Bisphensol A and It’s Side Effects to the Nervous and Endocrine System

Anatomy and Physiology 201
November 7, 2012

Abstract
Bisphensol A (BPA) is a synthetic compound that is used to produce plastics. This chemical has been used to make plastics since the 1950’s. BPA is made from chemicals that mimic the sex hormone “Estradiol.” Estradiol is a sex hormone found in both female and male. Therefore, BPA is known to be an endocrine disruptor; it is a compound that exits everywhere in the environment and also in the human body. There have been many meetings with the discussion of studies about BPA causing numerous diseases to the human body. These meetings were held with a diverse collection of researchers which include: wildlife biologists, endocrinologists, reproductive physiologists, and toxicologists. The endocrine system is one of the organ systems dedicated to maintaining internal coordination of the human body, which communicates by means of chemical messenger or hormones secreted into the blood. New research has been exposed to show that a low dose of BPA has an association to adverse health effects, which include reproductive abnormalities, obesity, neurobehavioral problems, prostate and breast cancer.

Bisphensol A and The Nervous and Endocrine System Bisphensol A (BPA) is a synthetic chemical that is used to produce plastics. This chemical has been used to make plastics since the 1950’s. BPA is made from chemicals that mimic the sex hormone estradiol. Estradiol is a sex hormone found in both female and male. Therefore, BPA is known to be an endocrine disrupter; it is a compound that exists everywhere in the environment and also in the human body (Vogel, 2009). The endocrine system is one of the organ systems dedicated to maintaining internal coordination of the human body, which communicates by means of chemical messenger or hormones secreted into the blood. The endocrine system also consists of ductless glands that act together with the nervous system to control body activities. The endocrine glands work by secreting regulatory molecules, which are called hormones, into the internal environment of interstitial fluid (Martin, 2010). New research has been exposed to show that a low dose of BPA has an association to adverse health effects, which include reproductive abnormalities, obesity, neurobehavioral problems, prostate and breast cancer. Every one of the health effects are in connection with our endocrine system. With these findings they are now challenging the long-standing scientific and legal presumption of the safety of BPA. Now that we know some of the things about BPA, the public needs to know if this is a safe chemical, and if not, what steps will be taken to protect us from BPA. BPA is found in numerous products that we use on a daily basis, including laptops, cell phones, baby bottles, food containers, hospital and laboratory equipment, and main water pipes. The market for BPA is rather large, therefore there is over 6 million pounds of BPA produced globally every year, and companies who produce BPA anticipate continuing the production of more in the upcoming years. The exposure to BPA is widespread, and its existence has raised many concerns to the public. In April of 2008 there was an article written in The Washington Post titled, “US Cites Fears on Chemical in Plastics”. This article opened up a lot of worries to the consumer and to the Food and Drug Administration, because BPA is found in almost all of our food and drink plastic containers, and in all the baby bottles and containers that are used to store infant formula (Vogel, 2009).
What is the amount of BPA that the EPA considers safe? According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the European Food Safety Authority, the average levels of BPA that are considered safe are 50 micrograms per kilogram of body weight per day. But a recent study showed that BPA does not stay in the body very long. Once it is digested, it rapidly breaks down into glucuronide, which is a waste product that can be easily excreted. So with this study, it is almost impossible to show high levels of BPA in the urine because of its quick breakdown. But studies have been done with a low dose of BPA showing the different areas where it has caused a disruption to the endocrine system (Auer, N.d.).
The Discovery of BPA as an Endocrine Disruptor In the late 1980’s the United States of America was producing close to a billion pounds of BPA per year. As time went on, the market discovered new areas to use polycarbonates such as compact discs, DVD’s, baby and water bottles as well as hospital and laboratory equipment. A few years after the reference dose was set, the study of the estradiol hormone-like effects of synthetic chemicals and the safety of BPAs estrogenicity, was now under investigation. During a study in 1993, an endocrinologist at Stanford University made a discovery while searching for an endogenous estrogen in yeast. However, he discovered BPA was found when testing with estrogen-responsive breast cancer cells. With this discovery, researchers became rapidly interested in the synthetic estrogens, which we call estradiol, and what we refer to as endocrine disruptors. The endocrinologists determined that BPA was leaching from polycarbonate flasks in their laboratory. In 1991, there were several meetings held with a diverse collection of researchers, which included wildlife biologists, endocrinologists, reproductive physiologists and toxicologists. During this meeting they spoke about the possibilities of chemicals, such as Bisphensol A, and how it could interfere with the production and transmission of hormones in the human body and also be a disruption to the normal functioning of the endocrine system. It wasn’t until 1996 that Congress passed the Food Quality Protection Act, which amended Act 47 which is The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide, and Act 48, The Safe Drinking water Act. Both amendments directed The Environmental Protection Agency to establish testing and screening programs for endocrine disruptors. This was very challenging for the EPA. They were told to reach an agreement on a testing program, with a number of stakeholders, which included representatives from industries and environmental nongovernmental organizations. What this meant was that they needed to come to an agreement on what the definition was of an endocrine disruptor and how it causes all the adverse health effects that are causing Americans to be concerned about the use of BPA (Vogel, 2009). Endocrine disruptors are chemicals are that are known to interfere with the body’s endocrine system and cause adverse effects on reproductive, neurological, and the immune system on the human body. There are a wide range of substances that could be both natural and man-made, that are thought to cause endocrine disruption. This includes