Slashdot Mirror
New Study Links Plastics To Heart Disease, Diabetes
fprintf writes "There have been a number of studies over the years, some of which have been debunked, linking plastics with human disease. Now British researchers have released a study again linking common plastics used in food/liquid storage with human disease."
Corelation. Is. Not. Causation.
So, what, you're suggesting people who live lifestyles that cause heart disease are more likely to also use plastic containers for their food and drink? Or people with heart disease are more likely to use plastic containers? What other correllation are you proposing?
Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
Correlation.is.not.spelled.like.corelation
If you didn't RTFA, how do you know their results only evidenced correlation then?
Blerg.
I wonder if they will compare the instances of disease to those from food poisoning from earlier methods of food storage?
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
Exactly right. "Correlation is not causation" has become more like a reflexive meme around here rather than a thoughtful addition to the conversation.
I may make you feel, but I can't make you think.
Every week there will be a new study that reveals some common chemical in our daily lives, will be harmful or good for your health.
Often it will be both harmful and good on consecutive weeks.
Soon I'll be releasing my own study that shows excessive worrying about common foods causes diabetes, cancer and spontaneous combustion.
It's called a cheap grab for mod points.
Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
From TFA: "At least from this study, we cannot draw any conclusion that bisphenol A causes any health effect. As noted by the authors, further research will be needed to understand whether these statistical associations have any relevance at all for human health."
As noted by the authors. The authors, and the person TFA got a quote from, and TFA all make this concession, and you try to karma-whore by stating the obvious. Read. The. Fine. Article.
I agree. A perfectly sensible interpretation is "if you eat more unhealthy prepackaged food, that food comes in plastic containers".
My Photography - http://ian-x.com
The Deathlings (comic) - http://thedeathlings.com
Actually the study was based on the number of rubber bullets fired at a persons chest. As the number increased, the probability of a heart attack also increased. The second part was based on the study of plastic heart valve installations. It was observed that the people who had these valves in their hearts were also likely to suffer from heart disease.
I haven't even rtfa but here goes
Corelation. Is. Not. Causation.
Translation: I don't like the conclusion so I'll make a baseless assumption and attack the article without any knowledge of it. Sounds like a severe case of cognitive dissonance to me.
If you have something that you dont want anyone to know, maybe you shouldnt be doing it in the first place -Eric Schmidt
Keep using BPA products. And people wonder why girls are hitting puberty so much earlier now.
Internet? (reference: any adult web site)
attention deficit disorder
Internet? (reference: online games)
and neurological systems
Internet? (reference: goatse)
Disclaimer: I am not god.
We may not be created equal
But we can be treated equal.
http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/petbottles.asp
Didn't you realize that the snopes article in the summary talks about a completely different chemical?
tag: badsummary
If you have something that you dont want anyone to know, maybe you shouldnt be doing it in the first place -Eric Schmidt
Nice links. Can't imagine why Natural News would have such articles. Couldn't be anything about their bias to get people to buy "natural" products, is it?
You know, like Kevin Trudeau claiming the government is keeping cures for arthritis, cancer and other afflictions from the people and how he miraculously has all these cures, but only if you buy his book and visit his web site to buy the products.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
The article in question actually says that they don't claim causality - but that it should be looked at further.
As usual from press reporting of scientific studies it's really hard to tell what to make of the conclusion. The article mentions animal studies that indicate BPA (the plastic) may disrupt hormones (especially estrogen).
The article suggests this is a preliminary study that only measured the correlation (so, yes it appears the assumption was correct) between BPA levels and heart disease and diabetes. It doesn't talking about removing the effect of diet, which is well-known to affect both of these diseases. If that effect is not accounted for in the study, it may well turn out that people who eat lots of meals from BPA containers (or have bad teeth and have fillings with BPA) tend to have less healthy diets as well.
Well done. You were trolling, right?
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
And people wonder why girls are hitting puberty so much earlier now.
That is because children have much better nutrition than there used to be. As a result, they are able to reach puberty sooner because of better health.
"Exactly right. "Correlation is not causation" has become more like a reflexive meme around here rather than a thoughtful addition to the conversation."
I don't see how you can say that, just because a lot of commenters tend to reflexively reply with that meme to articles about scientific studies linking one thing to another. There can be many reasons for this. Correlation does not necessarily equal cau... uh ... oh, I see your point.
Nice links. Can't imagine why Natural News would have such articles. Couldn't be anything about their bias to get people to buy "natural" products, is it?
You know, like Kevin Trudeau claiming the government is keeping cures for arthritis, cancer and other afflictions from the people and how he miraculously has all these cures, but only if you buy his book and visit his web site to buy the products.
Do you have any proof of this bias? No
Did Kevin Trudeau write any of those articles I posted? No
Do you have any links or proof that he is providing miraculous cures? No
Good job at attacking a source you don't like instead of trying to prove anything they said wrong. Very intelligent!
