Human Hormones Are Being Eclipsed By Synthetic Chemicals

A study published in the Journal of Applied Toxicology has raised some disturbing possibilities regarding the dangers of common hormone-mimicking preservatives found in thousands of consumer products on the market today.[1]

Titled “Parabens detection in different zones of the human breast: consideration of source and implications of findings,” researchers discussed the role that parabens — a class of estrogen-mimicking chemicals widely used in drugs, foods and cosmetics — may have in breast cancer and childhood disease.

The report focused on the findings of The Genesis Breast Cancer Prevention Centre at the University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Foundation Trust published last month (March, 2012), which discovered five paraben esters in human breast tissue samples collected from 40 mastectomies from women with primary breast cancer.[2] The report revealed three things:

1) The ester form of parabens found within the breast tissue samples indicated a dermal route of exposure, as would occur through skin care products and underarm deodorants.

2) The paraben residues were found at concentrations up to 1 million times higher than the estrogen (estradiol) levels naturally found in human breast tissue.

3) Propylparaben was found in the highest concentration in the underarm area (axilla), where underarm deodorants are most used and breast cancer prevalence is at its highest.

While the World Health Organization considers the estrogenic properties of parabens to be a low toxicological risk due to it being 10,000-100,000 less potent than estradiol (E2), the 1 million-fold higher levels found within breast tissue sampled clearly indicate the magnitude of exposure more than compensates for the reduction in potency.

Also noted in the new study was a highly disturbing possibility: “For exposures in children, concern has already been raised that ‘the estrogenic burden of parabens and their metabolites in blood may exceed the action of endogenous estradiol in childhood and the safety margin for propylparaben is very low when comparing worst-case exposure’ (Boberg et al., 2010).”

In other words, synthetic hormones from chemicals like parabens may actually be eclipsing the activity of endogenously produced (natural) hormones in our children.  Given that 99.1% of the US population’s urine samples (ages 6 or older) contain methylparaben, this issue has broad-ranging implications.

Presently, European regulations allow for the use of parabens in cosmetics at up to 0.4% by volume.  The limits in the US are much less restricted. According to the FDA’s website: “The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) reviewed the safety of methylparaben, propylparaben, and butylparaben in 1984 and concluded they were safe for use in cosmetic products at levels up to 25%. Typically parabens are used at levels ranging from 0.01 to 0.3%.” Parabens are also FDA-approved for use as food preservatives.

Given the fact that modern-day toxicological risk assessments do not account for the adverse effects of chronic, low-dose exposures, nor the reality of synergistic toxicities, i.e. the reality that a chemical’s adverse effects may be amplified when present alongside other chemicals, this new research points to a disturbing possibility: commonly used preservatives may be contributing greatly to the burden of disease in exposed populations — especially infants and children, whose body burden is higher (lower body weight vs. chemical dose), susceptibility to chemically-induced genotoxicity higher (because their cells replicate more rapidly), and detoxification systems are less developed than adults.

It is becoming increasingly clear that in order to protect ourselves and especially our offspring from avoidable chemical exposures this country needs to implement the precautionary principle in its toxicological risk assessments: if there is indication that a chemical could do harm (based on cell and animal studies), it should be treated as if it does do harm, and be regulated accordingly. Until then, we are effectively a living and breathing nation of guinea pigs.

For additional research on paraben toxicity visit our research page on the topic. Also, view four studies on ginger’s ability to reduce paraben toxicity.

---

[1] Measurement of paraben concentrations in human breast tissue at serial locations across the breast from axilla to sternum. J Appl Toxicol. 2012 Mar ;32(3):219-32. Epub 2012 Jan 12. PMID: 22237600

[2] Parabens detection in different zones of the human breast: consideration of source and implications of findings. J Appl Toxicol. 2012 May ;32(5):305-9. Epub 2012 Mar 7. PMID: 22408000

© March 12, 2018 GreenMedInfo LLC. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of GreenMedInfo LLC. Want to learn more from GreenMedInfo? Sign up for the newsletter here http://www.greenmedinfo.com/greenmed/newsletter.

The post Human Hormones Are Being Eclipsed By Synthetic Chemicals appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Sunscreen Ingredient Becomes Toxic in Sunlight and Water

A chemical commonly found in sunscreen breaks down into toxic compounds when exposed to sun and water, research shows.

Avobenzone is an oil-soluble compound that is notable for its ability to absorb ultraviolet (UV) light. It is most often an ingredient in sunscreen and cosmetics, including lip balms and moisturizers. The compound converts UV rays into safer wavelengths that don’t damage the skin, and transforms UV energy into thermal energy. [1]

The chemical was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in commercial cosmetics in 1988. It is a known endocrine-disruptor.

