The FDA Claims BPA Doesn't Harm, ... yet

[regeneratia]

http://search.eurekalert.org/e3/query.

Read more...

Research Headlines:

Higher urinary levels of commonly used chemical, BPA, linked with cardiovascular disease, diabetes

Exposure to BPA has been underestimated, new MU research says

Women with polycystic ovary syndrome may be more vulnerable to BPA

Recycled thermal cash register receipts spread BPA to other paper products: ACS podcast

BPA-exposed male deer mice are demasculinized and undesirable to females, new MU study ...

Workplace BPA exposure increases risk of male sexual dysfunction

BPA could affect reproductive capabilities, cause infection of the uterus

Consuming canned soup linked to greatly elevated levels of the chemical BPA

Exposure to chemical BPA before birth linked to behavioral, emotional difficulties in girls

BPA exposure in utero may increase predisposition to breast cancer

Fetal exposure to BPA changes development of uterus in primates

Parental exposure to BPA during pregnancy associated with decreased birth weight in offspring

BPA and testosterone levels

Mount Sinai researchers analyze impact of chemical BPA in dental sealants used in children

Sperm may be harmed by exposure to BPA, study suggests

Early life exposure to BPA may affect testis function in adulthood

Increasing BPA levels in urine associated with worsening male sexual function

Why BPA leached from 'safe' plastics may damage health of female offspring

Hard plastics decompose in oceans, releasing endocrine disruptor BPA

Component in plastic bottles found to cause abnormal pregnancies in mice

There is so much more on this.

So what do you think of the FDA decision?

Does this decision change how you feel about this particular government agency?

[RightInTheStatisticals]

Research Headlines:

...

So what do you think of the FDA decision?

Does this decision change how you feel about this particular government agency?

This is actually the first I've heard about BPA (I've learned and heard about so many things since I joined UM )

Might you provide links to a few of those research headlines?

As for changing my mind about the FDA, I doubt my mind will change. The FDA regulates quite a few things I would prefer to stay regulated and out of my body.

Also the query search you did on eurekalert seems to have not translated into the link you posted. Repost?

Can you also post a link to the FDA claim about BPA?

Thanks!

EDIT: nevermind the link that pops up didnt work , but the Read more link did work .. time to read.

EDIT 2: Well from the quick look at the articles I would probably disagree with the FDA, still doesn't change my stance about the FDA in general though. It looks like the market is responding to problem anyway by making BPA-free bottles.

Edited April 4, 2012 by RightInTheStatisticals

[regeneratia]

I did provide a link to the search that includes them all.

Re-review the link for the thread start.

I agree. However, while being a nurse, I can totally assure you I will never ever use statins, while I just did a continueing education that now states that a cardiac health org is recommending that all people, young and old, be on statins. Super strange, that recommendation.

You only get one liver, which does 108 functions in your body. Why cook your liver early, if at all, with liver-destroying statins?

And today we see, if one looks for this information, that fluoroquinolones cause retinal detachment, along with a huge list of massively undersirable side effects, including the common tendon problems. Yet the FDA will not stop the distribution of Cipro, a drug I swear never again to take unless my life is directly threatened and it is the fastest way to save my life.

There are so many drugs the FDA has approved that I would never ever put in my body.

They have recalled Resulin, Propulsid, Vioxx, to name just a few.

So, as for appearing as tho you are conscience, I would say you need to hit the research sites and find out what is real, instead of depending on the mindset that these Dr.s know exactly what they are doing. They don't!

This is actually the first I've heard about BPA (I've learned and heard about so many things since I joined UM )

Might you provide links to a few of those research headlines?

As for changing my mind about the FDA, I doubt my mind will change. The FDA regulates quite a few things I would prefer to stay regulated and out of my body.

Also the query search you did on eurekalert seems to have not translated into the link you posted. Repost?

Can you also post a link to the FDA claim about BPA?

Thanks!

EDIT: nevermind the link that pops up didnt work , but the Read more link did work .. time to read.

EDIT 2: Well from the quick look at the articles I would probably disagree with the FDA, still doesn't change my stance about the FDA in general though. It looks like the market is responding to problem anyway by making BPA-free bottles.

[WoIverine]

The FDA is also in bed with GMO / Aspartame Monsanto. They share several executives, and both are corrupt. Slow kill methods to keep the public sick, while big pharma cashes in on it, and serving to de-populate over time.

Edited April 5, 2012 by Spid3rCyd3

[Simbi Laveau]

Hot off the presses

http://www.care2.com/causes/fda-wont-ban-bpa-in-food.html

[WoIverine]

More than likely a few FDA officials are financially connected with this is some fashion. Same goes for their ties with Monsanto's carte blanche to push Aspartame, GMO's and only god knows what else. They're even working to strike down having to label specifically what goes on consumable product labeling, we won't even know what we're eating.

Edited April 5, 2012 by Spid3rCyd3

[regeneratia]

It might be a good idea to throw some money NRDC's way. I think I am going to.

I doubt they let off this, and bet they keep pushing it.

The science is behind the push to eliminate BPA in all things.

Recyclers need to get on it too.

As of today, I have decided NOT to recycle BPA products. I don't even handle sales tickets anymore. I make them put it in a sack all it's own.

Edited April 9, 2012 by regeneratia

[WoIverine]

Ron Paul talking about the FDA and Big Pharma Connections:

http://www.infowars....n-bed-together/

[MissMelsWell]

As some people know I've recently quit a 1.5-2 pack a day, 30 year, smoking habit with the aid of an "e-cig" (basically the day I picked up an e-cig, was the day I quit, the switch was effortless)... the battle with the FDA in that market has been fascinating to watch. From everything I can gather, the FDA is actually more interested in keeping big tobacco and pharma profitable. Crazy but true. Some of the FDA's press releases about e-cigs have been utter fabrications! The success rate of quitting smoking using gums, lozenges, or god forbid drugs like Chantix or Zyban, is minimal, somewhere around 7%. The success rate with a quality e-cig is somewhere around 60% conservatively. No wonder the FDA doesn't like them.

The reality is that most health professionals are supporting the e-cig market as a viable healthier alternative to smoking. Cigs have over 4000 toxic chemicals and carcinogens in them, e-cigs have only a little food grade flavoring (or you can get them unflavored) some vegetable glycerine and/or propolene glycol all of which are perfectly safe and are already in a lot of foods and other products we inhale including asthma inhalers and other vapor medications! And, of course they contain nicotine (although you can get the without any nicotine too)

Contrary to what the FDA would like you to believe... nicotine, while addictive like sugar, fat, caffiene, et al, isn't particularly dangerous health-wise. It's a mild stimulant. It's what gets you hooked on cigs, it's not what kills you. The other goofball thing the FDA has claimed (and we've heard this before) is that e-cigs are a "gateway" device leading to all kinds of bad behavior. That's a CROCK. I personally have never heard of a non-smoker picking one up.

The reality is that the FDA doesn't really care about health, what it cares about it making sure certain huge companies stay in business and keep giving their dollars to the FDA and government... mainly pharma. UGLY.