[ad_1]
BPA-free plastic may not be the health protection that was once thought of, new research indicating that the risks associated with plastic bottles and food containers could be as high as the BPA replaced. The first study suggested that in mice at least, chemicals in BPA-free plastics could trigger reproductive problems.
Decades ago, BPA, or bisphenol A, was considered a potential health risk. Studies have shown that the chemical, used commercially since 1957, may have estrogen-like properties. As a result, among the fears that this may affect fertility, among other things, its use has generally stopped in baby products, while health-conscious adults are often looking for options without BPA.
According to a study from the University of Washington, some of the common alternatives to BPA could have their own drawbacks. The main author, Professor Patricia Hunt, is no stranger to the subject. In fact, 20 years ago, she was responsible for some of the early research on BPA health.
This time, it was in plastic cages that housed mice used as control animals in studies by Hunt that they reported a potential problem. These cages used BPA-free plastic with bisphenol S – or BPS – instead of bisphenol A.
"This is a more stable plastic, but it has similar effects on the egg and sperm manufacturing process," Hunt said of the results of the new study. "Especially, when we tested the chemicals in controlled experiments, we got similar results for each one of them."
Mice in cages containing BPS have seen changes in the way germ cells in their testes and ovaries copy and splice DNA, while producing sperm and eggs respectively. "Both sexes have had problems getting DNA to recombine properly," the team reports, "leading to a reduction in viable sperm and an increase in abnormal eggs."
Perhaps most disturbingly, the impact was not limited to the BPS alone. The Washington State team also examined other common substitutes for BPA, including GMP, BPAF and diphenylsulfone, and observed similar results. "These results reinforce the evidence of the biological risks posed by this class of chemicals," they conclude.
It is too early to say conclusively if alternatives to BPA are equally harmful to humans. The study focused only on a relatively small group of mice, and although the similarities in development and reproduction between this animal and humans are present, it is not enough to say that the damage observed in one will be reflected by the other.
However, the finding warrants further research and draws attention to the lack of current safeguards. As the team points out, "it is easier and more cost-effective to replace a chemical of concern with structural compounds with current chemical regulations than to identify the attributes that make it hazardous." do as much damage as the substances they replace.
IMAGE Steven Depolo
Source link
