Bisphenol A

[????]

Health Canada is now considering a ban on the use of polycarbonate baby bottles.  The problem is that babies are being exposed to a chemical that has been proven to cause an early onset of puberty, and some birth defects.  The chemical is released when the plastic comes into contact with heat, and is therefore transfered to the baby.  Yet, it has been determined that infants are being exposed to this chemical below what is considered a risk. 
Mice exposed to this chemical have shown birth and fertility defects involving trisomies and monomies (which are naturally aborted) in the chromosomes during gamete production (wherein the chromosomes fail to separate), which in turn causes mental retardation.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/health/bisphenol-a.html

However, health canada is only thinking of outlawing the import and sales of just baby bottles, hereby protecting the infants from the chemical.  Even though there is very little risk to adults in the studies, shouldn't the ban be extended to all plastic drinking containers?  Or all containers using hazardous or cancerous causing substances?

Discuss;

[Cesium]

There's still a lot of debate over carcinogens like this. For example, the FDA here in the US has been debating bottle plastics for a while. There've been effects shown in studies, and several manufacturers have changed their materials, but there probably isn't going to be an official ruling anytime soon.

[Balore]

You'd think they'd ban all plastics with that chemical in it, but it's always about the babies, you know. If the level of danger isn't high enough, perhaps prolonged usage at such a young age would be good for them. They could eventually develop a resistance to the chemical. But of course, it's too dangerous to attempt, right?

[Nines~Tempest]

You'd think they'd ban all plastics with that chemical in it, but it's always about the babies, you know. If the level of danger isn't high enough, perhaps prolonged usage at such a young age would be good for them. They could eventually develop a resistance to the chemical. But of course, it's too dangerous to attempt, right?

I don't really think you can get resistence to a chemical.  That only works on live things.  Corrrct me if I'm wrong though, I'm not a big chem. kinda guy...

[Redlazer]

I don't really think you can get resistence to a chemical.  That only works on live things.  Corrrct me if I'm wrong though, I'm not a big chem. kinda guy...

Babies are alive.

[Nines~Tempest]

Babies are alive.

I meant the immunity against.  Are you trying to say chemicals will gain a resistence from babies?

[Redlazer]

I meant the immunity against.  Are you trying to say chemicals will gain a resistence from babies?

Oh, I thought you meant the babies wouldn't get a resistance, but you meant they make a cure for the bad effects of the chemical.

[Nines~Tempest]

Oh, I thought you meant the babies wouldn't get a resistance, but you meant they make a cure for the bad effects of the chemical.

...

NO I DIDN'T.

I'm wondering if prolonged exposure to a chemical can really build up some kind of resistence.

[Redlazer]

...

NO I DIDN'T.

I'm wondering if prolonged exposure to a chemical can really build up some kind of resistence.

Then what does this mean?

I don't really think you can get resistence to a chemical.  That only works on live things. 

OH, does it mean that you thought you could only get a resistance to live things? What I thought you said is that only live things could get a resistance to chemicals, which caused the confusion.

[Nines~Tempest]

Okay, great, you understand.

Now answer my damned question .

[Redlazer]

I think you could get a resistance to a chemical. Bugs seem to always eventually become immune to pesticides.

[Cythrosi]

The human body can develop a resistance to chemicals.  We already have in a way.  Our lungs have developed to deal with all the pollutants in the air due to how we live.

[Nines~Tempest]

I think you could get a resistance to a chemical. Bugs seem to always eventually become immune to pesticides.

That is due to rapid reproduction and mutations.

Cyth got it right I don't know much about chemicals...

[Cesium]

You develop immunity to antigens (bacteria, viruses, allergens...). Mostly alive things. You can also develop resistance or tolerance to chemicals, however. But that's different from bugs or bacteria becoming immune to things that kill them. That's the result of the ones who are weak to them dying off, and the trait of being resistant is selected for and eventually dominates the population.

[Nines~Tempest]

You develop immunity to antigens (bacteria, viruses, allergens...). Mostly alive things. You can also develop resistance or tolerance to chemicals, however. But that's different from bugs or bacteria becoming immune to things that kill them. That's the result of the ones who are weak to them dying off, and the trait of being resistant is selected for and eventually dominates the population.

I know what happens to bacteria and that stuff.  But I wasn't sure how tolerance from chemicals or toxins develops.  Just exposure over time?

[Cesium]

I know what happens to bacteria and that stuff.  But I wasn't sure how tolerance from chemicals or toxins develops.  Just exposure over time?

Yeah. Basically, either the body is actually physically unable to respond to the chemical, or it gets better at recognizing it and so it gets depleted more quickly, or the mechanisms that are wrecked by a toxin adapt to not get wrecked. I think. I'm not really an expert in this.

[GracefulDave]

I think you've got it right Cesium, if I remember my Bio 12 properly.

Water bottles already shouldn't be reused more than once because of the estrogen that gets in the water from the plastic. Now it's killing babies? Yeesh.

I always shudder a bit when I hear that the exposure is below the accepted levels. Basically, not enough people get fucked up to make them change to something less expensive... Anyways, I think they should just ban the chemical out right in regards to human consumption.

[Cesium]

Yeah. It may be under acceptable limits, but if you're addicted and drink three bottles a day, it can build up.

[GracefulDave]

What are we addicted to now? The water?

[????]

We're talking about the reusable baby bottles, and the hard plastic resuable bottles usually marked with a 7 on the bottom.  Although not all of these bottles have the chemical in them, some might.  It's the fact that the chemical can cause a mutation, or cancer though, It's not killing babies outright.  The plastic one time use bottles are not really efficient, nor should be used more than once, due to the chemicals in the bottle.  As far as i know, they don't release estrogen into the water; that's caused by synthetic hormones in birth control pills, being disposed of naturally.. The bottles are just expensive to make, and not very environmentally friendly. 

As far as resistance goes, sure, some will build up, but that's not really the point, is it?  The fact is the chemical can cause some mutations, and effects to producing gametes later in life (Results see post #1), and can result in an early onset of puberty.  So some resistance wouldn't really change the damage that has already been done.  It's not like resistance to meningitus, or mumps, for example, where live, weakened organisms are used to provoke a primary response of the immune system.  (The second allows for a quicker response, thereby not allowing the organism to take over; memory b cells which is why we can't get chicken pox twice)