If you have something that you dont want anyone to know, maybe you shouldnt be doing it in the first place -Eric Schmidt
Wow, did you even bother reading the article? Do you really even understand statistics? Yes, correlation is not causation, but that really doesn't add much to the conversation. Correlation is necessary but not sufficient for causation. You do realize that there is a whole branch of mathematics and analysis that tries to extract causal relationships, if they exist, from this data? Are you also aware that analysis like this is the only way we can discover certain relationships?(Well, the only feasible way anyway). Getting a bunch of statistically random people to sit in a lab and drink from either plastic or non-plastic cups for 50 years isn't really going to be possible.
If you have a genuine statistical beef with something, please actually explain it rather than smugly stating, "corelation(sic). Is. Not. Causation)
Either that or show me your PhD in statistics.
Monstar L
the food IN the plastic is causing the heart disease?
It's time to play the what-is-the-causation game again. Most obvious to me is that junk food, prepared food (microwave meals etc.), and soft drinks are sold in plastic containers, and these foodstuffs are generally associated with heart disease and diabetes one way or another. It'll be interesting to see what the more rigorous studies find, although I'm sure this fine pilot study will be presented as Unarguable Proof That Plastic Makes You Die And We're Not Changing Our Minds On This by the world media before the day is out.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
YES. THE WORDS. THEY ARE TRUE.
hahaha, I definitely cracked a smile at that one, thanks. I do enjoy idleispants, though.
I'm pretty sure the experts who did the study know much more about how to apply statistics than you ever will. If they are making conclusions in a respected, peer-reviewed publication, then you can bet money that they wouldn't be making those conclusions based on simple correlation alone. Even so, demonstrating a strong correlation between things often leads to the discovery of the cause of the correlation.
Second, why does parroting "correlation is not causation" warrant a mod to Insigthful? That's like trying to convince someone that a person who says "George W. Bush is an idiot" a lot has insightful political opinions. The parent post did not make a single insightful statement. Unless mindlessly repeating a buzzword that sounds intellectual counts as insight around here.
That is because children have much better nutrition than there used to be. As a result, they are able to reach puberty sooner because of better health.
You're kidding right? I guess all healthy girls should be hitting puberty at 3.
Or this study showing that more girls from age 6 to age 9 are hitting puberty instead of from 10 - 11.
I really pray you were joking!
If you have something that you dont want anyone to know, maybe you shouldnt be doing it in the first place -Eric Schmidt
It has recently been revealed that a common thread has been found among all human ailments and syndromes.
Everyone that has been afflicted with a disease or syndrome has consumed large amounts of DHMO!
Don't malign plastic, you dirty hippies. They saved my life in WWII! Why, when I was a lad, we would have KILLED to have plastic food storage. You know what I hear when you say plastics are dangerous? "blah blah blah I hate America blah blah I hate progress blah blah blah." Real Americans can eat plastic like it was apple pie and not get sick.
The same goes double for global warming & the ozone layer. In fact, let's just stop funding research into things that may be bad for us. Only sissies care. All you are doing with your sissy studies is holding back progress and making people worry over nothing.
Admit it: you want us all to go back to living in caves. You hate the modern world and everything in it and you want to destroy it with your evil 'studies.' Elitist intellectual claptrap.
America stands for progress. Except we're not progressive, the damn hippies stole that word and turned it into something dirty. Either you love progress and you know that everything new is better, or you hate America and want everyone to live in caves.
If you hate plastics, you hate the whole human race!
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
It was based off a study that was done some time ago. One of the findings was that for females, once they go past a certain weight (I don't remember what it was, and I don't feel like looking this up) they hit puberty. The CNN article you mention mentions obesity possibly being a factor for the early puberty. I think it must be referencing that study.
I've never been modded troll for posting links to articles that can easily be verified with a simple google search before.
Maybe people really don't like information that is contrary to their beliefs.
If you have something that you dont want anyone to know, maybe you shouldnt be doing it in the first place -Eric Schmidt
Straight from their own front page:
Never said he did. I was merely pointing out a similarity between Natural News and Kevin Trudeau both claiming that "natural" remedies are more effective than man-made medicines (which are also natural).
Just a few. Like this one, this one and this one. So yes, I have proof he is providing miracle cures. That and his infomercials on which he peddles his book which has in its title, "Includes The Natural Cures For Over 50 Specific Diseases".
I never said I didn't like the source. Some "natural" items can be very beneficial to certain people. However, claiming that ONLY "natural" products, such as supplements which are unregulated and don't have to detail what they actually contain or what effect they may have on people, is disingenuous and potentially harmful.
As far as proving them wrong, I don't need to prove them wrong because studies over the years have proven them wrong. Here is one article which discusses "natural" remedies, and this one which talks about Lycopene.
So yes, I was very intelligent to point out the bias of Natural News so people are aware of their bias. Whether people heed the warning is up to them but they have been warned.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Corelation. Is. Not. Causation.
Maybe So. But Corelation. Is. Not. Not. Causation.
None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
When it comes to common chemicals causing cancer, Carlin had a good line:
A Human Right
Ta da!
