There is also no question that our biologically generated estrone, estrial, estradial, and it metabolites have varying degrees of “strength”, if I may use that term. The same is true of phthalates and phytoestrogens such as soy. Neither of the latter substances come close to having the same kind of kind of effects on the human body as the former. It is more likely that the effects that are cited in the article you posted are from an endogenous imbalance of the many different estrogens and their metabolites (ie the 2-, 4-, and 16-alpha-hydroxderivatives of estrone).
When someone attempts to use such words as “estrogen-like compounds”, “estrogen disruptors” and the phrase “There is no question that hormonal compounds can have effects at extremely low concentrations” alarm bells go off in my head. It tells me that they have no clue as to what they are talking about. It also tells me that they have an agenda which has no basis in scientific fact but are working to reach only a consensus. Consensus, as we have seen in the concept of man-made global warming, is not science at all but politics masquerading as science.
I just read the rest of the posts. Every one posting on this article who works for the EPA or receives grant money from a government, either foreign or domestic, to study the environment please raise your hand.....I thought so.
I did some research on the internet today about the relative effects of estrogens, phytoestrogens, and xenoestogens like BPA. It has been shown that BPA can affect some cells in part-per-trillion (picomolar) concentrations. This paper looked at the effects on cells of low concentrations of various estrogen-like substances. As shown in the following graphs from this study, at nanomolar concentrations, BPA can even have a stronger effect than estradiol:
When someone attempts to use such words as estrogen-like compounds, estrogen disruptors and the phrase There is no question that hormonal compounds can have effects at extremely low concentrations alarm bells go off in my head. It tells me that they have no clue as to what they are talking about. It also tells me that they have an agenda which has no basis in scientific fact
This article describes the science and history behind this new work.