgene water bottles made with bisphenol A will be pulled from stores over the next few months because of growing consumer concern over whether the chemical poses a health risk.

Nalge Nunc International, a division of Waltham, Mass.-based Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., said Friday it will substitute its Nalgene Outdoor line of polycarbonate plastic containers with BPA-free alternatives.

"We continue to believe that Nalgene products containing BPA are safe for their intended use," Steven Silverman, general manager of the Nalgene business, said in a statement. "However, our customers indicated they preferred BPA-free alternatives and we acted in response to those concerns."

With more than 6 million pounds produced in the United States each year, bisphenol A is found in dental sealants, baby bottles, the liners of food cans, CDs and DVDs, eyeglasses and hundreds of household goods.

The U.S. government's National Toxicology Program said this week that there is "some concern" about BPA from experiments on rats that linked the chemical to changes in behavior and the brain, early puberty and possibly precancerous changes in the prostate and breast. While such animal studies only provide "limited evidence" of risk, the draft report said a possible effect on humans "cannot be dismissed."

Highly durable and lightweight, resistant to stains and odors, and able to withstand extremes of hot and cold, screw-cap Nalgene bottles have been marketed as an environmentally responsible substitute for disposable water bottles.

The transparent reusable sports accessory is made at a factory in suburban Rochester that employs about 900 people.

Nalge Nunc was founded in 1949 by Rochester chemist Emanuel Goldberg. The lab-equipment supplier's product evolved in the 1970s after rumors spread about its scientists taking hardy lab vessels on weekend outings. That led the company to form a water-bottle consumer unit targeting Boy Scouts, hikers and campers.

In 2000, a new sports line of Nalgene-brand bottles offered in red, blue and yellow hues quickly became the rage in high schools and on college campuses.

Earlier this week, Wal-Mart Canada and other major retailers in Canada began removing BPA-based food-related products such as baby bottles and sipping cups from store shelves. Canadian health regulators were expected to announce the results of a preliminary review on BPA later Friday.

"I think the writing's on the wall for this chemical," said Aaron Freeman, policy director of Toronto-based Environmental Defence Canada. "You've got major retailers with huge market clout pulling BPA products ... and you've got consumers in droves who are opting for alternatives. They're a big late to the game, but they are responding to that consumer demand."

Citing multiple studies in the United States, Europe and Japan, the chemicals industry maintains that polycarbonate bottles contain little BPA and leach traces considered too low to harm humans.

But critics point to an influx of animal studies linking low doses to a wide variety of ailments _ from breast and prostate cancer, obesity and hyperactivity, to miscarriages and other reproductive failures.

An expert panel of 38 academic and government researchers who attended a National Institutes of Health-sponsored conference said in a study in August that "the potential for BPA to impact human health is a concern, and more research is clearly needed."

© 2008 The Associated Press

Obesity's Hidden Trigger

by Emily Main
The Green Guide
July/August 2007 Issue

If you've ever suspected that there's a reason you can't burn off those last five pounds, you may be on to something. Recent studies on certain hormone-disrupting and environmentally persistent compounds are leading researchers to believe there's a plausible link between these ubiquitous chemicals and our ever-expanding waistlines.

The World Health Organization estimates that 1 billion of the world's nearly 7 billion citizens are overweight, 300 million of whom are defined as clinically obese. "People want to blame 40-ounce Cokes--and that's important--but there's reason to believe there are other things in play," says Richard Stahlhut, M.D., M.P.H., preventive medicine resident at the University of Rochester Medical Center.

Stahlhut and his colleagues wondered if a group of hormone-disrupting chemicals called phthalates (pronounced "thay-lates"), found in a wide array of everyday products, might be adding to this epidemic. Analyzing data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's most recent National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, Stahlhut and his colleagues compared six phthalate metabolites (phthalates processed by the body) found in men's urine samples to their corresponding waist circumferences. Two of the phthalates targeted were DEHP, used in synthetic fragrances and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) products (i.e. floor tiles, shower curtains and hospital IV bags), as well as DBP, used in nail polishes, floor finishes and paints.

