|
The Today Show Warns: Chemicals Are All Around Us!
By Gilbert Ross, M.D.
This morning, the folks who produce NBC's Today show allowed me six seconds (out of a six-minute segment) to comment on an astoundingly alarmist and unscientific "report" on the alleged dangers of plastic water bottles.
The precise target of this junk-science assault was bisphenol A (BPA), a component of some types of polycarbonate plastic bottles. In fact, BPA is near-ubiquitous in our environment, and we all have tiny amounts of this (and many, many other) synthetic chemicals in our bodies. These trace amounts do not pose any health threat -- but try telling that to those who want to scare us all into a tizzy with such (untrue) "science and health" stories. My brief appearance consisted of my advising viewers that "The toxic effects found on rats were done at thousands of times higher then we are exposed to in the environment." Dr. Elizabeth Whelan noted that "the segment was up there in the top three of the most biased TV reports I have ever seen." The show was probably 98% about the "dangers" of bisphenol A. In fact, as I have said, there is no threat at all to humans from plastic bottles, nor from the many other consumer products that contain BPA.
The host and the "experts" consulted, a toxicologist -- or in other words an expert on rats -- and doctor from Mt. Sinai whose career has been devoted to seeking toxic chemicals in every corner, went as far as they could to scare American consumers about these products -- though they have been safely used by people of all ages over the past five decades. For some reason, the doctor-expert was wearing a suit and a stethoscope even while in the TV studio -- perhaps planning to examine Matt Lauer after the show? He focused on the "leaching" of BPA and the "hormonal" disruption that will surely come from using plastic bottles. He noted several types that should "never be used -- there is no safe level of exposure."
I must wonder, if these are so toxic, why has no one noted any human illness associated with them? This comment is clearly absurd. In sum, the Today show barely acknowledged the scientific side of the argument. It was clear they had no intention of taking a balanced approach to this story. Various environmental chemicals are now coming under attack by "environmental" groups and their friends in the media and the state legislatures. It is disappointing that a show as popular as Today has decided to jump on this bandwagon, while giving only lip service to educating their viewers about science.
Gilbert Ross, M.D., is Executive and Medical Director of the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH.org, HealthFactsAndFears.com). See also: ACSH's full report on The Facts About Bisphenol A.
Lance K. (April 10, 2008)
Part of the reason that the scare tactics are so effective is that the typical consumer doesn’t know one plastic (polymer) from another. The polymer a consumer is most likely to encounter in a bottle of beverage is PET (polyethylene terephthalate), not PC (polycarbonate), and BPA is not used in PET as it is in PC. You can be specific and state (as Dr. Ross does above) that BPA is “a component of some types of polycarbonate plastic bottles,” but I’ll bet that what consumers hear is “plastic bottles,” not “polycarbonate plastic bottles.” Fear mongers benefit from that kind of misunderstanding. Not only are the levels of BPA leaching into a beverage from PC miniscule and non-threatening, but it is also easy for a consumer to believe that because of the large number of “plastic” bottles he drinks from his exposure is greatly amplified. Yet consumers encounter very few beverages packaged in PC bottles. PET is much cheaper than PC, so PET is the preferred material. The real exposure is non-threatening, and the exposure itself is much less than consumers are being permitted to believe.
Janusz Z. Byczkowski (April 11, 2008)
Dr. Ross (M.D.) wrote:
>>"…a toxicologist -- or in other words an expert on rats…">>
While I admire the vast contribution of Dr. Ross into debunking alarmist and unscientific horror stories and urban legends about potentially toxic chemicals, I disagree with his "definition" of a toxicologist.
Thus, more appropriate description of a toxicologist is "an expert on adverse effects of xenobiotics", where the term xenobiotics covers all chemicals foreign to the organism (synthetic and natural) and some physical agents, including drugs and other pharmaceuticals.
Historically, toxicology and contributing toxicologists formed the basis of therapeutics and experimental medicine (is it possible that Dr. Ross skipped clinical toxicology and pharmacology classes while in the medical school? ;-) Currently, most of the Ph.D. toxicologists are employed by the industry (pharmaceutical, chemical, consumer products, etc), academia and governments - and actually only a few do study the rats.
I am afraid that the mischaracterization of toxicologist's expertise does not add credibility to the Dr. Ross's article.
Janusz Z. Byczkowski, Ph.D., D.Sc.
Diplomate of the American Board of Toxicology
Consultant
212 N. Central Ave.
Fairborn, OH 45324-5006
voice (937)878-5531
e-mail januszb@AOL.com
homepage: http://members.aol.com/JanuszB/index.html
JZB Consulting web site: http://members.aol.com/JanuszB/consult.htm
Gem (May 6, 2008)
In response to your comment "I must wonder, if these are so toxic, why has no one noted any human illness associated with them? "
In March 2007, the Environmental Working Group reported "BPA exposure based on the latest science on the low-dose toxicity of the chemical . . .
BPA is associated with a number of health problems and diseases that are on the rise in the U.S. population, including breast and prostate cancer and infertility . . . as well as diabetes type II, to birth defects — permanent damage of developing male reproductive organs . . . " and a whole slew of other diseases as listed in a very large chart.
You might want to take a look at http://www.ewg.org/reports/bisphenola which may change your skepticsm about the dangers of this toxin alone.
Worth mentioning - BPA is also found in many commonly CANNED FOODS as well . . . not just limited to plastics.
Then there are the other toxins in addition to BPA. That includes plastic types 1 (which are supposedly safe for only ONE TIME USE), and types 3, 6, 7 - as we were all warned about.
|
