Currently viewing the category: "BPA"
Bookmark and Share
Agent Orange – Infertility In Children Of Vietnam Veterans
AGENT ORANGE INFERTILITY CHILDREN OF VIETNAM VETERANS AO2GEN COVVHA.NET
“You Might Be Infertile Because Your Grandparents Were Mucking Around in Harmful Chemicals”

New research shows that if your grandmother or even your great-grandmother came in contact with some very common environmental chemicals, you could be suffering the consequences today in the form of male infertility, ovarian disease and the early or late onset of puberty.

It’s freaky when you think about it. It means that generations ago, for example, a pregnant woman was exposed to, say, DEET, the most common insect repellant in the whole world. Her baby grew up to have his own children and passed along mutations that occurred during mom’s exposure. Those children went on to also pass along those changes when they had their own kids, and there’s no telling how many future generations might be affected.

Michael Skinner and his colleagues at Washington State University in Pullman, Washington, published data supporting this phenomenon today in Public Libray of Sciences. In addition to DEET, they looked at several other common chemicals including those found in soft plastics, pesticides, and jet fuel. They also looked at dioxin, the contaminant in Agent Orange.

Skinner and his colleagues have published several other studies looking at a chemical called vinclozolin, a common fungicide used on crops. They found it impaired fertility, and that the effect was carried down through generations. Now, the scientists are adding BPA, phthalates, pesticides, DEET, permethrin, dioxin, jet fuel, hydrocarbons, and JP8 to the list of chemicals with a similar effect.

“We didn’t expect them all to have transgenerational effects, but all of them did,” Skinner told me. “I thought hydrocarbon would be negative but it was positive too. This tells us that it’s not simply a unique aspect for a unique compound but that many environmental compounds have the ability to do this.”

The reasons behind choosing which chemicals to study partly came from the Department of Defense, which initiated the study. Why jet fuel? Because military bases spray it on roads to control dust. That’s also why they looked at three plastic compounds found in disposable water bottles: troops stationed overseas almost always drink bottled water.

Bookmark and Share

On October 16, 2011, Kelly L. Derricks (TRUTH TELLER) traveled to New York City where she gave a public speech about Agent Orange after being invited by Millions Against Monsanto to participate in the rally event for World Food Day.  Below is the video recording of that speech.

Kelly has battled severe health issues since she was born that continue today. Some of her illnesses, presumed to be associated with the inter-generational effects of Agent Orange, include but are not limited to the following:

• Chronic kidney disease
• Crohn’s disease
• Addison’s disease
• Congenital adrenal hyperplaysia
• Intersticial cystitis.

*Her complete list of illnesses staggers to 30 different things.

Kelly continues to fight for the Children of Vietnam Veterans as well as Vietnam Veterans and their families. In January of 2012 She Co-Founded The Non-Profit Organization (COVVHA) Children Of Vietnam Veterans Health Alliance INC

Visit The Main Website At WWW.COVVHA.NET

https://www.youtube.com/user/teppnme?feature=watch

Bookmark and Share


Progress Being Made In Autism Research (via redOrbit)

Connie K. Ho for RedOrbit.com Out of four million children born each year in the United States, 400,000 to 600,000 are born with neurodevelopmental disorders – including autism. With this alarming rate, there has been an increase in the amount of research done to examine the disorder.  Recent studies…

Read Full Article →

Bookmark and Share

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced on Friday that they would not ban the use of a controversial chemical used in food packaging, various media outlets have reported.

At least trace amounts of BPA, which Bloomberg said is created by combining phenol and acetone, are present in the systems of a reported 90% of all US citizens. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) report that the substance could have a negative impact on the brains and prostates of fetuses and young children, and Kaskey added that some scientists believe that BPA can cause adverse effects on the reproductive and nervous systems, especially in infants and small children.

“Scientists are still working to determine what effects BPA, which mimics estrogen in the body, has on human health once ingested,” added Bettina Boxall and Eryn Brown of the Los Angeles Times. “They know that… it has been shown to have negative effects in mice, including developmental and reproductive abnormalities, precancerous changes in the prostate and breasts, and other health problems. In epidemiological studies, researchers have reported correlations between BPA levels in people and higher risk of ailments including cardiovascular disease, diabetes and liver problems.”

Click Here To Read The Full Article 

Bookmark and Share

Just days ago, this child recited a speech that he wrote at the recent Monsanto shutdown.
I watched with tears in my eyes at his bravery, and now I ask,

WHAT HAVE YOU DONE???