The results, published online last March in Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP), revealed that American men with abdominal obesity or insulin resistance (a precursor to diabetes) were more likely to have high levels of the metabolites in their urine than men without those problems. Stahlhut is quick to point out that there's no definitive link proving that excessive phthalate exposure causes obesity, but the study does suggest a possible connection. "[These results are] what you would expect if phthalates are lowering testosterone levels," Stahlhut says, and "low testosterone in adult men, from whatever cause, is known to cause abdominal obesity and insulin resistance." Past research has demonstrated the effects of phthalates on testosterone; a 2006 Danish study of infant boys found that those exposed to phthalates via breast milk had lower testosterone levels and abnormal reproductive development.

Fredrick vom Saal, Ph.D., a developmental biologist at the University of Missouri, is currently studying the obesity-inducing effects on pregnant mice of BPA, a hormone-disrupting chemical found in #7 polycarbonate bottles, dental sealants and can linings. Presenting preliminary results at the American Association for the Advancement of Science's annual meeting last February, he discovered that these mice, which had been fed very low doses of BPA, had offspring that exhibited abnormal growth later in life. While it's not clear that BPA is linked to obesity, says vom Saal, "we do know that it makes animals bigger. It doesn't categorize them as obese, but obesity is a very particular aspect of growth."

In yet another study in press online at Environmental Science & Technology, researchers from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health tested cord blood taken from newborns for ten environmentally persistent perfluorochemicals (PFCs), including perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), used in the manufacture of non-stick pans and in microwave popcorn bags, and the now-banned perfluorooctanoic sulfonate (PFOS). High levels of both were associated with low birth weight, itself a risk factor for obesity later in life. "We do know, in the case of animals, that some of these chemicals have effects later in life," says Lynn Goldman, M.D., one of the study's lead authors.

While all these links are preliminary, the studies point to "where folks need to focus effort," says Stahlhut. "There's some exposure or combination of exposures that everybody thinks is okay but isn't."

Fortunately, awareness is being raised. In California, a ban on phthalates in children's toys reached the senate floor before defeat and Maine's legislature is considering a bill that would bar the sale of any children's product containing BPA or phthalates. Until such legislation reaches your state, "People have to protect themselves," says Stahlhut. Vom Saal's research points out that BPA is harmful even before children are born, so such laws may not offer the highest level of protection. "This is a very, very complex problem, and it will take many years to get to the bottom of it," Stahlhut adds. "The organic approach--avoiding complex chemicals you don't really need, and otherwise being 'zen' about it--may be a reasonable strategy."

What You Can Do

* Exercise regularly.

* Eat less fat. PFOA and PFOS don't build up in fat, says Goldman, but many PFCs do. "As a general precaution, eating less fat and less animal fat is a good idea," she advises.

* Purchase cookware without non-stick features, and avoid microwave popcorn: PFOA released from bags accounts for over 20 percent of the chemical measured in Americans' blood.

* Choose phthalate-free products: See Moisturizers and Flooring product reports (www.thegreenguide.com/reports) and www.greenerpenny.com. When pregnant, ask ahead about your hospital's policy on PVC in medical devices.

* See the Baby Bottle and Plastic Containers product reports for non-polycarbonate bottles at www.thegreenguide.com/reports.

* Avoid canned products that may be packaged in cans lined with BPA. See "The Bisphenol-A Debate: A Suspect Chemical in Plastic Bottles and Cans," and "A Survey of Bisphenol-A in U.S. Canned Foods".

© 2007 National Geographic Society

The True Cost of Bottled Water

by Solvie Karlstrom
The Green Guide
July/August 2007 Issue

From childhood, we're told to drink at least eight glasses of water each day. Unfortunately more and more Americans drink those eight glasses out of plastic bottles—a convenience that stuffs landfills, clogs waterways and guzzles valuable fossil fuels.

Last year Americans spent nearly $11 billion on over 8 billion gallons of bottled water, and then tossed over 22 billion empty plastic bottles in the trash. In bottle production alone, the more than 70 million bottles of water consumed each day in the U.S. drain 1.5 million barrels of oil over the course of one year.