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel Boorstin
Maybe its not the plastic, but rather the junk food inside the plastic?
You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
"some of which have been debunked"
Snopes is good at debunking (urban) myths. They are not, however, good at evaluating science. Debunking is not even an appropriate term or activity to apply to science (as stated by the poster, and as performed by Snopes). Their FAQ lists other forms of common fiction which are not urban myth, but fail to list badly researched statements by or about science among them.
Snopes reports the "debunking" coming from the International Bottled Water Association. Nobody conversant with science would accept a statement from such as biased source as authoritative. Their major hint should have come from the statement that the master's thesis was "not peer reviewed". A thesis is conducted by a student under a committee of professionals, at least one of which (the thesis supervisor) is an expert in that field. Peer review is conducted by the committee. A thesis is intended to be material suitable for rewriting into a publishable paper. It will have the committee members' names on it, in reference if not in the by-line. As professionals they will at least see to it that the result is worthy of carrying their names.
As for the quote in Snopes supposedly from Rolf Halden of Johns Hopkins that there are no dioxins in plastic, do your own research, as Snopes should have done to follow up, and as the Johns Hopkins people should have done before making the statement. Go to: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez and put in the search terms "plastic" and "dioxin".
Snopes should also have done their research on the link they provide to the Johns Hopkins PR release (not a scientific publication of any sort, and certainly not peer reviewed) making the "hoax" claim. It is not from Halden, it is from Kellog Schwab. In addition to misattribution, they fail to note that the statement is made in the context of J.H. distancing themselves from misattribution in the emails titled "John Hopkins Cancer Update" and such, not in the context of research conducted or reviewed. There is a similar J.H. missive listed among the 150 results from PubMed. It is in a J.H. publication (peer review?) and has no authors credited.
Snopes appears to have found a way to become a subject of their own scrutiny, as they have delved into science and come up as debunkable urban science myth. Stick to urban mythology, Sponesites. Science can and does take care of itself, if you dig for it in science rather than press releases. Evaluating science requires taking the specific hypothetical statements and applying scientific expertise, not merely quoting vested interests (!) who happen to disagree for reasons other than replicable evidence.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
Well Duh .. I mean when you store nothing but friend fish and chips in there, with a little more grease for good "measure", and you eat that for two years every day .. don't you think you are going to get heart disease? I mean have you not seen "supersize me?" :)
From TFA
"At least from this study, we cannot draw any conclusion that bisphenol A causes any health effect. "
and:
"The researchers also cautioned that these findings are just the first step and more work is needed to determine if the chemical actually is a direct cause of disease."
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
There is a reason all chemistry beakers, bottles, and flasks are made from glass, its the only cheap inert material that doesn't on some level mix with what you are containing. Metal and plastic eventually leech out.
Rather than going overboard with the results I would follow some common sense guidelines:
1) If you are a baby or preggers then use glass containers.
2) Use glass containers for heating things in the microwave or for long term liquid storage.
Given that the vast majority of everything we drink and eat these days is either stored in plastic or touches plastic at some point I think its almost impossible to go plastic free, and I doubt it matters much.
Puberty is related to nutrition.
Did you read the article you link to?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
A Chemical Research in Toxicology article here stated that rats and humans handle bisphenol A in very different ways so I'd be careful drawing lines between rat and human results.
"Enterohepatic circulation of bisphenol A glucuronide in rats results in a slow rate of excretion, whereas bisphenol A is rapidly conjugated and excreted by humans due to the absence of enterohepatic circulation. The efficient glucuronidation of bisphenol A and the rapid excretion of the formed glucuronide result in a low body burden of the estrogenic bisphenol A in humans following oral absorption of low doses."
The article actually says humans basically excreet all of the material resulting in extremely low (near undetectable) levels of biphenol A or its metabolite. They fed humans 5mg of isotopicaly labeled bisphenol A and studied what the body does with it - there is no way any plastic bottle or cup is gonna deliver 5mg of bisphenol A to you via drinking or eating its contents. Bisphenol a is an anti-oxidant used in ppm levels in the plastic to keep it from yellowing over time. So IMHO the jury is still out - BUT my kids use BPA free plastics :) With kids why take the chance?
I thought it was a good idea
I have. On the first of four pages, it's pointed out that there's not enough evidence yet to concede that the chemical in question causes these diseases.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
I wish I could mod you up a more.
I don't understand why everyone immediately fires off that stupid one liner every time someone proposes a logical conclusion. Do any of these people understand how science works? You come up with a hypothesis based on an educated guess, then you test to see if it's true. Refuting something outright, saying that there's no concrete proof is the basis of a creationist's argument. If there is evidence to support a claim then there is clearly reason to believe there is causation, *based* on the correlation.
MABASPLOOM!
Yes I did. It said the causes is indeterminate, then they quoted some people who for all we know made up something off the top of their head.
If you have something that you dont want anyone to know, maybe you shouldnt be doing it in the first place -Eric Schmidt
What's a mime?
"Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
Damn those plasmids.
Khaaaa.aaaa.aaaa.nnnn!
Or maybe you can ask the NIH itself:
http://cerhr.niehs.nih.gov/chemicals/bisphenol/draftBPA_MtgSumm080807.pdf
The Expert Panel expressed some concern that exposure to Bisphenol A causes neural and behavioral
effects.
The Expert Panel had expressed minimal concern that exposure to Bisphenol A potentially causes
accelerations in puberty.
http://cerhr.niehs.nih.gov/chemicals/bisphenol/BPADraftBriefVF_04_14_08.pdf
In addition to effects on survival and growth seen at high dose levels of bisphenol A, a variety of effects related to neural and behavior alterations, precancerous lesions in the prostate and mammary glands, altered prostate gland and urinary tract development, and early onset of puberty in females have been reported in laboratory rodents exposed during development to much lower doses of bisphenol A (⥠0.0024 mg/kg bw/day) that are more similar to human exposures.
Recognizing the lack of data on the effects of bisphenol A in humans and despite the limitations in the evidence for âoelowâ dose effects in laboratory animals discussed in more detail below, the possibility that bisphenol A may alter human development cannot be dismissed
If you have something that you dont want anyone to know, maybe you shouldnt be doing it in the first place -Eric Schmidt
Yeah, it's pointed out by a representative of the chemical industry.
Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
Everything causes cancer, and cures it.
A lot of this "new study" stuff is horrendously lazy journalism caused by having too much space to fill.
http://rocknerd.co.uk
What's a mime?
A mime is someone who acts out a story through body motions without use of speech.
They're easy not to like.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
Sorry, but Bisphenol A is NOT a ppm level anti-oxidant - it's the main chemical building block in both epoxy-resins and polycarbonates. The problem is that no polymerization reaction proceeds to 100%, so you will always have unbound BPA in any "plastic" of these types. And yes, IAAPC
In regards to the article, it states that 90% of the population showed BPA in their bodies, and that the top 25% BPA correlated with increased disease. Since the BPA accumulates in fat tissue, this might also correlate with "the fattest 25% of the population have an increased risk of heart disease and diabetes". What no one will dispute.
I'm aging rapidly, I bought a new game and had no idea if my machine was good for it.
To parrot an industry-trade-group TV commercial, "imagine a world without plastics." No single-use hypodermic needles and other medical devices, fewer artificial body parts and almost certainly no pacemakers, etc. etc. etc.
Yes, certain plastics are harmful to certain parts of our bodies. Any decision to take them off the market or restrict their use must be made holistically, and not based on a single narrow "save the fill-in-the-blank" criterion.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
mime
n.
A modern performer who specializes in comic mimicry.
1. The art of portraying characters and acting out situations or a narrative by gestures and body movement without the use of words; pantomime.
2. A performance of pantomime.
3. An actor or actress skilled in pantomime.
4. Twenty (20) points if you run one over with a car
"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore."
...life, as it is the disease that always leads to death.
This is only kiddie_valind's 4th post and he's managed 17 replies as of the time of this post. The troll-fu is strong with this one. He's been fed well.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
Hmm, let's see, what's more likely to be in a plastic container...
Fast Food
Candy Bar
Pop (Soda)
Snack Cakes
A good healthy home-cooked meal...
It's a defensive reaction, because most people think that correlation is causation.
Publish a study that shows how ice cream sales are correlated to shark attacks, to a very high degree. Watch how all the morons swarm out of the woodwork to talk about the evils of ice cream and how Nature is getting her revenge and all other kinds of stupid crap.
It's true that "correlation is not causation" does not add anything to the discussion. But it does keep things from being subtracted by idiots who can't grasp that concept.
If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
Exactly. People who eat more prepackaged foods are more likely to be taking in all sorts of stuff---high fructose corn syrup, higher levels of sugar, higher levels of various preservatives (some of which break down into rather nasty stuff in the presence of citric acid), etc., all of which lead to increased levels of disease, whether it's heart disease, diabetes, cancer, etc. Those prepackaged foods are frequently packaged in containers made out of plastics that leach... yup, you guessed it... bisphenol A.
The correlation is interesting, but it isn't remotely close to proving causation. What would be required for that would be doing another study that compensates for dietary differences (and genetic predisposition and...).
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Actually he completely agrees with the conclusion, which was that there is correlation but as yet no evidence for causation. You fail it!
If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
Seeing as how the article comes right out and says, essentially, that correlation is not causation and there is no evidence for causation in the study, how can you possibly start out with those two questions in your post? His post completely agrees with the researchers who performed the study, and yet you somehow feel a need to sit there and lecture him for stating a fundamental fact of statistics. Well done!
If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
I thinks that's why they want more studies, they have shown the correlation but not the causation yet. One plausible explanation is that it's the food found in these plastic containers that is increasing the risk of disease. If the food that is typically packaged in these plastics is worse for you than food that is not typically packaged in these plastics, then the correlation with urine BPA levels would be just that, a correlation not a causation. Changing the container to be made of triton plastic, or whatever, would not change the fact that it's the food that is causing the increased risk of disease.
