Plastic poisons replace BPA - use glass or natural products when possible

Most of the ATS community already knows about the horrors of BPA which is a dangerous plastic poison.

People around the world is slowly awakening to the poisoning of our race and starting to raise their voices. This awareness made Canada, declared BPA as a toxic substance in September 2010, but to date no other country has followed suit, although BPA has been banned in baby bottles in Europe and the US.
As a result of the backlash, many companies have rolled out "BPA-free" plastic products, meant to appeal to those health-conscious consumers looking to avoid toxins.

Unfortunately, this may be just a ruse, as studies now show another bisphenol, bisphenol-S (BPS), is now showing up in human urine concentrations at levels similar to those of BPA.i This suggests that many manufacturers are simply swapping one bisphenol for another

This is not necessary a step fore ward because:

"... while regulators wait for manufacturers who promote their products with "BPA-Free!" stickers at the same moment that they infuse them with BPS to voluntarily reformulate,there isevidence now that BPS may actually have worse effects to environmental and human health, alike..

"... BPS' relative inability to biodegrade indicates: 1) once it is absorbed into the human body, it may accumulate there for longer periods of time. 2) it is more likely to persist in the environment, making external exposures to it, and its many metabolites, much more likely than the faster degrading BPA. In other words, its potential to do harm will worsen along the axis of time, not lessen, which is a common argument made for the purported "safety" of BPA."

In a study meant to simulate "real-world" use, 95 percent of all plastic products tested positive for estrogenic activity, meaning they can still disrupt your hormones even if they carry a BPA-free label. Even more disconcerting is the finding that BPA-free plastics in some cases leached more BPA than the non-BPA free plastics

BPA is not the only culprit; it's simply the most highly publicized one. There's also Bisphenol AB and AF, Bisphenol B and BP, Bisphenol C, Bisphenol E, F, G, M, S, P, PH, TMC and, yes, there's even a Bisphenol Z. Any one of these can be in your BPA-free baby bottle or sippy cup, unfortunately.

The problem is that theres no real laws protecting us from this sea of new plasticpoisons, which is a serious issue that should be addressed instantly, just like the many foodpoisons we are also subjected too. We need to get people in office, who puts people health before companies wealth.

"... Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the U.S. law that regulates chemicals in commerce, it's entirely permissible to launch a new material into high-volume production without disclosing its precise chemical identity or any information about its toxicity. This makes it impossible for the public to assess product safety independently of manufacturer claims. And currently, despite EPA and FDA policies that support "safe" alternatives to a chemical of concern like BPA, neither federal agency conducts safety testing of new materials destined for consumer products before they come on the market."

If you're interested in avoiding any number of chemical toxins leaching into your food and beverages, choose glass over plastic, especially when it comes to products that will come into contact with food or beverages. This applies to canned goods as well, which are a major source of BPA (and possibly other chemicals) exposure, so whenever you can, choose jarred goods over canned goods, or opt for fresh instead. Another good idea is to ditch plastic teething toys for your little ones and choose natural wood or fabric varieties instead.

BPA-Free Products Still Contain Bisphenols of Equal Toxicity

Well, we are about to get another new tax.......for plastics and glass here in Australia:

www.dailytelegraph.com.au...

reply to post by Mimir



wow.


they say, NO POISON!!

DONT USE POISON!


everyone says "YEA! we dont want poison"




so all the companies are like- "ok"

*turns around to their bottle guy*

"just use the other poison"

reply to post by bluemirage5 & soymilkAlaska


Well they need to tax you so they can give taxcuts to the industry. As soymilk said...the companies need our money to invent less traceable poisons of higher toxicity.

Originally posted by Mimir
reply to post by bluemirage5 & soymilkAlaska

 

Well they need to tax you so they can give taxcuts to the industry. As soymilk said...the companies need our money to invent less traceable poisons of higher toxicity.

i really didn't say that O_O


i hope they don't get new ideas.




but, humans can be really dumb sometimes.


they slap them on the wrist, NO bad, don't poison people


and they say "ok sorry, look we do better!"

and they use almost literally the same poison with a different name.