Banning the Bottle

Though the sale and consumption of bottled water is still on the rise, certain policy makers and activists have taken steps to reduce it. San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom signed an executive order in June that bars city government from using city money to supply municipal workers with bottled water, and New York City launched an ad campaign this summer encouraging residents and tourists to forego the bottled beverage for the city's tap, long considered some of the best water in the country. "New York waste and pollution is on a massive scale," says Michael Saucier of the New York City Department of Environmental Protection. "Considering that the average New Yorker consumes nearly 28 gallons of bottled water each year, New York clearly hasn't been doing enough to encourage residents to drink tap."

Even restaurateurs are doing their part to keep water bottles out of landfills. Upscale eateries in Boston, New York and San Francisco have taken bottled water off the menu, offering filtered tap instead. At the Italian restaurant Incanto in San Francisco, carafes used to serve filtered tap water are refilled 2,000 times on average before they're cracked and retired. Owner Mark Pastore explains that leaving bottled water off the menu is "a tiny thing that we can do to be a little more sustainable."

Avoiding Chemical Intruders

Not only does bottled water contribute to excessive waste, but it costs us a thousand times more than water from our faucet at home, and it is, in fact, no safer or cleaner. "The bottled water industry spends millions of dollars a year to convince us that their product is somehow safer or healthier than tap water, when in fact that's just not true," says Victoria Kaplan, senior organizer with Food and Water Watch, a nonprofit that recently launched a Take Back the Tap campaign to get consumers to ditch bottled water. "As much as 40 percent of bottled water started out as the same tap water that we get at home," she adds. A 1999 Natural Resources Defense Council study found that, with required quarterly testing, tap water may even be of a higher quality than bottled, which is only tested annually.

Water aside, the plastic used in both single-use and reusable bottles can pose more of a contamination threat than the water. A safe plastic if used only once, #1 polyethylene terephthalate (PET or PETE) is the most common resin used in disposable bottles. However, as #1 bottles are reused, which they commonly are, they can leach chemicals such as DEHA, a known carcinogen, and benzyl butyl phthalate (BBP), a potential hormone disrupter. According to the January 2006 Journal of Environmental Monitoring, some PET bottled-water containers were found to leach antimony, an elemental metal that is an eye, skin, and lung irritant at high doses. Also, because the plastic is porous you'll likely get a swill of harmful bacteria with each gulp if you reuse #1 plastic bottles.

While single-use water bottles should never be used more than once, some reusable water bottles simply shouldn't be used. The debate continues over the safety of bisphenol A (BPA), a hormone-disrupting chemical known to leach out of the #7 polycarbonate plastic used to make a variety of products, including popular Nalgene Lexan water bottles. New studies keep cropping up that don't bode well for BPA, demonstrating that even extremely low doses of the chemical can be damaging. Recent research has linked the chemical to a variety of disorders, including obesity and breast cancer, and one chilling 2007 study, published in the journal PLoS Genetics, found that BPA exposure can cross generations. Pregnant mice exposed to low levels of BPA led to chromosomal abnormalities, which possibly cause birth defects and miscarriages, in grandchildren.

Yet, in spite of mounting evidence, polycarbonate water bottles don't seem to be losing popularity. A 2006 Green Guide reader poll found that roughly a third of respondents still preferred the Nalgene Lexan over other reusable bottles. If you're partial to the brightly colored containers, Nalgene does manufacture safer alternatives made from #2 high density polyethylene (HDPE).

Avoid the perils of plastic altogether with a metal water bottle that can handle a variety of liquids, including acidic fruit juices, and won't leach chemicals into your beverage. Klean Kanteen's stainless steel bottle is lightweight, durable, and entirely chemical free. Avoid detergents that contain chlorine when cleaning Klean Kanteens; chlorine can corrode stainless steel. Another attractive alternative to plastic is the aluminum Sigg bottle with a taste-inert, water-based epoxy lining. Independent lab tests commissioned by the company found that the resin leached no detectable quantities of BPA, while other unlined aluminum and polycarbonate bottles subjected to the same conditions did.

Noting that the federal share of funding for water systems has declined from 78 percent in 1973 to 3 percent today, Kaplan urges consumers to "support public policies that promote safe, affordable, public tap water for future generations." Visit www.foodandwaterwatch.org and take the pledge to take back the tap, promising to choose tap water over bottled whenever possible and to support policies that promote clean public tap water for everybody. And meanwhile, invest in a safe, reusable bottle.