According to researchers in Russia, exposure to water and sunlight causes avobenzone to break down into chemicals that are potentially dangerous to people.

When the team exposed avobenzone to a chlorinated water solution simulating that used in swimming pools, the ingredient broke down into a mix of aromatic acids, aldehydes, phenols, and acetyl benzenes, several of them extremely toxic. Researchers tracked the process using chromatomass spectrometry. [2]

Albert Lebedev, a chemist at Lomonosov Moscow State University, said in a news release:

“On the basis of the experiments one could make a conclusion that a generally safe compound transforms in the water and forms more dangerous products. In spite of the fact that there are no precise toxicological profiles for the most established products, it’s known that acetyl benzenes and phenols, especially chlorinated ones, are quite toxic.” [2]

Read: Environmental Working Group Releases 2017 Guide to Sunscreens

He added:

“Studying the products of transformation of any popular cosmetics is very important as very often they turn out to be much more toxic and dangerous than their predecessors. In principle, basing on such researches, one could obtain results, which could restrict or even put under a ban the usage of one or another product, and preserve health of millions of people.” [1]

Lebedev and his colleagues are now studying how avobenzone breaks down in seawater and freshwater.

Sources:

[1] UPI

[2] R&D

---

---

About Mike Barrett:
	Mike is the co-founder, editor, and researcher behind Natural Society. Studying the work of top natural health activists, and writing special reports for top 10 alternative health websites, Mike has written hundreds of articles and pages on how to obtain optimum wellness through natural health.

Adverse Effects from Personal Care Products Climb 300% in 2016

Reports of side effects caused by cosmetics and personal care products sold in the U.S. more than doubled in 2016, and that’s partly due to complaints about WEN by Chaz Dean Cleansing conditioners, according to recent study. [1]

Researchers looked at data on side effects reported to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from 2004-2016 for products including makeup, sunscreen, tattoos, hair color, perfume, shaving creams, and baby care items. A total of 5,144 adverse events were reported to the agency during that time, with an average of 396 a year, the team writes in JAMA Internal Medicine.

Source: Campaign for Safe Cosmetics

Side effect reports skyrocketed from 78 to 706 in 2015, and there was a huge 300% spike to 1,591 adverse events in 2016, due in large part to complaints concerning WEN products.

In 2014, the FDA announced it was investigating WEN by Chaz Dean Cleansing Conditioners after receiving reports that the products cause hair loss, hair breakage, balding, itching, and rash. The agency had received 1,386 complaints as of November 2016. [2]

Read: 5 Toxic Ingredients Probably Found in Your Shampoo

Through that investigation, the health regulator discovered that Chaz Dean Inc. and parent company Guthy Renker LLC had been buried in more than 21,000 complaints. It didn’t matter, though; companies are not currently required by law to report complaints.

The FDA doesn’t regulate cosmetic products, and companies can launch products without the agency’s approval.

In an e-mail, the FDA said:

“The law does not require cosmetic companies to share their safety information, including consumer complaints, with the FDA. FDA’s data on cosmetic adverse events are limited because reporting is voluntary. The FDA may take regulatory action against cosmetics on the market that do not comply with the laws we enforce, if we have reliable information indicating that a cosmetic is adulterated or misbranded.”

If you wind up losing clumps of hair after using a particular product, complaining to the manufacturer may or may not get you results.

Read: 4 Solutions for Naturally Healthy Skin from the Inside-Out

Dr. Shuai Xu, a dermatology researcher at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago, said:

“Adverse events to cosmetics matter to patients mostly because nearly everyone uses a cosmetic or personal care product every single day – this includes newborns, infants and pregnant women. Unlike drugs and medical devices, cosmetics permeate daily life. We’re exposed to hundreds of chemicals a day from these products.”

Source: Campaign for Safe Cosmetics

And, he said, there are likely far more adverse events caused by cosmetics and personal care products than is represented by the findings.

“These numbers are likely underreported. We need better reporting, from both consumers and clinicians. Broadly, the hope of our paper was to continue this discussion to modernize and expand the collection of data about personal care products. If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it, was our key point.”

Xu says most cosmetic and personal care products are safe, but it’s hard proving that the “bad” ones are truly unsafe.

“When it comes to cosmetics on the shelves that are dangerous, it’s very hard to prove. In general, cosmetics are a very safe product class.”

The Personal Care Products Council (PCPC) said in a statement that it “believes that mandatory adverse event reporting is critically important, which is why we have long advocated for it on Capitol Hill.”

PCPC adds:

“Nevertheless, despite the recent increase in reporting, the fact remains that only a very small percentage of cosmetics products on the market are associated with adverse events. And of those, a fraction are listed as ‘serious.’

