(NaturalNews) A poorly designed study with one obvious goal -- to cover up the health effects of exposure to the plastics chemical bisphenol A, or BPA -- is right now circulating the mainstream media with corresponding claims that BPA is completely safe for humans at current exposure levels, despite copious contradicting science. But a University of Massachusetts Amherst (UMA) assistant professor and several others have since come out publicly to decry this flawed study, the construct of which ignores the basic confines of legitimate science.
As recently covered by Environmental Health News (EHN) writer Brian Bienkowski, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decided to team up with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to put together a team of government scientists to investigate the safety of BPA, which the FDA has long insisted is completely safe. The project emerged in response to the publishing of multiple scientific studies in recent years illustrating both acute and chronic health effects associated with BPA exposure, findings that directly contradict the agency's longstanding position.
Not surprisingly, this new study was conducted in such a way as to avoid coming to these same conclusions, an apparently sinister plot that shows where these taxpayer-funded agencies' loyalties truly lie. Independent investigations into their work have revealed that the new research, which was published in a recent issue of the peer-reviewed journal Toxicological Sciences, is severely lacking in terms of abiding by accepted and proper scientific standards.
"Some scientists not affiliated with the study said that the findings are flawed," writes Bienkowski for EHN. "FDA scientists didn't look for all relevant health impacts, such as effects on the developing brain. Also, the experiment lasted for 90 days, so it is unknown if the rats' health was affected later in life. Some effects, such as altered glucose levels, might occur after continuing exposure."
Government BPA study had no real controls, ignored estrogenic effects of BPA
The study also lacked proper controls, say critics, as all the mice were determined to have the same levels of BPA in their blood at the conclusion of the study, regardless of whether or not they were intentionally exposed to the chemical during the actual evaluation. What this means, of course, is that the study's ultimate findings are completely meaningless, as there is no way to accurately assess how BPA affects physiology without proper controls.
"That's a problem," commented Laura Vandenberg from UMA, who completely disapproves of the way the FDA/NIH study was conducted. "When you have contamination like that, you cannot just look at the higher-dose groups and make conclusions."
Also missing from the FDA's assessment was any consideration of BPA's affects on human hormones, mainly its ability to activate estrogen receptors in the brain. Previous studies have confirmed that even low-dose exposure to BPA can alter hormone levels, especially over long periods of time -- the new FDA study on BPA, it should be noted, only evaluated the effects of BPA on rats for 90 days, which is far too short a duration to make any reasonable or logical conclusions about its safety.
"Other recent animal studies conducted at universities have linked low-dose BPA exposure to an array of health impacts, including some of the effects that the new study did not find," writes Bienkowski for EHN. "These other experiments found mammary gland abnormalities, altered male and female sexual development, changes in metabolism, insulin and glucose, impaired learning and memory, stress and obesity."