A CBC news item caught my attention recently when I was browsing online news at Yahoo.ca The item – “BPA linked to behavior problems in girls: study” – featured a file illustration of Camelback-brand water bottles hanging on display.

According to the news item, girls who were exposed to the industrial chemical bisphenol A while in the womb showed more behavioral problems at age three than those whose moms had lower BPA levels. (The study was released on Monday, October 24, 2011.)

I thought readers might appreciate my reproducing the rest of the news item, with my own brief comment at the end:

Anxiety, depression and hyperactivity were seen more often in toddler girls whose mothers had high levels of the chemical in their urine while pregnant, said the research led by the Harvard School of Public Health.

“This pattern was more pronounced for girls, which suggests that they might be more vulnerable to gestational BPA exposure than boys,” said the study in the October 24 issue of the journal Pediatrics.

BPA is used in the manufacture of plastics and adhesives, and can be found in the lining of canned foods, some plastic bottles and containers, cashier receipts and dental fillings.

The analysis was done using data from 244 mothers and their children up to age three in the Cincinnati, Ohio area. The mothers’ urine samples were tested while pregnant at 16 and 26 weeks, and again at birth.

The children’s urine was tested at age one, two and three. BPA was found in 85 percent of the mothers’ urine and in 96 percent of the samples from the children.

The higher the BPA levels were while the mother was pregnant, the more likely the daughters were to experience behavioral problems by age three.

The same correlation was not seen in boys, nor was there any apparent link between behavior and levels of BPA in the children’s urine, said the data derived from questionnaires on child behavior filled out by the parents.

“None of the children had clinically abnormal behavior, but some children had more behavior problems than others,” said lead author Joe Braun, research fellow in environmental health at the Harvard School of Public Health.

The study reported that “increasing gestational BPA concentrations were associated with more hyperactive, aggressive, anxious, and depressed behavior and poorer emotional control and inhibition in the girls.”

The research appeared to support previous studies that have suggested a link between BPA exposure in the womb and child behavior, but is the first to show that in utero exposure is the critical window when altering effects may occur.

However, due to the small size of the sample, the study authors -- who also included scientists at Cincinnati Children's Hospital and Medical Center, and Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, British Columbia -- said more research is needed.

“There is considerable debate regarding the toxicity of low-level BPA exposure, and the findings presented here warrant additional research,” said the study.

Funding for the study came from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, the US Environmental Protection Agency and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences training.

Okay, that is where the news item ends. My own thought is that, of course, further research is needed; but I’m bothered that the study is so inconclusive and is based on small sample size. I’m not disputing the conclusions, yet I really wish a really broad study would be initiated immediately, and in fact hope there’s already one under way. These reports are very disturbing and I want more information to support the news headline and the alarm it causes. I also wish that news items like this contained some detail, such as a typical amount of BPA found in the urine, or a range, especially in terms of what constitutes a high level, in the study authors’ opinions. And some commentary from toxicologists for added perspective would also help.

I have enough training and experience to read past the headlines on news items of this sort. I fear that many in the public do not.

Posted by Guy Crittenden at 04:11 PM | Permalink

Don't get fooled by the Ministry of Labour Inspection Blitz's. Because they have certain industries and certain target areas, does not mean you are relieved of an inspector entering your workplace for a surprise visit.

Currently this month - PPE - personal protective equipment is on their list of blitz targets in both industrial and health care sectors. Make sure you are well informed. The Ministry of Labour has a list of responsibilities on their website that you must be aware of and follow:

These General Responsibilities are:
• The employer shall ensure that PPE is used where appropriate.
• The employer shall provide information, instruction and supervision to workers on the proper use and maintenance of PPE. Instruction should include, but not be limited to:
• how to properly fit and wear PPE;
• when PPE should be worn;
• how to care for PPE and identify when it requires repair, cleaning or disposal;
• how PPE provides protection and the consequences of not wearing it.
• The employer should assess each work process and job task on the farm and determine where PPE may be needed to protect workers. PPE should be used as a last resort if the hazard cannot be controlled by other means such as engineering controls, (for example, ventilation), redesign of work processes, or using less toxic substances.
• The worker shall use PPE provided by, and as required by, the employer.
• Where a chemical or other hazardous product endangers the health or safety of a worker, PPE should be worn according to the product manufacturer's instructions on either a warning label or MSDS.
• The employer should monitor the use of PPE to ensure that it provides adequate protection for the worker and does not cause undue discomfort or create new hazards while being used.
• The worker shall inform the employer of any defects in the PPE, which the worker is aware of and which could endanger the worker.

(taken from the MoL website) http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/hs/sawo/blitzes/

Alberta's current focus is a Jobsite inspections focus on residential construction.
http://employment.alberta.ca/SFW/53.html

For more information on your provincial inspection blitz's - visit your provincial ministry's website.

http://employment.alberta.ca/SFW/53.html

Posted by Lynne at 10:03 AM | Permalink

Those of you who are interested in product stewardship and such things as deposit-refund systems for used beverage containers should follow developments in BC where Zero Waste Vancouver is launching a campaign to support what it calls “Real Recycling” (see the news release below about the kick-off meeting on Monday, October 3).

The campaign may be about many things but appears to be centered on getting milk containers in the province included in the deposit system and also to raise deposit levels to match those in Alberta. The suggestion is to not accept a government proposal to collect all packaging in a mixed stream.

Here’s the release and I’ll post further detail as it becomes available.

Campaign launch Monday (October 3rd) in Vancouver

WHAT:

On October 3rd a group of citizens will launch a web-based campaign to show public support for Real Recycling – recycling that delivers the best possible environmental, economic and social benefits to society. The first objective is to get milk containers included in the deposit system and raise deposit levels on all containers to match those in Alberta.

WHO:

This province-wide campaign is being guided by Zero Waste Vancouver, a registered non-profit organization that has been operating in the Lower Mainland since 2007. It will involve people in communities across the province who support the economic, environmental and social benefits of real recycling.

WHEN:

Monday, October 3rd, 10:30 am

WHERE:

Mount Pleasant Neighbourhood House, 800 East Broadway, Vancouver BC (West Hall room).

WHY:

This month the provincial government will begin public consultation on a proposal to collect all different kinds of packaging mixed together – from milk jugs to toothpaste tubes and cigarette wrappers. This will downgrade the truly recyclable materials like milk jugs and create the false illusion that non-recyclable packaging is being recycled. It would also ignore decades of success in British Columbia with a beverage industry recycling program that is delivering outstanding environmental, social and economic benefits in community across the province. The Campaign for Real Recycling wants to give the milk industry a chance to provide further proof that deposits – especially higher deposits -- get good returns.

HOW:

For additional information, please contact Helen Spiegelman: 604-731-8464 spiegelmanhelen@gmail.com

Posted by Guy Crittenden at 10:40 PM | Permalink