Correlation *is* causation for multi-normal distributions, and since these types of distributions are common in nature (cf. the central limit theorem), the discovery of a correlation, while not necessarily proving a causal link, at least raises a significant possibility of a connection.
We get that you are all about criticising Americans based on your own ignorant biases and stereotypes. We get that.
I just wonder why people think it's funny since you've been making the same basic joke for years.
To quote LongNoi "QZTR was right and won't leave me alone because I called him a moron when I was wrong" FYS
No, class A addresses look like aaa.nnn.nnn.nnn. Yours is a class C, which looks like ccc.ccc.ccc.nnn.
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
Look, if it were in response to any particular post or claim, I'd understand it. Heck, I could even swallow it as "just watch the hordes claim causation there." Then it at least also gave the question to which it answers.
But posted as a knee-jerk reaction by itself, it is just plain old dumb. And it almost invariably makes a claim about TFA, not about anyone who might misunderstand it.
I mean, picture the following conversation:
You: "But it does keep things from being subtracted by idiots who can't grasp that concept."
Me: "Then you should stop sucking cock."
You: "WTF?"
Me: "Oh, sorry, I'm just defensively answering in advance to people who think sucking cock also keeps idiots away."
If it sounds stupidly absurd, bingo, that's about how that tired meme is too. Stick to where someone actually falsely claimed causation.
Because from where I stand, the parrots reposting that meme all over the place _are_ the idiots subtracting from the conversation. That "answering" a question nobody asked is just adding useless noise to the signal.
But, just to be a lot less nice, let me tell you what it looks like to _me_ most of the time: karma whoring and ego masturbation. It allows some loser to (A) feel like a member in the big family of skeptics, and/or (B) feel already better for his lack of scientific results or education, by having something snarky to say each time any mention of science comes up. It's a one-liner ego-stroke, that's all there is to it. "Look at how much smarter I am than those 'scientists'! I know that correlation doesn't equal causation! I bet they don't!"
Bonus point if the idiot doesn't even understand what he's talking about there.
Not that I think science needs any defense from that, and far from me to keep anyone from using their own brains about any given problem or solution. By all means, please _do_ use your brains. But the whole point is that such one-liner memes _aren't_ much of a sign of brain activity, most of the time. It's just a canned slogan that most seem to wave around mechanically and unthinkingly, just because it seemed fashionable to pull it out.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
When will people learn not to eat the containers their food comes in?!?
Tell that to William Shatner.
Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
Yes, it was a topic carefully avoided by the scientists themselves. Just look at their tap dancing: "The researchers, who will also present their findings at the U.S. FDA session on Tuesday, added it was too early to identify a mechanism through which the chemical may be doing harm." and "The researchers also cautioned that these findings are just the first step and more work is needed to determine if the chemical actually is a direct cause of disease."
Ur doin it wrong: "In Soviet Russia, causation correlates you!"
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Maybe you should have RTFA first. "At least from this study, we cannot draw any conclusion that bisphenol A causes any health effect. As noted by the authors, further research will be needed to understand whether these statistical associations have any relevance at all for human health," Hentges said in a telephone interview.
www.timcoleman.com is a total waste of your time. Never go there.
The Mime Pope is a tough fight, though vulnerable to explosives.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
A curious statement, since BPA was found at detectable levels in the urine of 92.6% of the population in a CDC study.
Bisphenol A is everywhere - it's the building block of polycarbonate. It's used in dental resins and in the lining of food cans.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
Correlation is a measure of the probability of causation.
Corelation. Is. Not. Causation.
I had a correlation... with yo' mama!
Bow-ties are cool.
This is why I only drink from metal cans. Sure the boss gets uppity when I'm on my 8th Strongbow before lunch but I say, "HEY! Don't you know plastic bottles of water could give me HEART DISEASE!??!".
"Getting a bunch of statistically random people to sit in a lab and drink from either plastic or non-plastic cups for 50 years isn't really going to be possible."
"Next... Mr Smith."
"Hi."
"Oops, looks like the seed material is recycling. Jenkins, retune the entropy pool, and get a cleaner in here."
Kraboom!
"Next... Senor Frobuzz."
"Purple souffle! Unicorn toffee!"
"Excellent, welcome to the team. Would you like to work on financial forecasting, cryptography or Situationism?"
You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
If you look at a lab supply catalog these days, there is quite a bit of plasticware.
George Carlin outlined quite good, that the intent of the planet earth to create mankind was to have plastic in the first place. Actually it does not need us any more, earth + plastic is there. We can go as well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9X0F1Qjn0Ac
To error is human, not? So here is the link I ment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dWrSuhLpVM
A curious statement, since BPA was found at detectable levels in the urine of 92.6% of the population
What part of "excrete" did you not understand?