Better Bottles

Kleen Kanteen stainless steel water bottle w/ cap, 27 fluid ounces ($17.95; www.kleankanteen.com)
MLS Stainless Steel Thermos Bottle, 1 liter ($22.16; www.mls-group.com)
Nissan Thermos FBB500 Briefcase Bottle, 1pt ($35; www.coffee-makers-espresso-machines.com)
Sigg resin coated aluminum sport bottle, 25 ounces ($19.99; www.mysigg.com)
Platypus #5 polypropylene 2+collapsible water bottle, 2.4 liters ($9.95; www.rei.com)
Nalgene HDPE Loop-Top Bottle, 16 ounces ($4.53; www.nalgene-outdoor.com)

For more suggestions, see our Plastic Containers Product Report.

RELATED

Handle With Care: A Nalgene Bottle Poll
by Emily Main

Picnic Perfect Plastics
by Danielle Masterson

The Bisphenol-A Debate: A Suspect Chemical in Plastic Bottles and Cans
by Catherine Zandonella, M.P.H

© 2007 National Geographic Society.

Finding Alternatives to Melamine Dishware

by Alexandra Zissu
The Green Guide
July 1, 2008

Now that the bisphenol A used to make polycarbonate baby bottles has become such a health concern, parents of the bottle-feeding set are tossing out their colorful, durable plastic bottles in favor of glass and safer plastics. But what about the solid-food eaters and those cute and colorful, practically indestructible plastic dishes off of which they love to eat?

Aside from sippy cups, most kidware isn't made of polycarbonate but of durable, colorful melamine. Melamine is a questionable choice for food because it's made with formaldehyde, which has been linked to allergies, asthma and cancer. There's no evidence that formaldehyde leaches out of melamine every single time it's used, but some studies, including one by the Danish Veterinary and Food Administration, have shown that the chemical can migrate out of melamine and into food under certain circumstances, such as heat and when serving highly acidic foods.

Parents who continue to be devoted to plastic can find plates, cups, spoons and forks made from the better plastics (those labeled #2, #4 or #5). Unfortunately, plastics aren't always labeled, so it can take considerable work finding which type is in your child's favorite Dora the Explorer plate. One resource is The Soft Landing, a web site run by a mom/former RN who spends a tremendous amount of time emailing manufacturers to find out what plastics their products are made of. Regardless of type, it's a good idea to hand-wash all plastics, since abrasive, powdered detergents can cause them to deteriorate.

Another option, especially if a houseful of kids makes hand-washing next to impossible, is to do what I did and do: Avoid plastic altogether. My daughter eats from our own lead-free ceramic dishes. She also eats from small stainless-steel prep bowls purchased at a kitchen supply store, and even the occasional glass bowl. I know some moms and dads worry about shattering glass, but she's never broken one, despite the fact that the floor under our dining table is poured concrete (inherited from someone else's renovation). It probably helped that we have firmly explained to her over and over and over that she may not toss the things.

Unfortunately toxic chemical concerns don't stop at bowls and plates. For bibs as well as other kiddie dining items that contain too-high levels of questionable materials, log on to www.HealthyToys.org. It's a great place to visit before shopping to learn if your desired spoon with "color change tips" (or something equally extraneous) contains lead-tainted polyvinyl chloride (PVC) or other undesirables. To avoid this sort of thing entirely, go with stainless steel cocktail spoons and forks, the perfect size for wee mouths. These are widely available, especially at kitchen supply stores. Many moms I know also use Bambu's bamboo utensils. Parents who miss the cute characters that come on plastic plates can make up for it with bibs, placemats and splashguards. Check out Mimi the Sardine, a brand of PVC-free Oeko-Tex-certified acrylic-coated cotton bibs that are as chemical-free as they are cute and colorful.

The Mimi goods are our concession to adorable dining presentation, used with sweet and subtly patterned kids' enamelware sets from Golden Rabbit (pictured above). There's some concern about lead and cadmium when it comes to enamelware in general, but Golden Rabbit happens to be manufactured by family friend and father of two, Tom Mansfield. He says all his products are free of both, "and FDA tested every time a shipment is brought into this country, so it's food safe and everything safe." Like glass, ceramic and stainless steel—and unlike certain plastics—it goes safely on the top or bottom rack of the dishwasher, worry-free.