Truth Teller

YouTube Channel

Bookmark and Share

People exposed to higher levels of Bisphenol A (BPA), a chemical widely used in food packaging, may have a slightly higher risk of heart disease, according to UK researchers.

They can’t say for sure if some factor other than BPA, like weight or blood pressure, might be the underlying reason for the heart problems. Still, this is the third study from the team to find such a link.

“We’ve now shown this association in two quite separate ways, in completely different people… and at very different exposure levels,” said lead researcher Dr. David Melzer of Peninsula Medical College in Exeter, UK. “It’s getting a bit intriguing, really.”

BPA’s potential health effects are controversial. The chemical is used in countless consumer products, including drinking bottles and the lining of tin cans. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which originally stated that the chemical was safe, is now rethinking that position. According to the agency’s website, “recent studies provide reason for some concern about the potential effects of BPA on the brain, behavior, and prostate gland of fetuses, infants and children.”
The FDA has reportedly said it will decide at the end of this month if BPA should be banned from food and beverage packaging.

Major manufacturers of baby bottles in the United States no longer use BPA in their products, Canada has declared the chemical a toxin, and the French government has banned its use in food packaging. Exposure to BPA has been tied to behavioral problems in girls, a hormonal syndrome in women, and a variety of physiological effects in animals
(see Reuters Health stories of October 24, 2011 and January 11, 2011).

But whether BPA is actually to blame for these health problems is still a matter of debate.

Bookmark and Share

People exposed to higher levels of Bisphenol A (BPA), a chemical widely used in food packaging, may have a slightly higher risk of heart disease, according to UK researchers.

They can’t say for sure if some factor other than BPA, like weight or blood pressure, might be the underlying reason for the heart problems. Still, this is the third study from the team to find such a link.

“We’ve now shown this association in two quite separate ways, in completely different people… and at very different exposure levels,” said lead researcher Dr. David Melzer of Peninsula Medical College in Exeter, UK. “It’s getting a bit intriguing, really.”

BPA’s potential health effects are controversial. The chemical is used in countless consumer products, including drinking bottles and the lining of tin cans. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which originally stated that the chemical was safe, is now rethinking that position. According to the agency’s website, “recent studies provide reason for some concern about the potential effects of BPA on the brain, behavior, and prostate gland of fetuses, infants and children.”
The FDA has reportedly said it will decide at the end of this month if BPA should be banned from food and beverage packaging.

Major manufacturers of baby bottles in the United States no longer use BPA in their products, Canada has declared the chemical a toxin, and the French government has banned its use in food packaging. Exposure to BPA has been tied to behavioral problems in girls, a hormonal syndrome in women, and a variety of physiological effects in animals
(see Reuters Health stories of October 24, 2011 and January 11, 2011).

But whether BPA is actually to blame for these health problems is still a matter of debate.

www.COVVHA.net
Bookmark and Share
Under Pressure from Parents, Advocacy Groups, Campbell’s Goes BPA-Free

To date, the FDA has maintained that BPA does not pose a health threat at the low levels at which it appears in canned and packaged foods. Several researchers and public health advocates, however, have argued that the average load a person consumes is far more than the levels set for any one product, and that the chemical has negative effects even at very low levels. Others argue that the FDA’s average daily exposure estimates are way off. According to independent studies conducted by Consumer Reports in 2009, “Consumers eating just one serving of the canned vegetable soup we tested would get about double what the FDA now considers typical average dietary daily exposure.” [Progresso, Campbell's, and Del Monte products had the highest BPA levels of the products tested.]

Anticipating not only a potential FDA change on BPA, but also continued consumer backlash, Campbell’s announced today its plan to phase out the use of the chemical in its can linings. Although the company has not announced a specific timeline, or released any further details of its BPA-free commitment, at a February shareholders meeting, Campbell’s Chief Financial Officer Craig Owens reported that the shift to BPA-free cans had already begun, and would not impose a significant cost to the company.

We believe that current can packaging is one of the safest options in the world; however, we recognize that there is some debate over the use of BPA,” he said. “The trust that we have earned from our consumers for over 140 years is paramount to us and we have been monitoring and working on the issue for several years. Because of this, we have already started using alternatives to BPA in some of our soup packaging and we are working to phase out the use of BPA in the lining of all of our canned products. The cost of this effort is not expected to be material.”