Well,let us try to think this thing through(I did RTFA,BTW) and see what we can come up with. The chemical in question is found in drink bottles,and is also used as the waxy coating on many cans,most of which has really crappy stuff inside that is very bad for you. According to TFA those with the highest concentrations were 25% more likely to have heart disease,cancer,etc. Considering that we KNOW that the stuff that comes in a lot of those containers is really bad for you,and that the west has lots of unhealthy people who eat way too much junk. Wouldn't be logical to look at the diets first and see if the reason they have high levels of this plastic in their system is the fact that they are eating to much garbage and that the garbage might have a factor in their disease?
Again,according to TFA that more than 90% of folks test positive for this chemical in their urine,which means it really shouldn't be hard to find enough healthy folks to test this theory. Unless of course the amount they are considering bad is so high that there is no way to eat anything healthy and get enough of this plastic in your system which means those folks got bigger things to worry about than plastic. Even the reviewers note "At least from this study, we cannot draw any conclusion that bisphenol A causes any health effect. As noted by the authors, further research will be needed to understand whether these statistical associations have any relevance at all for human health".
And while I don't want to sound like a shill for the plastics industry(really have no interest in plastics one way or the other) the simple fact is ANYTHING can kill you if there is too much in your system,even water. And they don't tell what amount they are calling the "highest" so we don't know if that is folks who drank one bottled drink a week,or several a day. And yet it says in TFA that the Canadian regulatory agencies are already labeling it a toxic chemical and coming up with all kinds of new laws to limit exposure like it was Radon or something. So maybe we should simply spend a little more money on testing before we draw any conclusions one way or another about the matter. And the reasons why folks break out the correlation meme is because bunches like the regulatory agencies seem to jump on data like this looking to pass new rules without even bothering with further testing or verification. But as always this is my 02c,YMMV
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
I should probably clarify that comment.
If BPA is found in the urine, it most certainly enters the bloodstream. However, what the GP post's article is suggesting is that it is cleared and excreted very quickly from the bloodstream, therefore it cannot build up in a large enough quantity in the blood to exert any physiological effect on humans.
Thus when they tried to measure blood levels they could only detect the conjugated, presumably inactive form of bisphenol A, which was found in very small quantities and promptly cleared in the urine.
Hope that makes sense.
Teach Correlationism in highschool science class!
"The biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place."
Corelation. Is. Not. Causation.
So, what, you're suggesting people who live lifestyles that cause heart disease are more likely to also use plastic containers for their food and drink? Or people with heart disease are more likely to use plastic containers? What other correllation are you proposing?
I rarely respond to people who can't figure out how to put their response outside of the quote tags, but here goes...
Perhaps people with heart disease also have reduced ability to metabolize or excrete bisphenol A.
Don't strain your brain...
Support SETI@home
"all of which lead to increased levels of disease, "
And your evidence of this is...?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
So yes, I was very intelligent to point out the bias of Natural News so people are aware of their bias and lies .
There fixed it for you. :)
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
h please, ther eis no evicens at al in the first article.
While yuo can be suspect of the industry funded studies, many other countries have done studies as well.
Your last linking is talking about rats..rats, not people, rats.
Naturalnews goal is to get everyone 'organic' and to fear anything 'artificial.
I wonder if they get to pick the 2 billion people that would die if everyone went organic?
Also it is funny how they don't have any articles about how all ecoli breakout have been from organic farms?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Bisphenol-A is not found in plastic articles that are made of polypropylene (PP), HDPE, or LDPE. Those of you swigging from that bottle of FIJI, NYC Tap, or that can of Jolt need to wake up and check your sperm count.
Sig this!
You come up with a hypothesis based on an educated guess, then you test to see if it's true.
I agree with what you said, but most people only do the hypothesis. Tim S PS: Posting the hypothesis on /. does not count as testing it.
<sarcasm>Yeah, obviously that's all wrong; obviously, heart disease and cancer induce false memories of using plastic bottles.</sarcasm>
People who eat more prepackaged foods are more likely to be taking in all sorts of stuff---high fructose corn syrup, higher levels of sugar, higher levels of various preservatives [...]
It seems that no one bothers to actually read the articles before posting (save the "you must be new here", I'm being sarcastic).
You see, the study didn't test exposure to BPA. It only compared the likelihood of some diseases with the amount of BPA present in the body. That's an important detail.
In other words, this correlation may very well indicate causation... the other way around. Heart disease or diabetes may cause your body to retain more BPA. As simple as that.
Shooting off in random directions and making conjectures about the habits of people who come into contact with BPA is pointless (unless you're planning to back it up with data). For example, BPA is used in the packaging of several vegetables, so you can eat nothing but "health food" and still come into contact with BPA frequently. In fact the article points out that 90% of the people tested had some BPA in their body. Also, high-fuctose corn syrup is relatively rare outside the USA (extremely rare in Europe), and the study was (apparently) conducted in the UK.
In any case the study's authors are not claiming any causation, one way or the other, and they specifically say they did not identify any mechanism through which BPA would cause any illness.