Now that you know what's safe to serve on—and why—let the messes begin.

RESOURCES
For sippy cups made from safer materials, see our Baby Bottles Buying Guide.
Stainless steel prep bowls: www.amazon.com
Stainless steel cocktail forks and spoons: www.cb2.com
Bambu: www.bambuhome.com
Mimi the Sardine bibs and mats: www.mimithesardine.com
Golden Rabbit enamelware: www.goldenrabbit.com
Mini glass bowls: www.crateandbarrel.com

© 1996-2008 National Geographic Society

PVC Shower Curtains Spew Over 100 Toxic Chemicals

by the Center for Health, Environment & Justice
June 12, 2008

Results from a two-phase study released today by the Center for Health, Environment & Justice, a non-profit organization dedicated to preventing environmental health harms caused by chemical threats, show that shower curtains made with polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic contain many harmful chemicals including volatile organic compounds (VOCs), phthalates and organotins; these PVC shower curtains are potentially toxic to the health of consumers. Vinyl shower curtains and shower curtain liners release chemicals into the home that are most easily identified by that “new shower curtain smell” and are routinely sold at major retail outlets. Results of this study show that PVC shower curtains can release toxic chemicals into the air that may lead to adverse health effects including respiratory irritation, central nervous system, liver and kidney damage, nausea, headaches and loss of coordination. The Work Group for Safe Markets is a co-sponsor of this report.

Across the nation many consumer and environmental health organizations join CHEJ and other experts in calling for safeguards to prevent harm from exposure to toxic PVC shower curtains. For a list of state events and/or to read the full report, Volatile Vinyl: The New Shower Curtain’s Chemical Smell – www.chej.org/showercurtainreport.

Key Report Findings

• 108 different volatile organic compounds were released from the shower curtain into the air over twenty-eight days.
• After one week, 40 different VOCs were detected in the air; after two weeks, 16 VOCS; after three weeks 11 VOCs and; after four weeks, 4 VOCs.
• The level of Total VOCs measured was over 16 times greater than the recommended guidelines for indoor air quality established by the U.S. Green Building Council, violating these guidelines for seven days.
• Just one new PVC shower curtain will release Total VOCs that exceed the typical Total VOCs residential level for four days.
• The concentration of Total VOCs in the Wal-Mart tested shower curtain was so high that the analytical equipment was saturated and further testing had to be halted so that lab equipment would not be damaged.
• All five curtains tested in phase one contained phthalates DEHP and DINP, chemicals banned in children’s toys in California, Washington, and the European Union.
• This testing did not replicate temperature and humidity conditions typically found in a shower, which would likely increase the concentrations of volatile pollutants released from a PVC curtain into the air of a bathroom; concentrations of these chemicals are likely to be even greater during and after a shower than those reported in this study.

“The release of so many volatile organic compounds, many of which are toxic, raises serious questions about the risks PVC shower curtains pose to families, especially young children exposed to these vapors. Every effort should be made to eliminate PVC shower curtains from homes and to replace them with safer alternatives,” said CHEJ Science Director and report co-author, Stephen Lester. On June 10th, CHEJ's Science Director Stephen Lester testified at the U.S. House Energy and Commerce committee hearing on phthalates and bisphenol A about the growing market movement away from phthalates in consumer products such as PVC shower curtains.

CHEJ is the first non-governmental organization (NGO) to conduct a study of this type on PVC shower curtains. These test results mirror and expand upon those first conducted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In 1991, the EPA studied emissions of a broad range of VOCs found in a new PVC shower curtain, detecting decane, a VOC also found in CHEJ’s study. In 2002, the EPA focused its study on emissions of four chemicals – toluene, phenol, ethylbenzene and methyl isolbutyl ketone (MIBK) – from a PVC shower curtain. The results found elevated levels of the chemicals evident beyond one month. The concentrations of these four chemicals were among the five highest found in CHEJ’s current results. PVC is the second largest commodity plastic in production in the world today; with nearly 15 billion pounds being produced annually in the U.S.