pharmaceuticals, dioxins-- which are a group of chemical compounds that share chemical structures and biological characteristics-- and dioxin-like compounds, polychlorinated biphenyls, DDT, which are pesticides, and plasticizers such as BPA. Endocrine disruptors are in everyday life, from baby bottles, to all the bottled carbonated drinks, water and even our laundry detergent, also the metal food cans that we purchase at our local grocery store. Most of the toys that are purchased for our children are made with plastic that is produced with BPA. The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences has supported studies to determine whether or not the exposure to chemicals that cause endocrine disruptors may be the cause of human health effects. Other human health effects include lowered fertility and the incidence of endometriosis and various cancers. Researchers have discovered that these chemicals used in today’s society that cause endocrine disruptors in the human body, could possibility pose the greatest risk during prenatal and early postnatal development when the organ and neural systems are forming (Sciences, 2012). According to, (Willingham), from CNN News ,” The Food and Drug Administration announced that it will deny the National Resources Defense Council’s petition asking it to prohibit the use of Bisphenol A in the United States. But they also announced that this was not a final safety determination, and they will continue to support research examining the safety of BPA. In 2008, the National Resource Defense Council submitted a petition asking the Food and Drug Administration to regulate the use of BPA in human food and food packaging. The petition was filed over 41 months ago, and the FDA had not responded. The council finally made the decision to sue the administration to try to get some form of response and Friday’s announcement is a response to that suit. The Natural Resources Defense Council responded by saying it believes the FDA ‘Made the wrong call.’ (Willingham, 2012)” The Natural Resources Defense Council has made several statements regarding the decision made by the FDA in continuing the use of the chemical in our food supply. They believe that BPA is a toxic chemical and has no reason to be in our food supply. By supplying our food in these packages we have more exposure to the chemical and is even more dangerous to those who use the products (Willingham, 2012).
BPA and its link to Heart Disease, Diabetes, and Liver Problems In September of 2008, the United States Food and Drug Administration, scientists, and health advocates had a debate as to whether or not Bisphensol A is hazardous to our health. There was a study prior to the hearing that linked exposure of BPA with heart disease, diabetes and liver-enzyme abnormalities in adults. Researchers stated that The Journal of the American Medical Association offered the first scientific evidence that proved adults with higher levels of BPA in their bodies were more likely to develop heart disease, diabetes, or liver problems. According to Dr. David Melzer, of Peninsula Medical School in Exeter, England, a study was done with 1,455 United States residents between the ages of 18-74, based on BPA concentrations in their urine. The people with the highest concentration of BPA had almost three times the odds of heart disease. They also factored in race, income and education levels and they still had a 2.4 higher risk for diabetes. With all these studies being done and information being released about the possibilities of BPA being the main cause of these diseases, the Food and Drug Administration is still stating that the products currently on the market that contain BPA are safe, and Steven G. Hentges, who is the executive director of the Polycarbonate/BPA Global Group of the American Chemistry Council, made several statements which include: “Urinary concentrations tell you the exposure over the last 24 hours, but heart disease and diabetes do not occur overnight.” He also stated that BPA would have to be measured over the same time period when heart disease and diabetes is actually occurring, so that it can limit the study to what the actual cause is. We as Americans have to make the decision as to how we will reduce our exposure to BPA, until the Food and Drug Administration decides to recognize that the toxicity of the chemical is the leading cause of numerous diseases in our country. Some states have banned BPA from children’s products and some states have made the decision not to purchase or sell products with BPA (Shelton, 2008).
It is finally official BPA banned from baby bottles The Food and Drug Administration has finally made a decision to ban Bisphensol A (BPA) from baby bottles and Sippy cups. The reason for the removal of BPA from these items is because of a study done with over 2,000 people who had traces of BPA in their urine. They also found traces of the estrogen mimicking hormone in breast milk, the blood of pregnant woman, and umbilical cord blood. There have also been concerns about the potential effects of BPA on the behavior of infants and children and also prostate glands of fetuses. The Food and Drug Administration is moving rather slowly in making these decisions, but there are still numerous other items that contain the chemical that need to be considered a health hazard and removed immediately from the production line (Tavernise, 2012).
Conclusion
If The Food and Drug Administration would take the time and consideration in listening to all these scientists, wildlife biologists, endocrinologists, reproductive physiologists and toxicologists and put all the information together, they could possibly come to a conclusion as to why there are such large epidemics in the world and put a stop to these rapidly growing diseases and allow people to live long healthy lives.

References
Martin, T. R. (2010). Human Anatomy and Physiology. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc.
Sciences, T. N. (2012, June 5). NIEHS. Retrieved from http://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/agents/endocrine/index.cfm: http://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/agents/endocrine/index.cfm
Shelton, D. L. (2008, September 16). Researchers Link BPA to Heart Disease, Diabetes, Liver Problems. Retrieved September 16, 2008, from SIRS Issues Researcher: http://sks.sirs.com
Tavernise, S. (2012, July 18). "F D A Makes it Official: Chemical Can't be used in Baby Bottles". Retrieved from New york Times: www.sks.srs.com
Vogel, S. A. (2009). The Politics of Plastics: The Making and Unmaking of Bisphenol A "Safety". Retrieved from http://search.epnet.com: http://search.ebscohost.com
Willingham, V. (2012, March 30). www.cnn.com. Retrieved November 8, 2012, from FDA says it will deny request to ban BPA: http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/30/health/bpa-ban-denial/index.html