You come up with a hypothesis based on an educated guess, then you test to see if it's true.
Well, you test to see if it's false within the limits of your study. The important point though is that a valid test must eliminate or compensate all sources of influence other than those being studied. However, when you're working with something as complicated as people, doing a rigorous study that controls for everything except the variables of interest is incredibly expensive, if not impossible.
So we get a lot of these studies where 10,000 people fill out a medical background and answer a few questions about $topicOfTheWeek. Studies like this can certainly indicate possible correlations that should be studied further (i.e. where grant money should be funneled), and the researchers are often rational about their conclusions. But then the press blows it up into a shocking medical fact, because "Something in your refrigerator can kill your children! Find out at 10!" gets viewers.
there is clearly reason to believe there is causation, *based* on the correlation.
Certainly if two things are correlated something is causing them, but it doesn't tell you which one causes the other, or if both are the consequence of some third thing. Naturally, people who choose to be dishonest about the results will choose the causation that benefits them, which is what the phrase in question aims to remind people.
I'm against the kind of alarmism that has become rampant in nutritional science, but there is increasing reason to be concerned about BPA
Evidence that eating foods with more sweeteners leads to greater obesity, which in turn leads to diabetes? Do I really need to cite studies for something so commonly accepted? Okay, here's a good start:
http://news.healingwell.com/index.php?p=news1&id=521780
http://healthlink.mcw.edu/article/941223597.html
http://www.healthsystem.virginia.edu/uvahealth/adult_diabetes/obover.cfm
I'm not saying that all type 2 diabetes is caused by obesity---it is well established that this is not the case---but it is well established that a fair percentage of people with type 2 diabetes became diabetic after gaining weight and that these people often cease to be diabetic after surgical intervention to forces weight loss. That's about as clear an establishment of causation as you can get.... The causative mechanism is even somewhat understood at this point.
Or did you mean the proof about the preservatives?
http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Science-Nutrition/FDA-re-opens-probe-into-benzene-contamination-of-soft-drinks
Follow the links from there for loads of info on this subject.
It is fairly well established that sodium benzoate when combined with ascorbic acid (sorry, wrong acid in my previous post... my bad) releases benzene, which is a well known carcinogen.
Word to the wise: if you're buying soft drinks or fruit juices preserved with sodium benzoate, be sure to drink them immediately. Don't let them sit on the shelf of your home. What you don't know can kill you.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
"Linked". Does. Not. Imply. Causation. You. Annoying. Git.
sudo ergo sum
No, they come once a month!
I thankyou.
Invaders must die
You did waste time reading my post, and you wasted even more time replying. And YOU seem to think everyone else gives a fuck about YOUR opinion, so we're in the same boat, eh? You know what I see when you post? "Wah wah wah, someone thinks differently than me, make them stop, wah wah!" Free speech: get used to it or get off the Internet, you freak.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
How can you listen to me, fool? Are you hiding in my office somewhere? Please. You can't shut me up, either. Have you invented a device to stab people in the face over the Internet? I thought not.
I think you might have some kind of manic disorder. Your thinking is disorganized and illogical, and you seem to have sever delusions of grandeur. You don't actually have the power to shut me up.
You might want to see a mental health professional. Manic disorders are serious.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
But you did pay attention, didn't you? You read my post, you replied, that means you paid attention. The fun thing is, I'm forcing you to keep responding, wasting more of your time and attention, getting your blood pressure up, making you rant and rave. I love it, please keep going.
You've only shut me up in your own, delusional world.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
"But you did pay attention, didn't you?"
No, and you're changing your argument again because your stupid attempt to act like "listen" didn't apply, when I just proved to you that it did.
"You read my post, you replied, that means you paid attention."
No, I have no fucking idea what you said. I paid attention to nothing, I simply reacted reflexively. You fail again.
"The fun thing is, I'm forcing you to keep responding, wasting more of your time and attention, getting your blood pressure up, making you rant and rave. I love it, please keep going."
FUnny, I seem to recall you tracking me down a day later to defend your stupid joke. I am repeatedly telling you I don't care about what you say, yet you think you're "getting my blood pressure up" when the reality is, my co workers and I are marvelling at how stupid you are, and how ridiculous your attempts to get over on me are.
So far, you've changed your attack every time you reply, and yet you think you've done something other than prove exactly what I said about you.
And I've seen you use that stupid "I'm getting you to respond" attack befor, it's tired just like your jokes.
"You've only shut me up in your own, delusional world."
Then reality is my world.
You cannot deny that no matter what you've done, you've gotten your moronic arguments crushed at every opportunity, and now you're acting as though your own compulsion to reply is somehow a win for you.
Of course, if you weren't so stupid, you'd realize you replied to me, so by your own argument you lose.
Again.
Now, you cannot help yourself, you are so mentally ill, so totally intellectually flawed, that you must, must reply to defend yourself, no matter how idiotic your replies are, and no matter how stupid and hypocritical you appear.