COME ON!


we as humans really need to crack down on junk like this, when we say "NO POISON"

we really mean that we don't want poison in our food and bottles/water/anything.


it gets really annoying, but the strange thing is that im sure they are equally annoyed at us for wanting to be healthy.

i know people that if you tell them, hey i want to eat healthy, why not right?

will stare at me with an angry face and say

"HEALTHY?? psshh why would you want that, you gotta die somehow"




what the junk?



i want to go live on a new planet with all the healthy people that eat natural and care about everyone's happiness and well being and not just money, so we can start over as a human race, and actually live in a happy world, safe from nukes and evil corporations.


as soon as they discover that "this plastic is poison" they should immediately discontinue it, and record it, so we know what it is, what it does, and to not use it that way again.


peace.

This why i do not trust our governments having anything to do with the care of the people.
The FDA, WHO, CDC, FEMA, USDA Ect, Ect,Ect.
The FDA for example for many years allows food additives which have cancer causing effects to
be added for daily consumption. They Also let companies like Monsanto create franken foods that
cause hundreds of illnesses. But vitamins people could take are regulated to ridiculous extents
while drug companies kill people by the 100,000 per year.
Sodium fluoride is pushed to strengthen the teeth when in FACT it has no use but to keep people
sick and dumb to their world around them..
The FDA pushes vaccines which contain mercury, a known neurological poison and second most
toxic substance on the planet.
Also of which the ADA Backs as an additive for tooth fillings for the last 100 years.
High Fructose Cornsyrup is a massive cause to the cancer rates and diabetic rise in the world.
BPA and many other chemicals are being added to our food supply for a reason.
In my opinion, shorten the life cycle and generate revenue in the process

Originally posted by Lil Drummerboy
This why i do not trust our governments having anything to do with the care of the people.
The FDA, WHO, CDC, FEMA, USDA Ect, Ect,Ect.
The FDA for example for many years allows food additives which have cancer causing effects to
be added for daily consumption. They Also let companies like Monsanto create franken foods that
cause hundreds of illnesses. But vitamins people could take are regulated to ridiculous extents
while drug companies kill people by the 100,000 per year.
Sodium fluoride is pushed to strengthen the teeth when in FACT it has no use but to keep people
sick and dumb to their world around them..
The FDA pushes vaccines which contain mercury, a known neurological poison and second most
toxic substance on the planet.
Also of which the ADA Backs as an additive for tooth fillings for the last 100 years.
High Fructose Cornsyrup is a massive cause to the cancer rates and diabetic rise in the world.
BPA and many other chemicals are being added to our food supply for a reason.
In my opinion, shorten the life cycle and generate revenue in the process

THIS.

i can't imagine what sick ****ing ****rds work at places like those you mentioned, just reading a paper, Mercury? yup its OK.

bpa? sure fine!


fluoride? good for teeth? yup.

toothpaste says to not swallow.

put fluoride in their food? YES

add it in

muhahuah add it ALL in...

MUAHAHUAHAHUAUHAHA


$_$ mUAHAUHUAA



i can imagine this.

Reminds me of the many versions of bath salts.

This is probably off topic in a way....But it's a good chance to remind everyone to breastfeed your babies (if you are able) I promise those kids are less likely to have BPA, BPS or any other BP-whatever in their system.

OK, I'm going to educate you and back my Chit with documentation.

Your argument is what? Plastics is/are bad and glass and recycling is good, correct? AGREED!

So, How are you going to power the glass factory to remelt or clean the glass?
Coal? Nope! It's a dirty energy source. TAX it out of existanence! YAYYY
Solar panels? Call me when you get there, and don't file bankrupcy,get paid and run with the money.
Burlap bags that are resuable? OK, How many natural resources did you destroy to create that product?
I'm just curious. Include the factory that uses bleaches and toxic chemicals to create it. Let's keep an even playing field here.