Under Pressure from Parents, Advocacy Groups, Campbell’s Goes BPA-Free

Bookmark and Share
Under Pressure from Parents, Advocacy Groups, Campbell’s Goes BPA-Free

To date, the FDA has maintained that BPA does not pose a health threat at the low levels at which it appears in canned and packaged foods. Several researchers and public health advocates, however, have argued that the average load a person consumes is far more than the levels set for any one product, and that the chemical has negative effects even at very low levels. Others argue that the FDA’s average daily exposure estimates are way off. According to independent studies conducted by Consumer Reports in 2009, “Consumers eating just one serving of the canned vegetable soup we tested would get about double what the FDA now considers typical average dietary daily exposure.” [Progresso, Campbell's, and Del Monte products had the highest BPA levels of the products tested.]

Anticipating not only a potential FDA change on BPA, but also continued consumer backlash, Campbell’s announced today its plan to phase out the use of the chemical in its can linings. Although the company has not announced a specific timeline, or released any further details of its BPA-free commitment, at a February shareholders meeting, Campbell’s Chief Financial Officer Craig Owens reported that the shift to BPA-free cans had already begun, and would not impose a significant cost to the company.

We believe that current can packaging is one of the safest options in the world; however, we recognize that there is some debate over the use of BPA,” he said. “The trust that we have earned from our consumers for over 140 years is paramount to us and we have been monitoring and working on the issue for several years. Because of this, we have already started using alternatives to BPA in some of our soup packaging and we are working to phase out the use of BPA in the lining of all of our canned products. The cost of this effort is not expected to be material.”

Under Pressure from Parents, Advocacy Groups, Campbell’s Goes BPA-Free

www.COVVHA.net
Bookmark and Share
“You Might Be Infertile Because Your Grandparents Were Mucking Around in Harmful Chemicals”

New research shows that if your grandmother or even your great-grandmother came in contact with some very common environmental chemicals, you could be suffering the consequences today in the form of male infertility, ovarian disease and the early or late onset of puberty.

It’s freaky when you think about it. It means that generations ago, for example, a pregnant woman was exposed to, say, DEET, the most common insect repellant in the whole world. Her baby grew up to have his own children and passed along mutations that occurred during mom’s exposure. Those children went on to also pass along those changes when they had their own kids, and there’s no telling how many future generations might be affected.

Michael Skinner and his colleagues at Washington State University in Pullman, Washington, published data supporting this phenomenon today in Public Libray of Sciences. In addition to DEET, they looked at several other common chemicals including those found in soft plastics, pesticides, and jet fuel. They also looked at dioxin, the contaminant in Agent Orange.

Skinner and his colleagues have published several other studies looking at a chemical called vinclozolin, a common fungicide used on crops. They found it impaired fertility, and that the effect was carried down through generations. Now, the scientists are adding BPA, phthalates, pesticides, DEET, permethrin, dioxin, jet fuel, hydrocarbons, and JP8 to the list of chemicals with a similar effect.

“We didn’t expect them all to have transgenerational effects, but all of them did,” Skinner told me. “I thought hydrocarbon would be negative but it was positive too. This tells us that it’s not simply a unique aspect for a unique compound but that many environmental compounds have the ability to do this.”

The reasons behind choosing which chemicals to study partly came from the Department of Defense, which initiated the study. Why jet fuel? Because military bases spray it on roads to control dust. That’s also why they looked at three plastic compounds found in disposable water bottles: troops stationed overseas almost always drink bottled water.

www.COVVHA.net
Bookmark and Share

For the past 20 years, much of MU biology professor Frederick vom Saal’s research, thoughts and time have converged into one point: trying to get endocrine disruptors — chemicals that interfere with the hormone system and can cause obesity, infertility and cancer — out of daily use.

He’s accomplished the laboratory part, which resulted in dozens of scientific papers outlining the negative effects of bisphenol-A, an endocrine disruptor found in plastics.

How to minimize your exposure to BPA
Several changes in shopping and eating habits can help minimize everyday exposure to BPA:
Avoid water bottles and baby bottles that contain BPA and instead choose BPA-free products, which are sold in several supermarkets.
Don’t heat food in the microwave using plastic containers.
Try to touch fewer cash register receipts.
Avoid canned vegetables and canned soup; use fresh products instead.
Choose glass over cans for drinks.

BPA is a chemical used to make plastic more durable. It is found in plastic No. 3 and No. 7, which is used to make baby bottles among other baby products. It is also used in the production of some food cans. Frederick vom Saal, MU professor, has concerns about the effects of long-term exposure to BPA, especially for fetuses and young children.