Please deny it so I can post your quotes and prove it.
And you get shut the fuck up. Again.
To quote LongNoi "QZTR was right and won't leave me alone because I called him a moron when I was wrong" FYS
Translation:
We found some funny results, but we have no fucking idea what they really mean. Please send use some more grants so we can actually try to find if it causes anything except the liquid in the test tube turning sparkly violet.
The moon is not fully subjugated. I demand a second assault wave preceded by a massive nuclear bombardment.
You haven't repeatedly done anything. Your victories exist only in your own mind. Just to be clear, The Star Wars action figures you have lined up on your desk in your mom's basement are not 'your co-workers.' They are plastic dolls.
Tell me, gotten any positive moderations here? No? How's your karma? You seem to be out of touch as far as what the rest of Slashdot thinks of me, because I have excellent karma, and continue to get moderated up. And you don't. If I'm the idiot you claim to be, then everyone else here must be idiots too. So why waste your time posting on a web site full of idiots? Find something better to do.
You keep on losing pathetically in this argument, but you are too dumb to know it. But now I grow bored, my server installs are done and I don't have any more time to kill taunting you, so I'm afraid our little game here is done. Maybe you can find someone else to validate your pathetic existence.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Wood Toys are Better Than Plastic
Parents can replace plastic toys like puzzles for preschoolers with wood ones from family companies like http://www.tagtoys.com/ that make all their toys in the USA.
Let me get my coworkers so we can laugh at you some more.
PS I would have read your post, but as soon as I saw you bring up moderation I knew you knew I had won, so I didn't bother.
To quote LongNoi "QZTR was right and won't leave me alone because I called him a moron when I was wrong" FYS
@ you. Right now.
I mean damn, loser, look at how fast you responded...
To quote LongNoi "QZTR was right and won't leave me alone because I called him a moron when I was wrong" FYS
You do know that's just what you write in your paper if those are the stats you did. It's worded to hopefully get more grants. It's research boilerplate.
Nine minutes.
You're so obsessed it took you less than ten minutes to reply.
Sorry, you're too pathetic after that to do anything but laugh at.
Again.
To quote LongNoi "QZTR was right and won't leave me alone because I called him a moron when I was wrong" FYS
"Are you still obsessing over this, even after the weekend?"
No, I'm not replying within ten minutes to say I'm not obsessed with replying like you did.
" Is your life that boring?"
No, because I'm not replying within ten minutes to say I'm not obsessed with replying like you did.
"Sad."
Thanks for signing your post.
To quote LongNoi "QZTR was right and won't leave me alone because I called him a moron when I was wrong" FYS
"Neun minuten! Du bist ein esel!"
That's my German co-worker, congratulations you're internationally pathetic!
And you sure do wirte a lot for someone who "claims" they're not obsessed...
To quote LongNoi "QZTR was right and won't leave me alone because I called him a moron when I was wrong" FYS
And nine minutes = you are a loser.
Eat it.
PS we're still laughing at you.
To quote LongNoi "QZTR was right and won't leave me alone because I called him a moron when I was wrong" FYS
is 540 seconds, which, when written that way, makes you even more pathetic.
And we're STILL laughing at you.
To quote LongNoi "QZTR was right and won't leave me alone because I called him a moron when I was wrong" FYS
Spun said "Duh, I's not obsessed, I has to reply in nine minutes, I has no choice, I swear I's not obsessed!"
That made it even more fun to laugh at you.
To quote LongNoi "QZTR was right and won't leave me alone because I called him a moron when I was wrong" FYS
Spun says "I know I reply in nine minutes, which of course means you're obsessed with me."
Yes, Spun is that stupid.
Which is why we laugh at him so much.
To quote LongNoi "QZTR was right and won't leave me alone because I called him a moron when I was wrong" FYS
Whether it's physically painful for you to sit there fidgeting until it's been long enough for you to post without looking like even more of a loser.
Don't bother waiting, you can't make it any worse.
Spun says "I dun'ts gives a fudgy what you think, and I'll post over and over, obsessively and without fail to prove I's dun'ts care!!!!one1111eleven!!!"
Yes, again, Spun is that stupid.
To quote LongNoi "QZTR was right and won't leave me alone because I called him a moron when I was wrong" FYS
It's a good thing you're not totally obsessed with replying, otherwise you might do so in nine minutes then continuously reply to say you're not obsessed.
Uh oh... never mind...
To quote LongNoi "QZTR was right and won't leave me alone because I called him a moron when I was wrong" FYS
I bet if we were discussing your sex life, nine minutes would be your personal best.
But we're not, and you're a loser.
A loser that we're laughing at.
To quote LongNoi "QZTR was right and won't leave me alone because I called him a moron when I was wrong" FYS
Seven minutes!
You obviously obeyed when I instructed you to avoid waiting, it's nice to know you do what I tell you when I tell you.
But it doesn't stop us from laughing at you.
To quote LongNoi "QZTR was right and won't leave me alone because I called him a moron when I was wrong" FYS