Food Can Chemicals 'Could Be Linked to Early Puberty in Girls'

Telegraph.co.uk ^ | 8:30AM BST 07 Apr 2010 | Alastair Jamieson

[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.

More

[wideminded]

the environmental whack jobs that are claiming plastics are the cause

There is no question that phthalates are endocrine disruptors.

The is no question that they are ubiquitous in the products we use and so people are being exposed to estrogen-like chemicals that they didn't used to be exposed to.

There is no question that hormonal compounds can have effects at extremely low concentrations.

A person is not a whack job if they point out that maybe this combination of factors could be a serious problem and it is certainly worth investigating.

These estrogens reach our water treatment plants and end up back in our tap water.

I have heard that although there are water treatment plants that feed directly back into the tap water system, this is not yet common.

[9YearLurker]

Great, chemicals are sexualizing our girls at earlier and earlier ages—while feminizing the boys. Talk about frustration!

[Mase]

Ancient history. Never happened. Nothing to see here. Moving along.

I have no idea what you're talking about. Do you? Is this your admission that you have nothing to refute what I've said?

Honestly, there is a real problem with our food supply

You just can't identify what that problem is or back it up with sound scientific evidence.

when the people involved in the production and distribution of our food don’t know any better than to taint it with additives

Yet the people who produce the food and distribute it feed it to their families. They must be real evil SOB's. Have you ever even bothered to study the ingredients you rail against or do you simply believe everything you read on the internet?

that everyone with more than a single-digit IQ know is just plain wrong.

I don't understand why you have a much higher IQ but still can't explain to us why these things are "just plain wrong."

OTOH, myself, and many others like me, spend years in a classroom studying chemistry, biology, nutrition and physiology, and then work for decades in the industry further developing our knowledge, only to have someone who's never bothered to learn jack squat about the subject tell us we have single digit IQ's. Do you see the problem here?

Here are the facts....The FDA has studied the amount of hormones in milk treated with bST and milk from cows that were not given any growth hormones. They found the level of hormones in both test batches to be identical. There have been thousands of studies measuring hormone levels in milk from cows given synthetic hormone injections vs. those that have not. Supplemental administration of bST does not affect the quantity of bST found in milk or the milk's composition. In fact, 90% or so of the hormones in milk are destroyed during the pasteurization process. Those are the facts and they are supported by thousands of studies undertaken by academia, government and industry.

Beef cattle are also given growth hormones. I suppose you think that causes "real problems" too. As an example, a recent study found that 3 oz. of beef from an untreated animal contains approximately 1.3 nanograms of estrogen, while the same amount of meat from a treated animal would contain about 1.9 nanograms (one nanogram is one one-billionth of a gram). Does this sound dangerous to you? If so, then, like I suggested before, you shouldn't be commenting on the subject. As a comparison, a woman (not pregnant) produces approximately 500,0000 nanograms of estrogen per day.

It's clear you fear things you have no understanding of. The issue with young girls reaching puberty early is probably caused by greater body weight and fat in young girls today than in the past. It is also a fact that young girls today drink less milk than their mothers did. It's pretty hard to pinpoint a cause when can't find a correlation. But you keep trying.

[BykrBayb]

You wasted a lot of words, just to get back to the point that you don’t know any better than to inject cattle with artificial hormones, and feed them beef. Regurgitating words from the glossary of your fourth grade science book doesn’t make you look intelligent. It doesn’t conceal a lack of common sense.

[Mase]

Endocrine disruptors are all around us. They can be found naturally in more than three hundred plants that can bind with receptors in humans. Naturally occurring estrogens are common in many cereals, legumes, fruits, and vegetables. Chocolate, garlic, celery, coffee, grapefruit, tea, and other foods we enjoy every day have been shown to have antispermatogenic activity. It's difficult for many to remain balanced and objective when considering man-made chemicals in the environment that allegedly disrupt hormonal systems vs. the much greater amount of these disruptors we consume from everyday foods people have been enjoying for a long, long time.

Further study may be warranted but the fear is not.

[Mase]

I know, I know. Science was hard for you so you chose to ignore it in the hope that it would go away. Didn't work out too well, did it? If you were as smart as you want everyone to believe you are you'd be able to show us that synthetic hormones are different than the ones produced naturally. They aren't so you're left alone on your Luddite world with only insults to offer. You fears are based on ignorance and that's unfortunate. It's a good thing our health and welfare is in the hands of people who paid attention in school and who strive to understand how the world works. You're just along for the ride but that won't stop you from trying to tell others how to drive.

[BykrBayb]

Water is all around us too. That doesn’t make it smart to do stupid things with it.

[BykrBayb]

I know, I know. Science was hard for you, so you chose to memorize the glossary in the hope that somebody would believe you understood what the words mean. Didn’t work out too well, did it?

[mrreaganaut]

I remember a study a few years ago that condemned the high levels of estrogen (from soy?) in “negro” hair-care products; supposedly daily use produced pubescent hair growth even in toddlers. I’m not saying it’s true, just that I’ve heard it before.

[Mase]

Reading your posts reminds me of that admonition about wasting valuable time arguing with idiots on the internet.

[texmexis best]

Cattle are not fed beef. Their high protein portions come from corn and corn by-products such as dry distiller’s corn.

Dairy cows, when producing milk, take in about fifty lbs of corn (sileage) a day in addition to the grass that they eat.

[BykrBayb]

You’ve wasted valuable time pretending to know things you have no understanding of. Your elementary use of some memorized phrases can’t cover up the fact that you don’t understand what you’re talking about. Making it sound complicated to no one but yourself, can’t cover up the fact that you don’t understand a very simple truth.

[BykrBayb]

Am I the only here who’s heard of mad cow disease?

[Mase]

Ok, you poser, explain it to me. Take issue with anything I've offered here and back it up with something other than BS. I say you can't because you've never taken the time to learn about what it is you're ranting mindlessly about. It's easier to rant incoherently and offer nonsense than it is to prove you have a clue.

It isn't all that complicated, so go ahead, show us what you know. Either put up or STFU. Are you someone who understand the issue or are you just another fool with a keyboard?

[BykrBayb]

Holy cow! Did you say fifty pound of corn per day? Please tell me you didn’t say that. That’s about twice their entire dietary intake of dry food.

[texmexis best]

“Am I the only here who’s heard of mad cow disease?”

No you’re not. But some of us have been in agriculture and know that the beef protein supplements were banned many years ago. Which is why we haven’t had any mad cow disease.
Or not much anyway.

They may be used in other countries but I doubt it.

[BykrBayb]

Do you have a question? If it relates to the ongoing conversation, I haven’t changed my mind. Was my explanation too complicated for you to understand?

[Balding_Eagle]

The biggest factor besides heredity in pubertal onset is body fat, nutrition, and level of exercise. Combine higher fat, calorie dense diets with low levels of exercise and a girl’s body tells itself it’s ready for childbearing a heck of a lot quicker than a pre-teen from 1782 who is hauling well-water three times a day and eating meat twice a week.

That's it exactly.

Seesh, even FreeRepublic has a bunch of anti-food nuts.

[BykrBayb]

I realize it hasn’t been used here recently.

[BykrBayb]

We have a whole generation of people who never learned what real food was.