Frederick vom Saal, 67, a MU biology professor, poses in his laboratory in Lefevre Hall at MU on Nov. 13. Vom Saal’s research centers on the effects of endocrine disruptors, found in commercial products such as plastics, food cans and other household products, on the human hormone system. He has completed his research and is now trying to convince U.S. authorities to regulate the chemical and remove it from daily use. Eleven states, Canada, China and the European Union have enacted legislation prohibiting and restricting the use of endocrine disruptors in commercial products.

Endocrine disruptors are everywhere in the environment: in plastics, food cans, clothing fabrics, furniture and household and beauty products.

Now he’s doing the communicator’s part, trying to convince U.S. authorities to regulate the chemicals.

In mid-September, vom Saal was among 20 scientists who met in a closed session in St. Louis to discuss why, in the face of what they see as mountainous evidence, U.S. regulatory agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration don’t ban endocrine-disrupting chemicals.

Vom Saal’s work, and that of other scientists, has so far persuaded 11 states, Canada, China and the European Union to enact legislation prohibiting or restricting endocrine disruptors. Now he’s making further attempts to crack a tougher nut: the U.S. regulatory system.

That’s why Vom Saal, 67, spent most of the first week of October away from his beloved laboratory mice. Instead, he knuckled down at the computer in his office in Lefevre Hall, surrounded by figurine mice and a drawing of a wide-eyed rodent. He had a paper to write.

Seen as a three-act play, vom Saal’s pursuit is near the end of its second act — influencing federal regulation on endocrine disruptors.  Getting to Act 3 might be up to the public.

“As a scientist I feel I have an obligation to identify when, in fact, science and government policy are not consistent with each other,” vom Saal says. “And that’s what I’m doing.” Read Full Article

www.COVVHA.net
Bookmark and Share

For the past 20 years, much of MU biology professor Frederick vom Saal’s research, thoughts and time have converged into one point: trying to get endocrine disruptors — chemicals that interfere with the hormone system and can cause obesity, infertility and cancer — out of daily use.

He’s accomplished the laboratory part, which resulted in dozens of scientific papers outlining the negative effects of bisphenol-A, an endocrine disruptor found in plastics.

How to minimize your exposure to BPA
Several changes in shopping and eating habits can help minimize everyday exposure to BPA:
Avoid water bottles and baby bottles that contain BPA and instead choose BPA-free products, which are sold in several supermarkets.
Don’t heat food in the microwave using plastic containers.
Try to touch fewer cash register receipts.
Avoid canned vegetables and canned soup; use fresh products instead.
Choose glass over cans for drinks.

BPA is a chemical used to make plastic more durable. It is found in plastic No. 3 and No. 7, which is used to make baby bottles among other baby products. It is also used in the production of some food cans. Frederick vom Saal, MU professor, has concerns about the effects of long-term exposure to BPA, especially for fetuses and young children.

Frederick vom Saal, 67, a MU biology professor, poses in his laboratory in Lefevre Hall at MU on Nov. 13. Vom Saal’s research centers on the effects of endocrine disruptors, found in commercial products such as plastics, food cans and other household products, on the human hormone system. He has completed his research and is now trying to convince U.S. authorities to regulate the chemical and remove it from daily use. Eleven states, Canada, China and the European Union have enacted legislation prohibiting and restricting the use of endocrine disruptors in commercial products.

Endocrine disruptors are everywhere in the environment: in plastics, food cans, clothing fabrics, furniture and household and beauty products.

Now he’s doing the communicator’s part, trying to convince U.S. authorities to regulate the chemicals.

In mid-September, vom Saal was among 20 scientists who met in a closed session in St. Louis to discuss why, in the face of what they see as mountainous evidence, U.S. regulatory agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration don’t ban endocrine-disrupting chemicals.

Vom Saal’s work, and that of other scientists, has so far persuaded 11 states, Canada, China and the European Union to enact legislation prohibiting or restricting endocrine disruptors. Now he’s making further attempts to crack a tougher nut: the U.S. regulatory system.

That’s why Vom Saal, 67, spent most of the first week of October away from his beloved laboratory mice. Instead, he knuckled down at the computer in his office in Lefevre Hall, surrounded by figurine mice and a drawing of a wide-eyed rodent. He had a paper to write.

Seen as a three-act play, vom Saal’s pursuit is near the end of its second act — influencing federal regulation on endocrine disruptors.  Getting to Act 3 might be up to the public.

“As a scientist I feel I have an obligation to identify when, in fact, science and government policy are not consistent with each other,” vom Saal says. “And that’s what I’m doing.” Read Full Article

© 2013 ‎(COVVHA) Children Of Vietnam Veterans Health Alliance INC
Print Our Flyer!!! Subscribe To COVVHA  Join Us On Google+