Look, folks, I’m sorry, but RFK Jr. is going to force us to talk about sperm. And I’m very much going to try to keep the jokes at an absolute minimum, because, as per usual when Kennedy…
The right loves throwing around the word “insane” when they talk about the Left.
RFK Jr is despicable, but Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals from microplastics are ABSOLUTELY wreaking havoc on human reproductive physiology. The evidence is overwhelming and this TechDirt article is frankly embarrassing.
Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals from microplastics are ABSOLUTELY wreaking havoc on human reproductive physiology
oh, shut up.
BPA was originally developed as one of a series of chemicals by researchers trying to develop synthetic estrogens in the 60s, but they dropped it because it did not have any actual activity in humans.
Decades later, some truly shitty research at ONE lab in Missouri claimed hormonal effects in mice at levels simply not possible in humans. None of it was reproducible. Governments worldwide then wasted millions in over 800 studies that showed BPA was safe. Press ignored all these studies, because fear gets more clicks.
“Fundamental, repetitive work on bisphenol A has sucked in hundreds of millions of dollars and it looks increasingly like an investment with nil return. All it has done is to show that there is a huge price to pay when initial studies are adhered to as being correct when the second phase of scientific peer review, namely, the inability of other laboratories to repeat the initial studies says otherwise.” He references a study in the journal Toxicological Sciences that showed complete absence of effect of a rage of bisphenol A exposures on reproductive development, function and behavior in female rats. The results of this study are robust and unequivocal and counter previous more circumspect studies that spawned the BPA fear. The press, however, didn’t pick up this story.
Endocrine disruption is real, but it tracks with morbid obesity in teens.
Great, then let’s see the evidence. Where are the peer-reviewed statistical studies that show a causal link? Where’s the lab work that shows part of a causal chain? Without those, it’s not science, it’s just more “many people believe” bullshit.
Part of the reason there’s not more evidence and it’s hard to prove a causal link is because it’s next to impossible to find enough participants for a control group because of how prevalent microplastics have become in our food and subsequently our bodies. You can’t exactly run peer review observational, experimental and double blind studies on only one half (more like one third, as a causal study would need to induce change from a->b) of the required test groups. t- and p-tests also are much less valuable if the sample size is too small.
You also can’t exactly get ethical approval to put microplastics into people for the purposes of scientific experimentation. Or at least, it would be very difficult. More so when current evidence shows that it does have actively harmful effects.
RFK Jr is despicable, but Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals from microplastics are ABSOLUTELY wreaking havoc on human reproductive physiology. The evidence is overwhelming and this TechDirt article is frankly embarrassing.
oh, shut up.
BPA was originally developed as one of a series of chemicals by researchers trying to develop synthetic estrogens in the 60s, but they dropped it because it did not have any actual activity in humans.
Decades later, some truly shitty research at ONE lab in Missouri claimed hormonal effects in mice at levels simply not possible in humans. None of it was reproducible. Governments worldwide then wasted millions in over 800 studies that showed BPA was safe. Press ignored all these studies, because fear gets more clicks.
Good summary article here:
https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/health-news/majestically-scientific-study-casts-doubt-risks-associated-bisphenol
“Fundamental, repetitive work on bisphenol A has sucked in hundreds of millions of dollars and it looks increasingly like an investment with nil return. All it has done is to show that there is a huge price to pay when initial studies are adhered to as being correct when the second phase of scientific peer review, namely, the inability of other laboratories to repeat the initial studies says otherwise.” He references a study in the journal Toxicological Sciences that showed complete absence of effect of a rage of bisphenol A exposures on reproductive development, function and behavior in female rats. The results of this study are robust and unequivocal and counter previous more circumspect studies that spawned the BPA fear. The press, however, didn’t pick up this story.
Endocrine disruption is real, but it tracks with morbid obesity in teens.
I wish he’d start pushing for a reduction in plastic and petrol chemicals…lol
Technically the proposed bans on food colorings are an attempt at reducing petrochemical consumption, as they are derived from fossil fuels
Who is downvoting this fact?
Great, then let’s see the evidence. Where are the peer-reviewed statistical studies that show a causal link? Where’s the lab work that shows part of a causal chain? Without those, it’s not science, it’s just more “many people believe” bullshit.
Part of the reason there’s not more evidence and it’s hard to prove a causal link is because it’s next to impossible to find enough participants for a control group because of how prevalent microplastics have become in our food and subsequently our bodies. You can’t exactly run peer review observational, experimental and double blind studies on only one half (more like one third, as a causal study would need to induce change from a->b) of the required test groups. t- and p-tests also are much less valuable if the sample size is too small.
This. You’d need a bunch of pre-industrial people as your Control Group.
You also can’t exactly get ethical approval to put microplastics into people for the purposes of scientific experimentation. Or at least, it would be very difficult. More so when current evidence shows that it does have actively harmful effects.
Well, that article isn’t the best either, as it mentions phytoestrogens as a factor, which we have no conclusive evidence for.