Water bottles and wrinkles

WCBD ^ | 6/2/08

[LibWhacker]

Water is touted by many as the world's healthiest drink.

Some call it the secret to losing weight; others say it can be cure-all for things like dry skin, hair and nails, but one doctor says drinking bottled water could actually be like smoking three packs of cigarettes a day.

According to D.C. dermatologist Dr. Marilyn Berzin, dozens of women have come in puzzled by lines and wrinkles around their lips.

It's a condition termed "smoker's lips" because of the similar pattern of wrinkles found on the faces of long-term, heavy smokers.

But many of the women have never smoked a day in their life.

Instead, they're drinking from water bottles.

"When you're drinking from a water bottle, you're pretty much making the same face as you are when you're smoking a cigarette," said Berzin.

Berzin said that over time that face creates permanent lines.

People who drink from water bottles with either sport or straw tops or nozzles, consistently, all day long, for about two years, will start to develop noticeable smokers lips, according to Berzin.

And it's not just older people.

Berzin said she has had patients as young as their 30s.

Berzin recommended that water drinkers use wide-mouthed bottles or cups, allowing the upper lip to stay relaxed while drinking.

Melissa, 54, is the picture of health.

She runs, bikes and competes in triathlons.

That's why she needs to keep hydrated.

She said she drinks out of water bottles while at work and while working out.

"It never occurred to me that hydration was detrimental to my face," Melissa said.

She said she's not giving up her water habit or changing her bottle.

Instead, she's choosing to get a cosmetic treatment to fix the problem.

Typically, doctors will use a filler to fill in the wrinkles around people's lips.

But, if it's not too late, Berzin emphasizes avoiding bottles that have a sports top.

[sono]

Bottled water is a scam. The EPA and DOH regulate tap water far more stringently than the FDA regulates bottle water.

[Hazwaste]

Some people call that the "O" face.

[GoldMan]

It’s that constant scowl from being mad at the world.

[A_perfect_lady]

Now see? Everything I drink is either in a coffee mug or a wine glass, and at 42, my upper lip is as smooth as the front bumper of a Lotus Elan.

Like this.

Only not blue.

[Snoopers-868th]

And this is just some more crap—it is in the genes plain and simple. I am so sick of this crap being touted as one issue after another. Not all smokers have wrinkled lips either.

[LibertyRocks]

The doctors who use Botox are cheering!

[Neoliberalnot]

Yes, bottled water is a scam costing far more than a barrel of oil. The bigger issue from drinking constantly from hard plastic bottles is the low level ingestion of bisphenol-A, an estrogenic compound responsible for many ill effects. Vom Saal et al, suggest this compound is responsible for all manner of adverse effects including weight gain. Solution—drink your liquids from glass and drink no more than required to satisfy your thirst.

[GRRRRR]

There is NO BisA in water bottles made from PET.
This is another junk science hoax. go to Snopes.com and check it out, this and several other internet myths...sheesh!!

http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/petbottles.asp

[tet68]

You’re funny, and cute too.

[GRRRRR]

SOME of the SNopes.com article:

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates bottled water as a packaged food product and, for bottled water and all other foods and their packaging, FDA has determined that PET meets standards for food contact materials.

The basis for [the e-mail was] a college student's masters thesis that was not subject to peer review and did not reflect a level of scientific rigor that would provide accurate and reliable information about the safety of these products. Fortunately, FDA requires a much higher standard to make decisions about food contact packaging. DEHA, as mentioned in the email is neither regulated nor classified as a human carcinogen. Further, DEHA is not inherent in PET plastic as raw material, byproduct or decomposition product. DEHA has been cleared by FDA for food contact applications and would not pose a health risk even if present. DEHA is a common plasticizer used in many plastic items, many of which are found in the lab setting. For this reason, the student's detection (see comment above) is likely to have been the result of inadvertent lab contamination.

Also note that PET plastics used for bottled water containers are not unique to this product type and is the same as PET plastics used to package other common foods and beverages.

(Note that the e-mail misidentifies the DEHA used in production of PET plastic as diethylhydroxylamine. The plasticizer used in the production of PET is actually diethylhexyl adipate.)

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at one time included DEHA on the list of toxic chemicals maintained under the federal Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), but they have since removed it from the list because DEHA "cannot reasonably be anticipated to cause cancer, teratogenic effects, immunotoxicity, neurotoxicity, gene mutations, liver, kidney, reproductive, or developmental toxicity or other serious or irreversible chronic health effects." And, according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), diethylhexyl adipate "is not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans."

More recent studies have claimed that some plastic products (including plastic baby bottles) leach miniscule amounts of bisphenol A, a substance that has been linked to reproductive problems and cancer in lab rats, into liquids. However, whether bisphenol A poses the same risks to humans, and whether the small amount of bisphenol A that might be ingested through the use of plastic bottles is sufficiently large to be of concern, are still subjects of considerable debate:

[Environment California's] report is the latest rebuttal in the debate between environmental researchers and government bodies who disagree on the health risks of bisphenol A. While some reports, such as the study released by Environment California Research & Policy Center, conclude the chemical is hazardous at low doses, American, European and Japanese government agencies conclude the exposure to most people is negligible.

"I think that some of the things (Environment California) say are based somewhat on their political views," said David Weiss, assistant professor of chemistry at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, who reviewed the report and other studies on the topic.

