Things start to get interesting when the results human epidemiology and animal exposure studies meet. Epidemiology studies of human exposures to a xenoestrogen like BPA show relationships between exposure and diabetes, or exposure and obesity. But it is very difficult to say that exposure to a plastics component causes obesity, diabetes or heart disease. People who are exposed to a lot of xenoestrogens may eat more canned food and have more BPA (or similar) circulating in their systems, but people who eat a lot of canned and packaged food may also eat poorly, exercise less, and/or be less educated compared to someone who has very little plastics exposure.
This is why animal studies are so important. When the results of controlled animal studies are similar to trends we are observing in people the case for concern about a particular chemical jumps. Many people oppose animal studies for ethical reasons, but sometimes leaving questions unanswered is unethical as well.
There is increasing evidence that chemicals in the environment may be
contributing to diabetes and obesity. This is not to say that there is no such thing as good habits, but biochemical variables, set during early life, may make it harder to regulate things like blood sugar and weight. For current reviews and discussion
take a look at:
- Toxic environment and obesity pandemia: Is there a relationship?
- Impact of environmental endocrine disrupting chemicals on the development of obesity.
Katzenellenbogen JA (1995). The structural pervasiveness of estrogenic activity. Environmental health perspectives, 103 Suppl 7, 99-101 PMID: 8593885
No comments:
Post a Comment