klander
2014-12-27 08:29:05 UTC
Might want to make your next six-pack glass bottles. Cans and
plastic bottles are lined with a controversial chemical called
BPA, and while the CDC still says the chemical's health effects
are unclear, research on chronic exposure has linked it to high
blood pressure and heart rate issues.
To test the effects of drinking from cans, researchers in South
Korea provided 60 adults over the age of 60 with soy milk either
in a can or a glass bottle.
Urine tests showed that those who drank from cans saw BPA levels
up to 1,600% higher than those who drank from bottles, according
to a post at Eureka Alert.
What's more, both BPA and blood pressure rose significantly in
can-drinkers within a matter of hours, the New York Times
reports, noting that this is one of the first studies to
illustrate the potential risks of a just one BPA exposure.
An isolated experience of high blood pressure may not be that
dangerous, but people should think twice before drinking
regularly from cans or plastic bottles, an expert tells the
Times.
"A 5 mm Hg increase in systolic blood pressure by drinking two
canned beverages may cause clinically significant problems,
particularly in patients with heart disease or hypertension,"
says a researcher, noting that he hopes manufactures will come
up with "healthy alternatives" to BPA-lined cans.
But simply limiting BPA may not solve the problem.
http://www.newser.com/story/192325/bpa-free-doesnt-mean-your-
water-bottles-safe.html
(NEWSER) After health concerns prompted a ban on the chemical
BPA from our baby bottles, companies have touted the redesigned
baby bottles and water bottles as BPA-free. Unfortunately, that
label doesn't mean we're in the clear, according to recent
studies noted at Scientific American. Bottle makers "put 'BPA-
free' on the label, which is true. The thing they neglected to
tell you is that what they've substituted for BPA has not been
tested for the same kinds of problems that BPA has been shown to
cause," says a researcher from the University of Texas Medical
Branch at Galveston. Adds another from the University of
Calgary: "We're paying a premium for a 'safer' product that
isn't even safer."
Bisphenol A, or BPA, has been replaced with bisphenol S, or BPS,
which experts believed wouldn't leak into our drinks as much as
BPA did. But it turns out that BPS can be detected in the urine
of almost 81% of Americans. And research is suggesting that BPS
works a lot like BPA in the body. One study found that a
minuscule amount of the stuff messes with a cell in ways that
could lead to diabetes, asthma, or cancer. Another, via Popular
Science, suggests BPS "mimics" estrogen as well as BPA doesand
that could lead to sexual development issues. What we need, says
a researcher, is a federal agency to ensure new materials are
safe. (If you didn't have enough reasons to avoid it, BPA has
also been linked to miscarriage.)
plastic bottles are lined with a controversial chemical called
BPA, and while the CDC still says the chemical's health effects
are unclear, research on chronic exposure has linked it to high
blood pressure and heart rate issues.
To test the effects of drinking from cans, researchers in South
Korea provided 60 adults over the age of 60 with soy milk either
in a can or a glass bottle.
Urine tests showed that those who drank from cans saw BPA levels
up to 1,600% higher than those who drank from bottles, according
to a post at Eureka Alert.
What's more, both BPA and blood pressure rose significantly in
can-drinkers within a matter of hours, the New York Times
reports, noting that this is one of the first studies to
illustrate the potential risks of a just one BPA exposure.
An isolated experience of high blood pressure may not be that
dangerous, but people should think twice before drinking
regularly from cans or plastic bottles, an expert tells the
Times.
"A 5 mm Hg increase in systolic blood pressure by drinking two
canned beverages may cause clinically significant problems,
particularly in patients with heart disease or hypertension,"
says a researcher, noting that he hopes manufactures will come
up with "healthy alternatives" to BPA-lined cans.
But simply limiting BPA may not solve the problem.
http://www.newser.com/story/192325/bpa-free-doesnt-mean-your-
water-bottles-safe.html
(NEWSER) After health concerns prompted a ban on the chemical
BPA from our baby bottles, companies have touted the redesigned
baby bottles and water bottles as BPA-free. Unfortunately, that
label doesn't mean we're in the clear, according to recent
studies noted at Scientific American. Bottle makers "put 'BPA-
free' on the label, which is true. The thing they neglected to
tell you is that what they've substituted for BPA has not been
tested for the same kinds of problems that BPA has been shown to
cause," says a researcher from the University of Texas Medical
Branch at Galveston. Adds another from the University of
Calgary: "We're paying a premium for a 'safer' product that
isn't even safer."
Bisphenol A, or BPA, has been replaced with bisphenol S, or BPS,
which experts believed wouldn't leak into our drinks as much as
BPA did. But it turns out that BPS can be detected in the urine
of almost 81% of Americans. And research is suggesting that BPS
works a lot like BPA in the body. One study found that a
minuscule amount of the stuff messes with a cell in ways that
could lead to diabetes, asthma, or cancer. Another, via Popular
Science, suggests BPS "mimics" estrogen as well as BPA doesand
that could lead to sexual development issues. What we need, says
a researcher, is a federal agency to ensure new materials are
safe. (If you didn't have enough reasons to avoid it, BPA has
also been linked to miscarriage.)