He said the concentrations of the chemical are so low that they are below the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's "levels of concern."

The acceptable intake established by the EPA is .05 milligrams per kilogram of body weight per day. The study's findings are noted in "parts per billion," making a comparison difficult, though the study notes that the amount of bisphenol A found fell below the government standard.

Some cities, such as San Francisco, have enacted bans on toys and other plastic products containing bisphenol A for children under three years old.

As for the claim that freezing plastic bottles releases dioxins into the water they contain, Johns Hopkins researcher Dr. Rolf Halden says:

Q: What do you make of this recent email warning that claims dioxins can be released by freezing water in plastic bottles?

A: This is an urban legend. There are no dioxins in plastics. In addition, freezing actually works against the release of chemicals. Chemicals do not diffuse as readily in cold temperatures, which would limit chemical release if there were dioxins in plastic, and we don't think there are.

[A_perfect_lady]

Thanks! What’s a cruffler?

[Neoliberalnot]

I think I will go with Vom Saal publications in refereed science journals. I don’t put snopeys on a pedastal of full and honest truth.

[radiohead]

"When you're drinking from a water bottle, you're pretty much making the same face as you are when you're smoking a cigarette," said Berzin.
Berzin said that over time that face creates permanent lines.

Damn. If it's not one thing, it's another.

[tet68]

A cruffler is someone who has a Federal Curio and Relic firearms license, to collect firearms that fall within a
specific category. They must be over fifty years old or be
judged a Curio or Relic by the ATF.
Having a C&R license lets you buy direct from arms suppliers and have the UPS etc, deliver them right to your door.
It's the ATF’s secret plan to arm America.
Seriously, As a former Marine I had quite an interest in combat arms and being able to collect at wholesale makes it worth while.
Usually they arrive packed in grease and dirt but cleaning them up is part of the fun and they still work.

I have some that are a hundred years old but look almost like new and are very accurate too.
Only problem is they are so cheap you end up with lots of them and run out of space.

You can apply for $30 and a license is good for three years,
you must keep a Bound Record of all acquisitions and disposals and are subject to inspection by the ATF. Just look up cruffler on Google. Right now I mainly collect rifles from the Finnish Winter War / Continuation War period, that is the struggle against the Soviet Union before and during WW II. Probably more than you wanted to know but...

[Hot Tabasco]

Only not blue.

Uh, I think they put your steering wheel on the wrong side. is it still under warranty? LOL!

[GRRRRR]

check out the links at the website.

I actually work with people who understand polymer chemistry and materials science. I have developed products for medical applications using these materials that have been reviewed and approved by the FDA and other regulatory agencies, based on REAL science.

We’re talking parts per BILLION here. Many analytical tests do not have the accuracy and resolution to even measure that low. Levels of BisA in polycarbonate are below the level of the detection method in many cases.

Science journals...publish or perish....

[GRRRRR]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,25065,00.html

Excerpt from their story:

“Their claims are based in the work of Our Stolen Future cult leader and University of Missouri researcher Frederick vom Saal. His experiments on laboratory mice supposedly show that very low doses of some chemicals — thousands of times lower than current safe standards — increased prostate weight in male mice and advanced puberty in female mice.

No other laboratory has been able to reproduce vom Saal’s work. Traditionally, reproducibility of experiments is necessary before results may be considered “scientific.”

But vom Saal all but guaranteed that his work will never be reproduced. His experiments involved a unique strain of mice that he inbred in his laboratory for about 20 years. When the mice stopped producing the results he wanted, he killed them.

Without the same strain of mouse, vom Saal’s experiments can’t be reproduced by others and his work can’t be thoroughly evaluated.

But vom Saal didn’t have to kill his mice to prevent criticism of his work. Allies on the NTP panel would give him a free pass.

The panel met last October at the request of the Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA asked the panel to determine whether low doses of chemicals can interfere with hormonal processes. The EPA is required by a 1996 law to develop a screening program for chemicals suspected of having hormonal effects.

The panel asked the public to nominate studies to be reviewed. Ground rules required that a study’s raw data had to be submitted to the panel as a prerequisite for the study to be considered. The panel wanted to subject the data from these studies to “independent analysis.”

Vom Saal’s studies were nominated, but he didn’t submit his data. Inexplicably, the panel changed the ground rules to allow consideration of vom Saal’s studies anyway. The reason it did that had more to do with intimidation of panel members than science, according to those involved in the process.”

Looks like Vom Saal has some problems with his own research too...

http://www.google.com/search?q=vom+saal&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

[Neoliberalnot]

In my lab we routinely level ppb and sometimes 0.1 ppb levels of various elements with excellent QC. My undergrad degree is in chemistry so I know a little about such matters as well. I will not argue for vom Saal, but he has been well funded for years and has a number of refereed publications in some substantial peer-reviewed journals. I doubt all his work is a hoax. Wade Welshons has produced similar results in vitro using breast cancer cell lines and proven that BisPhenolA is in fact an estrogen receptor agonist of a high order. If you choose to believe Snopes is the gospel of science so be it—I don’t know of any scientists that publish there.

[GRRRRR]

Alrighty then,...just don’t eat or drink or breath anything, it’s all bad for us!!

Regards.