Originally published May 19 2014
BPA exposure during pregnancy raises miscarriage risk
by Jonathan Benson, staff writer
(NaturalNews) The adverse reproductive effects of the plastics chemical bisphenol A (BPA) have once again been demonstrated in the scientific literature. Researchers from Stanford University in California found that the more BPA circulating in a pregnant woman's bloodstream, the greater her chances of having a miscarriage.
Among 115 pregnant women tested as part of the research, 68 had miscarriages, a percentage roughly three times higher than that of the general population. Upon further investigation, a direct correlation between BPA levels and miscarriage rates was observed, substantiating a growing consensus that BPA directly interferes with human reproduction.
According to Environmental Health News (EHN), all of the women had been admitted to Stanford's fertility clinic within four weeks of fertilization, and each was tested for BPA levels prior to treatment. The women were then divided into four groups based on their BPA measurements to evaluate the miscarriage rate.
Leading the pack was the group of women with the highest levels of BPA, who were found to be 83 percent more likely than the others to have a miscarriage. Women in the second- and third-highest exposure groups also bore high risks at 58 percent and 30 percent, respectively. At the bottom with the lowest miscarriage risk were women with low circulating BPA levels.
Though a causal link between BPA and miscarriage was not established by this particular study, the correlative findings are strongly suggestive of one. They also back earlier research tying BPA exposure to general infertility, including a 2013 study out of Massachusetts that identified increased difficulties getting pregnant among couples where BPA exposure was high.
"Couples suffering from infertility or recurrent miscarriages would be best advised to reduce BPA exposure because it has the potential to adversely affect fetal development," wrote the authors of the new study.
FDA ignores science, insists BPA is safe With more than 90 percent of the general public now believed to be contaminated with BPA, these findings are definitely disheartening. Cases of infertility, miscarriage and birth defects are already on the rise due to other sources of environmental pollution, and adding BPA into the mix only makes the problem worse.
Data gathered last summer by researchers from Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston found that BPA directly inhibits the normal development of human eggs. Providing further details as to how BPA obstructs normal human reproduction, the research, which was published in the journal Human Reproduction, showed that BPA decreases the likelihood that eggs will fully mature.
"Our data show that BPA exposure can dramatically inhibit egg maturation and adds to a growing body of evidence about the impact of BPA on human health," wrote Dr. Catherine Racowsky, one of the authors of this earlier study. "I would encourage further research to gain a greater understanding of the role BPA plays in infertility."
Further research has been conducted all across the globe, and much of it has come to similar conclusions. And yet the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in complete denial of science, remains insistent that BPA at current exposure levels is perfectly safe, a lie that continues to harm the public.
When the FDA recently issued its own study that claimed to prove BPA's safety for humans, many academic scientists were outraged to find that the controls used in the study were deliberately contaminated. As it turns out, both the controls and the subjects had been exposed to BPA, completely invalidating the FDA study.
"It's basic science," stated Gail S. Prins, a professor of physiology at the University of Illinois at Chicago to Mother Jones. "If your controls are contaminated, you've got a failed experiment and the data should be discarded. I'm baffled that any journal would even publish this."
Sources for this article include:
All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing LLC takes sole responsibility for all content. Truth Publishing sells no hard products and earns no money from the recommendation of products. NaturalNews.com is presented for educational and commentary purposes only and should not be construed as professional advice from any licensed practitioner. Truth Publishing assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. For the full terms of usage of this material, visit www.NaturalNews.com/terms.shtml