Have you seen the horrific pictures of the plastic crap floating through the oceans? Disgusting.
I'm embarassed to be a human. (Dolphins try and WILL me into the water,and use telepathy all the time. Not falling for it. I think they want sharks to eat me for being human, and screwing up their water. The old bait and switch. LITERALLY)
I don't do ocean. Lake Tahoe only has an old bloated elephant that floats up from time to time. Harmless.
www.misanthropytoday.com...

I happen to be in the plastics/new product industry. There. I said it. AND I'm in California.

There are new biodegradable micro-organisms in plastics that tear down plastic within five years upon hitting a landfill.
ensoplastics.com...
This product is not banned in California, you just can't use the terminolgy "biodegradable" in the State beginning 2013 because why?
Because of CORN Starch lobbiests.

According to the new law, if a product doesnt' "biodegregade" with 21 days, it cannot use the word biodegradable.
WTF?

earth911.com...
See the pretty fork that says biodegradable in the picture?
Bought and paid for by Iowa and Nebraska lobbiests here in California.

And? They BEND when they come in contact with heat doncha know. So they don't even work.
So what right?

Plastic Bags are only 1/20 of the plastics problem. ERRRRRR 1.0 percent of the problem.
www.green.ca.gov... That's THEIR websight in Cal. Not mine.

My point? People do NOT want to pollute or exploit the Earth in the plastics industry. But to ban a product that was just getting ready to help the Earth at the profit of the cornstarch industry for profit is disgusting.

Enso is not banned. Biodegregation within 21 days is an insult in terminology based on a paid campaign by cornstarch lobbiests.

It's beyond rediculous. And I'M a treehugger.

And don't tell me at least it's a start or I'll puke.

Don't throw bad money into a bad situation just because you "believe "
in saving the Earth.

I'll just pay you off to pretend I care. Ask the cornstarch lobbiests. This is NOT going away you asses.

And wear your best game hat guys. Come forward and let's go "Game On". I have nothing you can take away from me, so have your little "free" interns try and discredit me.

I'm going public.

Ooooops. What I meant was, I just got a private email telling me I was being a little too angry.

So, Do I sell out, or go on record in the press?

For how much?


LOL........ BACK in the basement.

Thanks for the replies.

reply to post by niceguybob


Well, I never mentioned recycling as one of the problems with plastic, did you read the post? I totally agree with you on the issue about plastic pollution is bad for our environments. I cant disapprove what your saying about the glass industries pollution but that really not the issue of the post.

I haven't heard about biodegenerable plastics before, which sounds good as long as it does not add "poisons to nature" in the process. The "21 year rule" is just very weird, I would argue that even Uranium-235 that got a half life of 4,5 mil years is very slow degenerating into our more stable isotopes of lesser mass. - Again this is not the problem mentioned in this post initially.

However this post was not about pollution of nature, but pollution of our species (and to a lesser extension other species too).

You working in the plastic industry, does not make you a "bad man", unless your working in the labs with the composition of the plastics and on purpose? tries to hide away the bad components used in many plastics. Aslong as the industry don't show any real will to remove things like the bisphenols from the plastic, I would say the industry as a entity is reason for thousands/millions of deaths and illnesses. I can't give you my full endorsement, even if your correct and the production of plastics is less polluting than the glass industry, because of the many deaths and diseases linked to the products. Products that tricker diseases like cancer, dysfunctia learning and behavior problems in children, diabetes, obesity, earlier puberty for girls and causes the spermcount to plummet on men, just to mention a few.

Again...I do not blame the average worker but the industry.

I agree with you that currently the corn industry doesn't look like a better option, because of companies like Monsanto, who is trying to sterilize the world.

You are absolutely correct that plastics is not the only place we're exposed to toxins like the bisphenols, look at the lists i made in the BPA thread.

Last but not least, no your not selling out but showing that the industry might slowly move in the right direction on the pollution issue - now they just need to do the same when we talk health.

Did I read the post? That's kinda extreme dontcha think?

From an alternative energy position, I was just asking/telling you options.

Yeah, I read it.

And Cornstarch lobbiests in California SUCK! And they know who they are!

Me too.