09-10-2016, 05:40 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-10-2016, 05:59 PM by tanysquirrel.)
a bit more on BPA:
As it we know, BPA (bisphenol-a_) is an endocrine disruptor.. aka it favors the estrogen receptors and will disrupt the endocrine system.
apparently , the thermal paper receipts we get from the point of sale registers at fast food, grocery and just about any other store are coated with either BPA or BPS (bisphenol-s), which was supposed to replace BPA as a "safe" alternative.. however, it seems just as bad (save that for another thread.).
In this segment, I will continue discovery on the effects of BPA.. I found this article :
http://www.scienceworldreport.com/articl...e-skin.htm
"BPA first was developed by a biochemist and tested as an artificial estrogen supplement," said Frederick vom Saal, Curators Professor of Biological Sciences in the College of Arts and Science at MU, via Science Daily. "As an endocrine disrupting chemical, BPA has been demonstrated to alter signaling mechanisms involving estrogen and other hormones. Store and fast food receipts, airline tickets, ATM receipts and other thermal papers all use massive amounts of BPA on the surface of the paper as a print developer. The problem is, we as consumers have hand sanitizers, hand creams, soaps and sunscreens on our hands that drastically alter the absorption rate of the BPA found on these receipts."
Past studies have warn that excessive absorption of BPA can harm the endocrine system, which regulates hormones. Furthermore, exposure in the womb has been linked with heart disease, diabetes and obesity. Any exposure during pregnancy can be particularly dangerous for the future baby, as well. Research shows that BPA can affect the mental and physical health of a fetus in the womb.
"The combination of dermal and oral BPA absorption led to a rapid and dramatic average maximum increase in unconjugated (bioactive) BPA...in blood and urine within 90 minutes," the study authors concluded, in a news release.
Researchers discovered that skin absorption in general could increase the risk of BPA in comparison to digestion. For instance, when the team accounted for two other factors, they used hand sanitizer prior to touching a BPA-coated receipt and eating greasy foods with hands that had touched the receipt, they discovered an even greater level of exposure to the chemical.
ADVERTISEMENT
By using these items, the skin ends up absorbing higher levels of BPA from receipts. The researchers reported that exposure occurred in as little as two seconds, in some cases.
it seems, the used in conjunction with hand sanitizer (most likely from the alcohol content), it upregulates (increases) the transdermal absorption of the BPA through the skin.
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article...ne.0110509
Bisphenol A (BPA) is an endocrine disrupting environmental contaminant used in a wide variety of products, and BPA metabolites are found in almost everyone’s urine, suggesting widespread exposure from multiple sources. Regulatory agencies estimate that virtually all BPA exposure is from food and beverage packaging. However, free BPA is applied to the outer layer of thermal receipt paper present in very high (∼20 mg BPA/g paper) quantities as a print developer. Not taken into account when considering thermal paper as a source of BPA exposure is that some commonly used hand sanitizers, as well as other skin care products, contain mixtures of dermal penetration enhancing chemicals that can increase by up to 100 fold the dermal absorption of lipophilic compounds such as BPA. We found that when men and women held thermal receipt paper immediately after using a hand sanitizer with penetration enhancing chemicals, significant free BPA was transferred to their hands and then to French fries that were eaten, and the combination of dermal and oral BPA absorption led to a rapid and dramatic average maximum increase (Cmax) in unconjugated (bioactive) BPA of ∼7 ng/mL in serum and ∼20 µg total BPA/g creatinine in urine within 90 min. The default method used by regulatory agencies to test for hazards posed by chemicals is intra-gastric gavage. For BPA this approach results in less than 1% of the administered dose being bioavailable in blood. It also ignores dermal absorption as well as sublingual absorption in the mouth that both bypass first-pass liver metabolism. The elevated levels of BPA that we observed due to holding thermal paper after using a product containing dermal penetration enhancing chemicals have been related to an increased risk for a wide range of developmental abnormalities as well as diseases in adults.
according to this link, bpa is not as dangerous as previously thought.. if so, why do they drop the TDI (total daily intake) rate? :
http://www.bfr.bund.de/cm/349/no-health-...ssment.pdf
In January 2015, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) published a new opinion on the assessment of the health risks associated with Bisphenol A (BPA) in foods and from other, non-dietary sources. In this opinion, the EFSA experts conclude that based on the current scientific evidence and given the current levels of consumer exposure, BPA does not pose a health risk for any age group. This also applies to unborn children, infants and young adolescents. New data and more sophisticated methods have led the EFSA experts to significantly reduce the tolerable daily intake (TDI) for BPA - from 50 micrograms per kilogramme of bodyweight per day (µg/kg bw/day) to 4 µg/kg bw/day. In view of this new assessment, the highest estimates of the exposure derived from foods alone or in combination with other sources (diet, house dust, cosmetics and thermal paper) are 3 to 5 times below the new TDI value. Uncertainties regarding possible health effects of BPA on the mammary gland, the reproductive, metabolic and immune systems and in relation to neurobehavioural disorders have been analysed and taken into account in the calculation of the TDI. The TDI must be seen as a temporary value as long as the results of a long-term study on rats, a study which aims to eliminate those uncertainties, are still pending. The BfR welcomes the fact that extensive data from Europe was taken into account in the exposure calculation and, given the uncertainties of the overall BPA data situation, endorses the derivation of the new temporary TDI.
