Cookie Control

This site uses cookies to store information on your computer.

Some cookies on this site are essential, and the site won't work as expected without them. These cookies are set when you submit a form, login or interact with the site by doing something that goes beyond clicking on simple links.

We also use some non-essential cookies to anonymously track visitors or enhance your experience of the site. If you're not happy with this, we won't set these cookies but some nice features of the site may be unavailable.

By using our site you accept the terms of our Privacy Policy.

(One cookie will be set to store your preference)
(Ticking this sets a cookie to hide this popup if you then hit close. This will not store any personal information)

Most Plastic Products Found Toxic, But Alternatives May Exist

August 3, 2011

Toxicity concerns typically focus on one chemical at a time, due to the way our legal, science, and regulatory systems have been set up. But in the real world, dozens, hundreds, or thousands of chemicals interact to increase or decrease actual toxicity, in ways that can be very different from expectations for the individual chemicals.

This issue is illustrated well by the current controversy over bisphenol A (BPA), which is found in many plastics. The great majority of the science looks just at BPA. But plastic products often are made of dozens of substances.

To evaluate the combined effects of all ingredients in a plastics product, via one route of toxicity, a team of researchers evaluated more than 500 such products for their ability to induce estrogenic activity (EA, the most common form of endocrine disruption). The products were purchased at stores such as major mainstream retailers (e.g., Wal-Mart, Target, Albertsons) and ones that tend to appeal to more health-oriented customers (Whole Foods, Trader Joe's). The researchers found that nearly every product induced EA, even all the BPA substitutes.

At the same time, the researchers discovered there are some plastic products that instigated no EA in their tests, and would cost about the same to use in lieu of the EA-inducing products.

Keep in mind that most of the researchers are employed by a company, PlastiPure, that has a vested interest in selling non-EA products. Also, keep in mind there are other modes of toxicity besides EA, so any product that passes the EA screen would also need to be evaluated for carcinogenicity, immune disruption, neurological damage, etc.

You can cover this research and issue explicitly as a direct consumer story, for products on shelves today, or as a hook for a big-picture assessment of the limitations of our current legal, regulatory, and science systems. 

SEJ Publication Types: 
Topics on the Beat: 
Visibility: