Like the better-known chemical BPA, BPS is an endocrine disruptor linked to breast cancer and reproductive toxicity.

  • dandelion@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Above that it mentions:

    HAZARDS FOUND IN LABORATORY TESTS INCLUDE:

    • Obesity
    • Diabetes
    • Early Puberty
    • Cardiovascular system disorders
    • Abnormal reproductive system development
    • Hormone abnormalities in children
    • Susceptibility to various cancers
    • Resistance to chemotherapy
    • Diminished intellectual capacity

    Great, so receipts are going to be like our version of the leaded gasoline and mercury of past generations? 🫠

      • dandelion@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        As I understand it, plastics themselves have no known negative impact on human health - it’s the additives in the plastics that are a problem. But I don’t think the BPA hazards listed above can be fairly generalized to all microplastics.

        EDIT:

        from the hazards sheet:

        HEALTH HAZARDS IN THERMAL PAPER WITH BISPHENOLS (BPA & BPS)

        So BPA and BPS, and they’re talking about thermal paper with those in particular.

        I guess this has more details about BPA hazards: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_effects_of_Bisphenol_A

        The U.S. FDA states “BPA is safe at the current levels occurring in foods” based on extensive research, including two more studies issued by the agency in early 2014.[2] The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) reviewed new scientific information on BPA in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2015: EFSA’s experts concluded on each occasion that they could not identify any new evidence which would lead them to revise their opinion that the known level of exposure to BPA is safe; however, the EFSA does recognize some uncertainties, and will continue to investigate them.

        As usual, it’s highly contextual when something is a hazard and to what extent it is.

        • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          2 days ago

          Scientists also used to not think plastics crossed the blood-brain barrier until they started finding it in cadaver brains, you know? The list of things we understand about how plastics react to the body and its chemical processes is probably a much shorter list than the one of things we don’t understand about plastics.

          • dandelion@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            Yup, though this isn’t an argument for why plastics are certainly dangerous. It doesn’t really matter, there are many reasons plastics are a problem, even if we don’t have that smoking gun yet on how actual plastic is hazardous. BPA, BPS, PVC, and other additives are already horrible, the reliance on plastics are part of what is destroying the earth’s climate, and these materials are not recyclable or re-usable, it’s an environmental disaster on a scale we have never seen, etc.

        • aesthelete@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          As I understand it, plastics themselves have no known negative impact on human health - it’s the additives in the plastics that are a problem.

          1. What are these additive-free plastics you’re suggesting exist? Should we make sure the microplastics lodged in our brain are only of the free-range, organic, and crafted with love variety?

          2. There have already been preliminary studies linking higher concentrations of microplastics with poor medical outcomes with more damning reports coming out very frequently. In the meantime, maybe let’s not pretend that whatever absence of evidence you perceive is evidence of absence.

          3. Having no known negative impact certainly doesn’t mean they have a known positive impact. So it’s likely good to try to avoid them as much as you can.

          I know it sucks because it’s yet another tough to impossible problem to tackle alongside everything else, but that’s just a Monday.

          • dandelion@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            2 days ago

            yeah, this is probably a bit like when people thought smoking wasn’t bad for you.

            The higher concentration of microplastics are correlation studies, they don’t establish a causal link (which would be huge news and the discovery of a century). For example, the correlation could just be due to the poorer lifestyles of those who consume more microplastics (for example, they’re more common in processed and fast foods, which tend to be less healthy, for example and may also just be more common in people with lower economic status who then have less access to healthcare and more likely to die younger for a variety of reasons). The point is that they don’t have the smoking gun, yet.

            We should just be clear about where we are at with the evidence, I’m not saying we shouldn’t be concerned or the lack of evidence is somehow exonerating or that we should be confident this isn’t a public health concern - I am very much concerned.

            And of course there are lots of other reasons to avoid plastics, including its impact on the ecology and agriculture. It’s terrifying that China for example will just till plastic sheeting into the soil rather than bother to pull it up (and perhaps concerning plastic sheeting is used as a mulch in the first place, both in China and other countries like the U.S.).

            I don’t know what to tell you about additives, they absolutely do make plastics without some of the known-to-be-hazardous additives, though I’m not saying that has in any way been adopted across the board or has solved the problem (I don’t know enough about that to be honest, but I’m cynical industrialists are going to give a shit).