“Six years after the EPA found that PVC shower curtains continue to release toxic chemicals into the air we breathe for a month or longer, our study shows that nothing has changed. Something must be done to protect consumers from any potential harm these toxic chemicals cause. Wal-Mart and other retailers need to phase out these toxic chemicals. As Congress is considering a variety of chemical policy reforms, it must address the reality that no legal authority currently exists to enable the federal government to regulate consumer products which release toxic chemicals into the air inside our homes – air our children breathe every day,” said CHEJ founder and Executive Director Lois Gibbs.

PVC shower curtains’ life cycle of potential harm.

Workers, consumers, and those living in communities nearby to where PVC is made, or ultimately discarded, are at risk of harm from the toxic chemicals within the PVC. Three chemicals are at the core of manufacturing PVC. First, chlorine gas is used to produce ethylene dichloride (EDC). Second, the EDC is converted into vinyl chloride monomer (VCM). Finally, the VCM is converted into the PVC. VCM and EDC are extremely hazardous, with vinyl chloride causing a rare form of liver cancer, damaging the liver and central nervous system. The U.S. EPA classifies vinyl chloride as a known human carcinogen. When PVC is manufactured by workers, or burned when discarded,
numerous dioxins are formed and released into the air and water. Dioxins are a highly toxic group of chemicals that build up in the food chain and can cause cancer, as well as harm the immune and reproductive systems.

Health Implications.

This study found that PVC shower curtains release elevated levels of toxic chemicals into the air and contribute significantly to indoor air pollution. Seven of the chemicals found are classified as hazardous air pollutants by the EPA under the Clean Air Act. VOCs can also cause eye, nose and throat irritation, headaches, loss of coordination and nausea. Key symptoms associated with VOC exposure include eye irritation, nose and throat discomfort, difficulty breathing, allergic skin reaction, headache, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, dizziness and nose bleeding. Phthalates have been linked to reproductive problems including shorter pregnancy duration and sperm damage in males.

"The brain is a major target for VOCs, causing everything from headache and loss of concentration to learning disabilities in children whose mothers were exposed before their birth, as shown in a recent Canadian study. Since there are safe alternatives to vinyl shower curtains, such exposures should always be avoided," said David O. Carpenter, M.D., of the Institute for Health & The Environment at the University at Albany, SUNY.

Recommendations to protect consumers, workers & communities from PVC:

• The Federal Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) is 30 years old and must be updated to regulate consumer products which contribute to indoor air pollution and cause health harm.
• The Consumer Product Safety Commission should immediately recall all PVC shower curtains from store shelves.
• Manufactures and retailers should switch to safer products such as organic cotton shower curtains.
• Government at all levels should act quickly to ban the use of PVC in shower curtains.
• Consumers should avoid purchasing shower curtains made with PVC, and should not buy shower curtains that are not labeled with their content.

“The new shower curtain smell may be toxic to your health,” said Michael Schade, report co-author and CHEJ PVC Campaign Coordinator. “The good news is that families can take simple steps to protect their health by avoiding shower curtains made with PVC and choosing healthier products.”

To date, Bed Bath and Beyond, JC Penney, Sears/Kmart, Macys, and Target have all developed plans to offer more PVC-free shower curtains, but not all have set 100 percent PVC-free phase out plans and goals, while Ikea and Marks and Spencer have.

The Dangers of Nalgene Bottles and Food Cans

Hazards of Hydration by Frances Cerra Whittelsey, Sierra magazine, November 2003.

A Suspect Chemical in Plastic Bottles and Cans by Catherine Zandonella, The Green Guide, May 2006.

Our Stolen Future by Dr. Theo Colborn, Dianne Dumanoski, and Dr. John Peterson Myers, 2005.

An Extensive New Literature Concerning Low-Dose Effects of Bisphenol A Shows the Need for a New Risk Assessment by Frederick S. vom Saal and Claude Hughes, Environmental Health Perspectives, August 2005.

8 Ways to Avoid Harmful Chemicals in Plastics and Cans

1. If you already own polycarbonate bottles, including the Nalgene bottles popular on college campuses, labeled #7 on the bottom, wash them by hand with mild dishwashing soap, not in the dishwasher, to avoid degrading the plastic and increasing leaching of BPA (see "Picnic Perfect Plastics").

