A little correction
November 8th, 2009 Posted in UncategorizedIt’s been a while since I blogged. Not because I haven’t had anything to say … everyday I’m uncovering new positive and negative facts about plastic. On the one hand I’m amazed at all the initiatives that already exist in terms of waste reduction, reuse, and recycling. Then on the other hand, I’m amazed at the downside of our plastic production and consumption. In other words there is plenty enough material to write quite a number of blog entries.
In fact, it’s the attention overkill for Plastic Soup that has kept me from writing. Take last Thursday … first, a Belgian radio consumer program calls me for a live interview, then the Dutch daily nrc.next requests information for a front-page article on pollution in the North Sea, and finally the Belgian daily Het Laaste Nieuws calls because they heard me on the radio and want to dedicate an extensive article to toxins used in various kinds of plastic.
I’m pleased with the amount of attention the subject receives, but at the same time there is a risk that my statements are being taken out of context, or are being wrongfully interpreted. For example, this week in HUMO (a Belgian magazine), the caption to a photo from an otherwise excellent interview, read that I said that a baby who drinks from a polycarbonate bottle ingests the equivalent of a couple of contraceptive pills a day. I didn’t put it like that … and in the interview itself it was noted in a much more balanced way.
What I did say was that I have read a report which demonstrated that babies and young children who get their liquid and solid food from polycarbonate bottles, cups, and cans, ingests UP TO 14.5 micrograms of Bisphenol a per day. Bisphenol a is a pseudo-estrogen similar to the active pseudo-estrogen in a contraceptive pill (which contains 20 micrograms). When you compare the body weight of an adult woman with that of a baby, you could say that a baby ingests UP TO a couple of contraceptive pills a day.
Although this might sound defensive, I am not withdrawing a single word of what I have said in whichever interview so far.
I base my opinion on reports I’ve read, and on the accounts respectable experts give me. Of course, my opinion has been disputed. There are mainly two arguments which the experts (attempt to) sweep from the table.
The first argument was presented on the Radio Kassa program by the otherwise very charming and correct RIVM (Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu—National Institute for Public Health and the Environment) toxicologist, Van Leeuwen.
In regards to my claim on the toxicity of Bisphenol a in baby bottles, he stated that this agent exits the body when we urinate and has no harmful effect whatsoever on our health.. He confirmed that the agent is damaging to the environment and to animal life in particular (but for humans, the agent is not a problem). He was so convinced about this that he even offered his assistance if I should ever institute a campaign against Bisphenol a on those grounds.
Honestly, I can’t imagine that this agent is harmful to the environment, but not to us. Also, I have read reports indicating that this agent has been found in the human bloodstream, including fetuses. And that wouldn’t have an effect on health? I’m sorry, but employing common sense, I just can’t accept that.
The second argument being used to deny any side-effect of all toxic agents in plastic is the fact that the toxins (since their toxicity is not disputed) exist in such small amounts that they are therefore not harmful to humans.
I’m flabbergasted by such a statement. How can a scientist—a physician make such a claim? Only medical science experiments continuously with the effects of extremely small amounts of certain substances.
It was Nobel Prize winner, Schatz, who proved non-linear poisoning—indeed a toxin is rendered less harmful when diluted, but when you continue to dilute it, the effects become more severe. The receptors responsible for hormonal regulation in our bodies are extremely sensitive. And a lot of the toxins in plastic (such as various softeners in PVC and the above mentioned Bisphenol a) affect this hormonal regulation along with all the consequences.
What amazes me the most is the certainty with which scientists claim toxins in plastic are safe for us.
Firstly, to date, we still hardly know precisely which toxins are used in plastic and what their effects (to put it prudently) might be on our health.
Secondly, PARTICULARLY in the scientific world where shared knowledge changes so quickly, it is important to be careful when it comes to certain assessments when there is so much contrary evidence (as in the case of the questions surrounding plastic).
Personally, I chose to be on the safe side. I follow the reports that I read, along with my own sense, but also I am not fooled by horror stories.
Above all, I try to convince everybody that plastic can be safe, that it can be produced without toxins, and without being more expensive.
Honestly, when toxins are not really necessary, why on Earth use them? Whether they are harmful to us or not?
Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.