I don't know, maybe I am reading it wrong?
leads me to believe in the "feminization of America" theory
As it we know, BPA (bisphenol-a_) is an endocrine disruptor.. aka it favors the estrogen receptors and will disrupt the endocrine system.
apparently , the thermal paper receipts we get from the point of sale registers at fast food, grocery and just about any other store are coated with either BPA or BPS (bisphenol-s), which was supposed to replace BPA as a "safe" alternative.. however, it seems just as bad (save that for another thread.).
In this segment, I will continue discovery on the effects of BPA.. I found this article :
http://www.scienceworldreport.com/articl...e-skin.htm
"BPA first was developed by a biochemist and tested as an artificial estrogen supplement," said Frederick vom Saal, Curators Professor of Biological Sciences in the College of Arts and Science at MU, via Science Daily. "As an endocrine disrupting chemical, BPA has been demonstrated to alter signaling mechanisms involving estrogen and other hormones. Store and fast food receipts, airline tickets, ATM receipts and other thermal papers all use massive amounts of BPA on the surface of the paper as a print developer. The problem is, we as consumers have hand sanitizers, hand creams, soaps and sunscreens on our hands that drastically alter the absorption rate of the BPA found on these receipts."
Past studies have warn that excessive absorption of BPA can harm the endocrine system, which regulates hormones. Furthermore, exposure in the womb has been linked with heart disease, diabetes and obesity. Any exposure during pregnancy can be particularly dangerous for the future baby, as well. Research shows that BPA can affect the mental and physical health of a fetus in the womb.
"The combination of dermal and oral BPA absorption led to a rapid and dramatic average maximum increase in unconjugated (bioactive) BPA...in blood and urine within 90 minutes," the study authors concluded, in a news release.
Researchers discovered that skin absorption in general could increase the risk of BPA in comparison to digestion. For instance, when the team accounted for two other factors, they used hand sanitizer prior to touching a BPA-coated receipt and eating greasy foods with hands that had touched the receipt, they discovered an even greater level of exposure to the chemical.
ADVERTISEMENT
By using these items, the skin ends up absorbing higher levels of BPA from receipts. The researchers reported that exposure occurred in as little as two seconds, in some cases.
it seems, the used in conjunction with hand sanitizer (most likely from the alcohol content), it upregulates (increases) the transdermal absorption of the BPA through the skin.
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article...ne.0110509
Bisphenol A (BPA) is an endocrine disrupting environmental contaminant used in a wide variety of products, and BPA metabolites are found in almost everyone’s urine, suggesting widespread exposure from multiple sources. Regulatory agencies estimate that virtually all BPA exposure is from food and beverage packaging. However, free BPA is applied to the outer layer of thermal receipt paper present in very high (∼20 mg BPA/g paper) quantities as a print developer. Not taken into account when considering thermal paper as a source of BPA exposure is that some commonly used hand sanitizers, as well as other skin care products, contain mixtures of dermal penetration enhancing chemicals that can increase by up to 100 fold the dermal absorption of lipophilic compounds such as BPA. We found that when men and women held thermal receipt paper immediately after using a hand sanitizer with penetration enhancing chemicals, significant free BPA was transferred to their hands and then to French fries that were eaten, and the combination of dermal and oral BPA absorption led to a rapid and dramatic average maximum increase (Cmax) in unconjugated (bioactive) BPA of ∼7 ng/mL in serum and ∼20 µg total BPA/g creatinine in urine within 90 min. The default method used by regulatory agencies to test for hazards posed by chemicals is intra-gastric gavage. For BPA this approach results in less than 1% of the administered dose being bioavailable in blood. It also ignores dermal absorption as well as sublingual absorption in the mouth that both bypass first-pass liver metabolism. The elevated levels of BPA that we observed due to holding thermal paper after using a product containing dermal penetration enhancing chemicals have been related to an increased risk for a wide range of developmental abnormalities as well as diseases in adults.
according to this link, bpa is not as dangerous as previously thought.. if so, why do they drop the TDI (total daily intake) rate? :
http://www.bfr.bund.de/cm/349/no-health-...ssment.pdf
In January 2015, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) published a new opinion on the assessment of the health risks associated with Bisphenol A (BPA) in foods and from other, non-dietary sources. In this opinion, the EFSA experts conclude that based on the current scientific evidence and given the current levels of consumer exposure, BPA does not pose a health risk for any age group. This also applies to unborn children, infants and young adolescents. New data and more sophisticated methods have led the EFSA experts to significantly reduce the tolerable daily intake (TDI) for BPA - from 50 micrograms per kilogramme of bodyweight per day (µg/kg bw/day) to 4 µg/kg bw/day. In view of this new assessment, the highest estimates of the exposure derived from foods alone or in combination with other sources (diet, house dust, cosmetics and thermal paper) are 3 to 5 times below the new TDI value. Uncertainties regarding possible health effects of BPA on the mammary gland, the reproductive, metabolic and immune systems and in relation to neurobehavioural disorders have been analysed and taken into account in the calculation of the TDI. The TDI must be seen as a temporary value as long as the results of a long-term study on rats, a study which aims to eliminate those uncertainties, are still pending. The BfR welcomes the fact that extensive data from Europe was taken into account in the exposure calculation and, given the uncertainties of the overall BPA data situation, endorses the derivation of the new temporary TDI.
I don't know, maybe I am reading it wrong?
leads me to believe in the "feminization of America" theory