“In other words, even with the increase, adverse reactions associated with cosmetics and personal care products are extremely rare.”

But if the numbers are inaccurate, how can we really know?

Sources:

[1] Reuters

[2] CNN

Campaign for Safe Cosmetics

Campaign for Safe Cosmetics

---

---

UN Urges Action as Microplastics in the Ocean Outnumber the Stars

If you’ve ever laid on a blanket and looked up at the night sky, you know how mind-blowing it is to consider the sheer number of stars in our galaxy – between 100 and 400 billion, according to scientists. Now, think about how heartbreaking it is to find out that there are more microscopic pieces of plastic in our oceans than there are stars in the Milky Way. [1]

Source: National Ocean Service

An estimated 300 million tons of plastic are used every year, and about 8 million tons end up in oceans. To put that into perspective, imagine a garbage truck dumping plastic into the ocean every minute. There are as many as 51 trillion microplastic particles in the oceans – 500 times more than stars in the galaxy.

Microplastics cause at least $8 billion in damage to marine ecosystems, and by 2050, it is estimated that oceans will have more plastic than fish if revolutionary changes are not made immediately. [2] [3]

The UN wants to eliminate 2 major sources of plastic pollution by 2025: microbeads in cosmetic products, and single-use plastics like water bottles and plastic bags. [3]

Source: The Science Explorer

Erik Solheim, the head of UN environment, said plastic litter in the world’s oceans “must stop,” adding:

“Plastic pollution is surfing onto Indonesian beaches, settling onto the ocean floor at the North Pole, and rising through the food chain onto our dinner tables. “We’ve stood by too long as the problem has gotten worse.”

Read: This is why we Need to Stop Using Plastic

Microplastics aren’t just microbeads; they are also comprised of large pieces of plastic that have broken down into tiny pieces. Tires, fleece clothing, water bottles, and packing materials all become microplastics, and they never go away.

The Plastic Oceans Foundation states that “when broken down into tiny pieces, plastic attracts toxic chemicals released over decades from industry and agriculture, the concentration of which increases as they move up the food chain.” [4]

The tiny bits of plastic are mistaken for food by marine animals and have a physical and neurological effect on them, often blocking the animals’ digestive tracts and moving into their bloodstreams. Once this occurs, microplastics may eventually cross the blood-brain barrier.

The UN launched their new global Clean Seas campaign at the World Oceans Summit in Bali, asking countries and businesses to take ambitious measures to eliminate microplastics from personal care products, ban or tax single-use plastic bags, and dramatically reduce other disposable plastic items by 2022. [3]

The World Moves Against Plastic Pollution

Ten countries have already agreed to join the UN initiative, including Indonesia, which has pledged to reduce its marine litter by 70% by 2025. Uruguay has agreed to tax single-use plastic bags later this year; and Costa Rica plans to take drastic steps to reduce single-use plastic via better waste management and education.

In the United States, the Senate voted at the end of 2015 to phase out the use of microbeads in soaps, body washes, and other personal care products starting this year. Obama quickly signed the Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015. Last fall, the United Kingdom also pledged to phase out microbeads in cosmetics by the end of this year.

In order to save the oceans, plastics manufacturers must also get involved. Speaking at the summit, the president of Plastics Europe, Patrick Thomas, said:

“The most important contributions that plastics companies can make is not lose control of their product at any stage during manufacturing or during transportation. If we don’t turn off the tap of plastics going into the oceans we will end up in a situation by 2025 where there’s one tonne of plastic for every three tonnes of fish and that is simply unacceptable.” [2]

Dell Computers has announced that it will use recovered ocean plastic in its product packaging. Said Vice President for Global Operations, Piyush Bhargava:

“DELL is committed to putting technology and expertise to work for a plastic-free ocean. Our new supply chain brings us one step closer to UNEP’s vision of Clean Seas by proving that recycled ocean plastic can be commercially reused.” [3]

Peter Thomson, President of the UN General Assembly, said:

“The ocean is the lifeblood of our planet, yet we are poisoning it with millions of tonnes of plastic every year. Be it a tax on plastic bags or a ban on microbeads in cosmetics, each country [can] do their bit to maintain the integrity of life in the ocean.”

Sources:

[1] Space.com

[2] Sky News

[3] UN News Centre

[4] One Green Planet

National Ocean Service

The Science Explorer

---

---

About Julie Fidler:
	Julie Fidler is a freelance writer, legal blogger, and the author of Adventures in Holy Matrimony: For Better or the Absolute Worst. She lives in Pennsylvania with her husband and two ridiculously spoiled cats. She occasionally pontificates on her blog.