Our Plastics are Toxic

baby bottleBPA and other toxins found in plastics do affect the growth of your unborn child!  The article below shows a 20% reduction in growth for the highest BPA moms compared to the lowest BPA moms.  When you think that a large amount of a developing child’s growth is in the brain, this should be a real wake-up call that we must reduce and try to limit our exposure to BPA and plastics in general. This is especially true when pregnant, but has a real significance for all girls and women of child bearing age. We know BPA and other plastics are endocrine disrupters, meaning that they can alter both the hormone levels and the effectiveness of hormones.  We also know that low thyroid hormone, or low thyroid function during pregnancy can cause severe neurological damage, as well as lowered IQ and developmental delays. This concern is REAL.  Canned foods come in plastic lined cans, never microwave plastics and avoid plastic containers, food storage in plastics, plastic baby bottles, water bottles, etc.

Dr Paul

Full article and source can be found here

Fetal Growth and Prenatal Exposure to Bisphenol A: The Generation R Study

January 3, 2013 Advance Publications Comments Off

Claudia A. Snijder1,2, Dick Heederik3, Frank H. Pierik4, Albert Hofman1,5, Vincent W. Jaddoe1,5,6, Holger M. Koch7, Matthew P. Longnecker8, Alex Burdorf2

1The Generation R Study Group, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands; 2Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands; 3Institute of Risk Assessment Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands; 4Department of Urban Environment and Safety, TNO (Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research), Utrecht, The Netherlands; 5Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands; 6Department of Pediatrics, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands; 7Institute for Prevention and Occupational Medicine, German Social Accident Insurance, Institute of the Ruhr-Universitat, Bochum, Germany (IPA); 8Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), North Carolina, USA

 

Abstract

Background: Prenatal exposure to Bisphenol A (BPA) has been associated with adverse birth outcomes, but findings of previous studies have been inconsistent.

Objective: We investigate the relation of prenatal BPA exposure with intrauterine growth and evaluate the effect of the number of measurements per subject on observed associations.

Methods: This study was embedded in a Dutch population-based prospective cohort study, with urine samples collected during early, mid, and late pregnancy. The study comprised 219 women, of which 99 had one measurement, 40 had two measurements, and 80 had three measurements of urinary BPA. Fetal growth characteristics were repeatedly measured by ultrasound during pregnancy and combined with measurements at birth. Linear regression models for repeated measurements of both BPA and fetal growth were used to estimate associations between urinary concentrations of creatinine based BPA (BPACB) and intrauterine growth.

Results: The relationship between BPACB and fetal growth was sensitive to the number of BPA measurements per woman. Among 80 women with three BPA measurements, women with BPACB > 4.22 μg/g Crea had lower growth rates for fetal weight and head circumference than women with BPACB <1.54 μg/g Crea, with estimated differences in mean values at birth of -683 grams (20.3% of mean) and -3.9 cm (11.5% of mean), respectively. When fewer measurements were available per woman, the exposure-response relationship became progressively attenuated and statistically non-significant.

Conclusion: Our findings suggest that maternal urinary BPA may impair fetal growth. Since previous studies have shown contradictory findings, further evidence is needed to corroborate these findings in the general population.

Citation: Snijder CA, Heederik D, Pierik FH, Hofman A, Jaddoe VW, Koch HM, Longnecker MP, Burdorf A. Environ Health Perspect (): .doi:10.1289/ehp.1205296

Received: April 02, 2012; Accepted: December 21, 2012; Published: January 03, 2013

 

Reply To This Post