2. Even plastic does not last forever. Look for cracks or cloudiness on your reusable clear plastic bottles. See The Green Guide's survey, "A Nalgene Bottle Poll."

3. Use glass baby bottles or plastic bag inserts, which are made of polyethyelene, or switch to polypropylene bottles that are labeled #5 and come in colors or are milky rather than clear.

4. Choose soups, milk and soy milk packaged in cardboard "brick" cartons, by Tetra Pak and SIG Combibloc, which are made of safer layers of aluminum and polyethylene (#2) and also recyclable.

5. Choose canned foods from makers who don't use BPA, such as Eden Foods (www.edenfoods.com), which sells certified organic canned beans and other foods.

6. Eat fresh foods in season and save the canned foods for convenience or emergencies. The exception is some canned fruit such as that found in smaller fruit-cocktail cans, which do not require a liner, according to the Can Manufacturers Institute.

7. Buy or can your own fruits and vegetables in safe glass jars. For more, see Amy's Green Kitchen "In a Summer Pickle".

8. Some wines have been found to contain up to six times the BPA of canned foods. While most wines probably don't, it's another good reason to drink in moderation.

© Copyright 2006 The Green Guide Institute.

BPA Found in Most Canned Soft Drinks

by Elaine Shannon
Enviroblog
March 8, 2009

New tests by Health Canada's Bureau of Chemical Safety have found bisphenol A (BPA), a synthetic sex hormone and common plastics component, in 85 percent of 72 canned soft drinks sold in Canadian stores. The chemical is believed to have leached into the drinks from the epoxy resin can linings, which contain BPA.

The good news, according to the Canadian health agency, was that BPA contamination in the soft drink samples -- mostly brands also sold in the U.S. -- was well below its "safe" level. The average BPA level in the samples was .57 μg/L (micrograms per liter).

Rockstar Energy Drink was the most BPA-adulterated drink, at 4.5 μg/L. Lost Five-O Energy drink scored second, with 4.2 μg/L. President's Choice Mountain Mania Citrus Soda ranked third, with 2.3 μg/L, and Diet Canada Ginger Ale, fourth, with 1.7 μg/L.

Health Canada said that an adult would have to drink 940 cans of Rockstar to reach its "provisional tolerable daily intake" dose of 25 micrograms per kilograms of body weight a day (25 μg/kg/day). At that rate, it would take thousands of cans of Coca Cola (.18 μg/L), Pepsi (.12 μg/L) and Dr. Pepper (.10 μg/l) to reach Canada's safety bar. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has set an acceptable BPA exposure level for humans at 50 μg/kg/day, double the level set by Canada.

But critics contend that the Canadian and U.S. government "safe" levels are far too high, because scientific studies have found that BPA is active in the body at far lower doses than the government "safe" levels.

In 2007, a 38-member expert panel convened in Chapel Hill, N.C. by the National Institutes of Health concluded that experiments produced adverse effects in lab animals at levels at or below the level of BPA in people. (Epidemiological surveys by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have found BPA in 93 percent of Americans over 6 tested, with significantly higher BPA levels in children and adolescents than in adults.)

BPA exposure has been linked in laboratory tests to damage to the brain, neurological system and reproductive system, cardiovascular disease, cancer, obesity, diabetes, behavioral problems and other serious conditions.

Since people are exposed to BPA via a vast array of sources, including infant formula and food can linings, baby bottles, polycarbonate plastic water and beverage bottles, medical devices and other plastics, a growing number of scientists, health groups and environmental groups are pressing for a ban on BPA in all food packaging.

Last week, Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal announced that he and his counterparts from Delaware and New Jersey had reached an agreement with major baby bottle manufacturers to stop making bottles with BPA-based polycarbonate plastics. Anti-BPA forces hailed the agreement as a major step forward. Blumenthal said he would press for state legislation to force the removal of BPA from can linings and other food packaging.

Other state and local anti-BPA initiatives are under way. Ultimately, what's needed is a comprehensive national policy that protects all Americans, especially the youngest ones, from this powerful endocrine-disrupting chemical whose subtle effects are only beginning to be understood.