Exposure to plastics during pregnancy can raise blood pressure | Hacker News Reader

Exposure to plastics during pregnancy can raise blood pressure

publichealth.columbia.edu

25 pointsrustoo19 comments

I always feel these compound descriptions lack intuition for non Chemistry majors.

The coumpound described 'Phtalates' is a technically a plasticizer. A lot of plastic structures are naturally brittle, the purpose of Phtalates is to intercalate in the lattice of the plastic structure and give it some flex.

So even if you are using Phtalate free plastic, assume that if it has some flex it will likely just have some other chemically similar plasticizer. So as a general precautionery principle avoid plastic all together until we have a better picture of the science around it.

Avoid plastic? Is that even a possibility nowadays?

To some extent. Cotton or wool instead of synthetics. Glass food containers instead of plastic. Wood toys instead of plastic.

Good luck buying meat or vegetables in a supermarket which isn't wrapped in plastic.

Most supermarkets sell veggies loose, but even most people avoiding the standard plastic bags will put them in nylon mesh bags instead, not sure what your option there would be, but there's probably some cotton based bag you could find. Meat can usually be bought at larger stores from the butcher counter in butcher paper. However some butcher papers are treated so might be some more research needed three.

However many studies that make headlines like this are flawed bunk, so I'm not sure I'd waste my time with such efforts until there's clear consensus.

There's pretty solid consensus that phthalates disrupt the endocrine system, particularly testosterone production.

https://www.endocrine.org/news-and-advocacy/news-room/2014/r...

We used to think Teflon and the like were fine, until we found these compounds lasting basically forever in the environment and interacting with proteins.

In my opinion, a better default is to avoid when possible although its difficult to escape them everywhere. We are surrounded by plastics, and for good reason. They've done amazing things especially in the medical field.

Find a local butcher who wraps in paper? That paper coating may be plastic, though, unless they use waxed. Veggies are often loose at eg Whole Foods. You can get your milk in glass bottles pretty easily.

It’s likely easier in Europe, but it’s feasible in at least some parts of the US, depending on where you live.

It takes paying attention, but once you adjust your habits, it gets a bit easier.

You can probably get a lot of mileage out of just not heating your food in contact with plastic. You’re not going to eliminate all exposure, probably want to focus on the likely highest impact parts.

Studies that don't either establish causality or show extreme results should be banned from publication.

At this point, we can be pretty confident that everything is "associated" with everything. Further results are just wasted time and energy and are fodder for people to worry about unnecessarily.

If it is showing up in bloodstreams it needed FDA approval. That we can do these studies is an unacceptable regulatory gap. Given enough substances it is only a matter of time until we will eventually be doomed by this incompetence if our incompetence of treating releasing CO2 in any quantity as harmless doesn't doom us first.

I believe you only need FDA approval if you sell something as a medical device/treatment etc. If you sell it as <plastic thing> and some residual chemical ends up in someone's bloodstream, that's fine.

This is because millions of chemicals are perpetually floating around in our bloodstreams (and elsewhere).

The FDA may issue warnings and bans. But to do so usually requires some evidence something is harmful. This study does NOT provide any evidence of that. Hence it was a total waste of time and energy.

Edit:

https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/what-we-do

>The Food and Drug Administration is responsible for protecting the public health by ensuring the safety, efficacy, and security of human and veterinary drugs, biological products, and medical devices; and by ensuring the safety of our nation's food supply, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation.

(Goes on to include tobacco and terrorism)

The FDA evaluates food packaging and optimistically dismisses chemicals entering the consumer. But let's assume they don't, you are saying that given a new chemical added to your bloodstream you want to assume it is safe based on 0 evidence when presented with weak evidence for what it actually does?

I'm just saying:

* The FDA aren't interested in 90% of products, they mostly just do food and medicine.

* There are million of chemicals, assessing them all is an impossibly large task even for the US government.

* There is no evidence at all that this chemical is dangerous. If there were that would be different. But there isn't.

* I'm not saying it is (they are) safe. Just that there is no evidence of danger here.

I understand your concern, but I think that publishing these papers is important. It puts on the record what investigators have looked at for others to parse and decide if they want to investigate further.

Although I do agree that you can find associations between many different things, establishing causality is important for making the information more actionable.

It seems possible that increased exposure to phtalates is linked to better revenue. And better revenue is linked to more stress for the aquisition of the revenue and to increased calories consumption. It seems to me a more likely explanation, especially in Mexico. Not sure wheter the study controlled for BMI but that would be a minimum.

I'm not sure I understand. What do you mean by "exposure to phtalates is liked to better revenue"?

I searched the linked text for mentions of revenue but was unable to find any.

They're speaking generally about motivations to increase the production and distribution of phthalates.

Phtalate is essentially a plasticiser found in cookware I have the impression

Stress only has a temporary impact on blood pressure. This study looked at longer term trends.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com