Study finds evidence of 55 new chemicals in people

phys.org ^ | MARCH 17, 2021 | University of California, San Francisco

[BenLurkin]

Scientists at UC San Francisco have detected 109 chemicals in a study of pregnant women, including 55 chemicals never before reported in people and 42 "mystery chemicals," whose sources and uses are unknown.

The chemicals most likely come from consumer products or other industrial sources. They were found both in the blood of pregnant women, as well as their newborn children, suggesting they are traveling through the mother's placenta.

"These chemicals have probably been in people for quite some time, but our technology is now helping us to identify more of them...It is alarming that we keep seeing certain chemicals travel from pregnant women to their children, which means these chemicals can be with us for generations,"

"These new technologies are promising in enabling us to identify more chemicals in people, but our study findings also make clear that chemical manufacturers need to provide analytical standards so that we can confirm the presence of chemicals and evaluate their toxicity,"

The 109 chemicals researchers found in the blood samples from pregnant women and their newborns are found in many different types of products. For example, 40 are used as plasticizers, 28 in cosmetics, 25 in consumer products, 29 as pharmaceuticals, 23 as pesticides, 3 as flame retardants, and 7 are PFAS compounds, which are used in carpeting, upholstery, and other applications. The researchers say it's possible there are also other uses for all of these chemicals.

The researchers report that 55 of the 109 chemicals they tentatively identified appear not to have been previously reported in people:

[Larry Lucido]

Study finds evidence of 55 new chemicals in people

And that's just in Hunter Biden.

[LukeL]

How many times does this article use the word chemical? It reads like a 10th grader wrote it for his chemistry class.

[albie]

NOW what are we supposed to stop eating that we’ve been eating but is really, really bad for us?

[alternatives?]

I saw the 55 and thought Biden was going to change the speed limit.

[JaguarXKE]

The chemicals most likely come from consumer products or other industrial sources.

Or...since it is San Francisco...

[Vaduz]

Better living through chemistry

DuPont ad in the 70’s

[DannyTN]

14 in the extract including 1 in the title.

3 in one sentence alone.

[Red Badger]

And we wonder why we have cancers......................

[BenLurkin]

It’s almost as if the information presented is somehow related to chemicals.

[Carpe Cerevisi]

Reading this “news” story gave me cancer.

[PghBaldy]

Mango!

[oldasrocks]

All of it drifting over from china. Imagine what blood work from a chinese citizen would show.

[Leep]

Can’t biden sign a EO that eliminates them?

[z3n]

Better living through chemistry

DuPont ad in the 70’s

~~~

All of life is chemistry. Hell, all of the material universe and it’s physics is chemical.

But yeah, I hate to sound like an environmentalist, but we have been trending toward the industrialization of food sources for over a century, mostly to make supply and processing cheaper, and it’s not a good thing at all.

[JimRed]

Are they NEW chemicals, or just new combinations of the old ones?

[proxy_user]

Just wait until they discover people are made entirely out of chemicals!

[fruser1]

Maybe their spectrometer is broken.

[Repeal The 17th]

From the article:
“...these chemicals have probably been in people
for quite some time, but our technology is
now helping us to identify more of them...”
-
So these are not “new chemicals” in our bodies,
but “new technology” is now able to detect them.

[DannyTN]

"It’s almost as if the information presented is somehow related to chemicals."

Either they are trying to drive home the point that it's a LOT of chemicals.

Or they are afraid to use pronouns.