Chemicals and the public

Dr Alison Bleaney

These articles are well worth a read. Just so that we all understand that our regulators do not and cannot have a full understanding of the mechanisms of action, direct and indirect effects and the consequences of use of most “regulated for use” chemicals (including pesticides) currently widely available and used in Australia. And the preventative action needed to be taken by regulators and public health for our children’s health (apart from the blindingly obvious) could well be described as a cautionary approach.

In human fat tissues, bisphenol A (BPA) suppresses levels of a key hormone, adiponectin, that protects people from heart attacks and Type II diabetes. These results implicate BPA as a potential cause of metabolic syndrome, one of the most serious and costly public health problems in the US.

Most Americans have levels of BPA within their serum within the range of concentrations sufficient to suppress adiponectin in these experiments.

“Metabolic syndrome is an increasingly common collection of conditions in people that includes obesity, glucose intolerance, hypertension as well as abnormalities in insulin metabolism. People with metabolic syndrome are at greater risk of heart disease, including heart attacks, and Type 2 diabetes.

Together these conditions and diseases have emerged as one of the great medical challenges of the 21st century, imposing huge health and economic costs around the world, especially in industrialized countries. Most research into its causes has focused on lifestyle factors, especially high calorie diet and reduced physical activity. Within the last decade, however, a growing body of evidence from animal and cell experiments implicate some chemical contaminants, including bisphenol A, as contributors to a a medical condition known as metabolic syndrome. As for most of the recent discoveries about adverse impacts caused by BPA, there are almost no human epidemiological data.”

More… [related stories]

and

Heindel JJ. 2003. Endocrine disruptors and the obesity epidemic. Toxicolological Sciences 76:247-249

“These data suggest a role for toxicology in the etiology of obesity. This role has received additional support from a recent review (Baillei-Hamilton, 2002) that presents a provocative hypothesis to explain the global obesity epidemic: chemical toxins. This article presents data showing that the current epidemic in obesity cannot be explained solely by alterations in food intake and/or decrease in exercise.

There is a genetic predisposition component of obesity; however, genetics could not have changed over the past few decades, suggesting that environmental changes might be responsible for at least part of the current obesity epidemic. Indeed, the level of chemicals in the environment is purported to coincide with the incidence of obesity, and examples of chemicals that appear to cause weight gain by interfering with elements of the human weight control system-such as alterations in weight-controlling hormones, altered sensitivity to neurotransmitters, or altered activity of the sympathetic nervous system-are noted.

Indeed, many synthetic chemicals are actually used to increase weight in animals. This article provides fascinating examples of chemicals that have been tested for toxicity by standard tests that resulted in weight gain in the animals at lower doses than those that caused any obvious toxicity. These chemicals included heavy metals, solvents, polychlorinated biphenols, organophosphates, phthalates, and bisphenol A. This is an aspect of the data that has generally been overlooked. ”