Posted on 04/08/2010 6:19:48 AM PDT by fight_truth_decay
Researchers investigating the use of phenols, phthalates and phytoestrogens, used in packaging as well as perfumes, lotions and shampoos, has found evidence they can cause harm by interfering with the body's hormones.
A study of the effects of the three compounds on 1,151 pre-pubescent girls in the US found they caused a variety of problems in puberty.
Dr Mary Wolff, an oncologist at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, said: "Research has shown that early pubertal development in girls can have adverse social and medical effects, including cancer and diabetes later in life.
"Our research shows a connection between chemicals that girls are exposed to on a daily basis and either delayed or early development. While more research is needed, these data are an important first step in continuing to evaluate the impact of these common environmental agents in putting girls at risk."
The chemicals increase durability in nail polishes and add fragrance to perfumes, lotions, and shampoos. Some are also used to increase the flexibility of plastics such as PVC, and as coatings on medications and nutritional supplements.
Phthalates are banned in cosmetics in Europe but are allowed in the United States.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
Except that organic milk contains the same hormones as "regular" milk. All milk contains BST. It doesn't matter whether it is synthetic or if it comes naturally from the cow's pituitary gland. However, organic milk producers love it when people are motivated in such a way as it makes for much better margins.
Because milk didn't have hormones in it 50 years ago? Good grief.
LOL!
Is this how they're explaining away bad parenting these days?
Bingo! That’s exactly what’s happening.
Great - now they’re coming after our cans?
I’ll bet Barney Frank is behind this.
Thanks. I will don my reading glasses now.
Cows were not injected with synthetic hormones 50 years ago. They also weren’t fed to each other in place of their normal diet.
Milk - does a body GOOOOOD.
The organic community proposes many things that don't make sense when considered through a perspective built on sound science. I fully understand why they want to differentiate their products. Unfortunately, trying to establish a difference via alarmism just isn't acceptable.
My point exactly. 50 years ago, consumers of milk were ingesting the same hormones they are today. Why are these hormones bad for you today when they weren't bad for you 50 years ago?
They also weren’t fed to each other in place of their normal diet.
Do you think domestic producers of beef are still feeding their animals products known to cause mad cow? Are grains a part of of a cow's "normal" diet? What constitutes a "normal" diet for cattle?
My DBF's niece is in this situation : She "developed" before she was 10, when she was about 4' 10" and 105 lbs . Today, she is going on 19, and stands 4' 11 1/2" and about 145 lbs. There are worse fates than being a grown women less than 5 feet tall...But I think your friends were wise to let their daughter get a a few years older before letting puberty "freeze" her at a particular height.
Darn it-I meant to ping you to my remark above, re: the 8 year old girl beginning to develop.
No, I don’t think you’re trying to make the same point. Synthetic hormones in mass quantities are not the same as trace amounts of natural hormones. Do you not see the difference?
Cows are herbivores, not cannibals. Grains are a part of their normal diet. Body parts from other cows are not part of their normal diet.
This potential problem has been on the radar since the 1960s. It is based on a double problem. First, is that tiny amounts of the various hormones are very powerful in the human body. The second is that there are a lot of natural and artificial chemicals that are chemically very similar to our hormones.
A good example are plant estrogen. It is similar enough to human estrogen that our bodies recognize it and react to it. As such, it is one of the ways that our bodies know what season it is, and react accordingly. This is why “mating season” is pretty universal. Even in the oceans, over the course of a few days each year, the water is awash with hormones and the entire ecosystem enters mating season.
Inside female plants, estrogen levels also determine growth, fruit size and yield. This is why farmers spray their fields with plant estrogen.
One of the first suggested problems, again back in the 1960s, was based on a phenomenon that happens among mammals during gestation. Typically, the brain of a fetus is “female” by default. But about halfway through gestation, a male fetus will secrete testosterone from its gonads. This testosterone travels to its brain and tells it that it is a “male” brain.
But this process can be interfered with by other chemicals. This results in “gender confusion” in humans (though importantly it does NOT determine sexual preference). And plant estrogen can play a big part in this.
Now, if you can just prove that synthetic bST is different from natural bST and that mass quantities of synthetic hormones are ending up in the finished product vs. trace amounts of natural occurring hormones, you'll really be on to something.
Cows are herbivores, not cannibals. Grains are a part of their normal diet. Body parts from other cows are not part of their normal diet.
I thought the FDA established a ban on the use of most animal protein in feed for cattle back in 1997. Maybe I'm not remembering correctly but I didn't think this was an issue anymore - at least with domestic production.
Ancient history. Never happened. Nothing to see here. Moving along.
Honestly, there is a real problem with our food supply when the people involved in the production and distribution of our food don’t know any better than to taint it with additives that everyone with more than a single-digit IQ know is just plain wrong.
I hate to break everyone’s bubble about their favorite chemical industry bogeyman, but women urinate estrogen, synthetic estrogens and progestins (and their metabolites) every day. These estrogens reach our water treatment plants and end up back in our tap water. TO DATE THERE IS NO WAY TO REMOVE ESTROGENS FROM OUR WATER SUPPLY. Several people are working on nano-membranes that would filter out these types of molecules, but they are 10 years out as far as a workable, affordable technology.
I also forgot to mention that the environmental whack jobs that are claiming plastics are the cause also conveniently forget to mention this estrogen pathway as well.
**It’s the hormones in milk.***
As Benny Hill used to say,
What is the difference between a vitamin and a hormone?
You can’t make a vitamin!
(wait for it, wait for it!)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.