Bisphenol A link to heart disease confirmed

this is the stuff they use to make some plastic bottles and line the inside of cans and it has some serious side afects i realy dont know how they get of with this stuf it must be a lot cheaper than something safer
well heres the link
www.nature.com...

reply to post by digby888


Watch this:

Other than water......what drinks are bottled in plastic bottles?

Sugary Drinks!

Just because BPA in the urine is positively correlated with heart disease doesn't mean that BPA causes heart disease. That would be a logical fallacy.

Edit to add: It infuriates me that scientists can't even discern the difference between association/correlation and cause. It's clear these scientists were "expecting" the results that were gathered, which support their hypothesis that BPA is soooooo bad for us. Makes one wonder who funded the study.

-Dev

[edit on 13-1-2010 by DevolutionEvolvd]

The full text of the study can be found here: Full Text

Methodology and Findings

A cross-sectional analysis of NHANES: subjects were n = 1455 (2003/04) and n = 1493 (2005/06) adults aged 18–74 years, representative of the general adult population of the United States. Regression models were adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, income, smoking, BMI, waist circumference, and urinary creatinine concentration. Main outcomes were reported diagnoses of heart attack, coronary heart disease, angina and diabetes and serum liver enzyme levels. Urinary BPA concentrations in 2005/06 (geometric mean 1.79 ng/ml, 95% CI: 1.64 to 1.96) were lower than in 2003/04 (2.49 ng/ml, CI: 2.20 to 2.83, difference p-value = 0.00002). Higher BPA concentrations were associated with coronary heart disease in 2005/06 (OR per z-score increase in BPA = 1.33, 95%CI: 1.01 to 1.75, p = 0.043) and in pooled data (OR = 1.42, CI: 1.17 to 1.72, p = 0.001). Associations with diabetes did not reach significance in 2005/06, but pooled estimates remained significant (OR = 1.24, CI: 1.10 to 1.40, p = 0.001). There was no overall association with gamma glutamyl transferase concentrations, but pooled associations with alkaline phosphatase and lactate dehydrogenase remained significant.

In other words: This was an observational study that absolutely implies no causality.

Studies to clarify the mechanisms of these associations are urgently needed.

Ah yes, they finally come to terms. As I said in my first post, the mechanisms probably have nothing to do with BPA, but rather have everything to do with the sugary contents of the BPA-containing bottles.

-Dev

[edit on 13-1-2010 by DevolutionEvolvd]

Originally posted by DevolutionEvolvd
The full text of the study can be found here: Full Text

Methodology and Findings

A cross-sectional analysis of NHANES: subjects were n = 1455 (2003/04) and n = 1493 (2005/06) adults aged 18–74 years, representative of the general adult population of the United States. Regression models were adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, income, smoking, BMI, waist circumference, and urinary creatinine concentration. Main outcomes were reported diagnoses of heart attack, coronary heart disease, angina and diabetes and serum liver enzyme levels. Urinary BPA concentrations in 2005/06 (geometric mean 1.79 ng/ml, 95% CI: 1.64 to 1.96) were lower than in 2003/04 (2.49 ng/ml, CI: 2.20 to 2.83, difference p-value = 0.00002). Higher BPA concentrations were associated with coronary heart disease in 2005/06 (OR per z-score increase in BPA = 1.33, 95%CI: 1.01 to 1.75, p = 0.043) and in pooled data (OR = 1.42, CI: 1.17 to 1.72, p = 0.001). Associations with diabetes did not reach significance in 2005/06, but pooled estimates remained significant (OR = 1.24, CI: 1.10 to 1.40, p = 0.001). There was no overall association with gamma glutamyl transferase concentrations, but pooled associations with alkaline phosphatase and lactate dehydrogenase remained significant.

In other words: This was an observational study that absolutely implies no causality.

Studies to clarify the mechanisms of these associations are urgently needed.

Ah yes, they finally come to terms. As I said in my first post, the mechanisms probably have nothing to do with BPA, but rather have everything to do with the sugary contents of the BPA-containing bottles.

-Dev

[edit on 13-1-2010 by DevolutionEvolvd]

From my reading of the study, it's not the scientists' fault that this seemingly weak correlation is making headlines, but rather it is the fault of pop science rags and scientifically illiterate news channels/papers and the likewise illiterate public. I had this comic posted on my computer monitor for the past few months to remind myself and others of this effect for the past year or so:

www.phdcomics.com...

[edit on 1/13/2010 by VneZonyDostupa]

[edit on 1/13/2010 by VneZonyDostupa]