Clean and Pure Living

Baby shampoo study raises chemical concerns
Phthalates found in urine of infants after they were powdered or lotioned

CHICAGO - Baby shampoos, lotions and powders may expose infants to chemicals that have been linked with possible reproductive problems, a small study suggests.

The chemicals, called phthalates, are found in many ordinary products including cosmetics, toys, vinyl flooring and medical supplies. They are used to stabilize fragrances and make plastics flexible.

In the study, they were found in elevated levels in the urine of babies who’d been recently shampooed, powdered or lotioned with baby products.

Phthalates (pronounced thowl-ates) are under attack by some environmental advocacy groups, but experts are uncertain what dangers, if any, they might pose. The federal government doesn’t limit their use, although California and some countries have restricted their use.

Animal studies have suggested that phthalates can cause reproductive birth defects and some activists believe they may cause reproductive problems in boys and early puberty in girls.

Rigorous scientific evidence in human studies is lacking. The current study offers no direct evidence that products the infants used contained phthalates, and no evidence that the chemicals in the babies’ urine caused any harm. Still, the results worried environmental groups that support restrictions on these chemicals.

“There is an obvious need for laws that force the beauty industry to clean up its act,” said Stacy Malkan of Health Care Without Harm.

The study’s lead author, Dr. Sheela Sathyanarayana, a University of Washington pediatrician, said, “The bottom line is that these chemicals likely do exist in products that we’re commonly using on our children and they potentially could cause health effects.”

Babies don’t usually need special lotions and powders, and water alone or shampoo in very small amounts is generally enough to clean infant hair, Sathyanarayana said.

Concerned parents can seek products labeled “phthalate-free,” or check labels for common phthalates, including DEP and DEHP.

But the chemicals often don’t appear on product labels. That’s because retail products aren’t required to list individual ingredients of fragrances, which are a common phthalate source.

The Food and Drug Administration “has no compelling evidence that phthalates pose a safety risk when used in cosmetics,” spokeswoman Stephanie Kwisnek said. “Should new data emerge, we will inform the public as well as the industry.”

The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says the health effects in humans are uncertain.

“Although several studies in people have explored possible associations with developmental and reproductive outcomes (semen quality, genital development in boys, shortened pregnancy, and premature breast development in young girls), more research is needed,” a 2005 CDC report said.

The new study, which appears in February’s issue of the journal Pediatrics, involved 163 babies. Most were white, ages 2 to 28 months and living in California, Minnesota and Missouri.

The researchers measured levels of several phthalates in urine from diapers. They also asked the mothers about use in the previous 24 hours of baby products including lotions, powders, diaper creams and baby wipes.

All urine samples had detectable levels of at least one phthalate, and most had levels of several more. The highest levels were linked with shampoos, lotions and powders, and were most prevalent in babies younger than 8 months.

John Bailey, chief scientist at the Personal Care Products Council, questioned the methods and said the phthalates could have come from diapers, lab materials or other sources.

“Unfortunately, the researchers of this study did not test baby care products for the presence of phthalates or control for other possible routes of exposure,” Bailey said.

Lipitor Ads Spark Congressional Probe

pfizer, lipitor, statin drugs, expensive drugs, dangerous drugs Lipitor has been running a series of ads in which a kindly "doctor," Robert Jarvik, inventor of the artificial heart, tells viewers about the benefits of the cholesterol-lowering medication Lipitor. These ads, and their use of celebrity endorsers such as Jarvik, are now being investigated by Congress for potentially misleading viewers.

In the ads, Dr. Jarvik appears to be giving medical advice, but he has never obtained a license to practice or prescribe medicine.

Critics of the drug industry claim that such ads emotionally manipulate viewers and underemphasize the potential side effects of drugs.

The congressional probe focuses on the Lipitor ads, but will likely examine others, such as actress Sally Field's endorsement of the osteoporosis drug Boniva.

Sources:

ABC News January 10, 2008

Dr. Mercola’s Comments:

Some 30 years ago, hypercholesterolemia (high cholesterol) was an affliction of middle-aged men with cholesterol over 300 plus other risk factors, such as smoking and obesity. Since then, the massive fear about this non-disease has been created largely by the drug companies.

They have done this while simultaneously manipulating the definition of high cholesterol by controlling the government panels that are responsible for the definitions. This combination has led to absolutely spectacular profits of tens of billions of dollars, as their reward for their effective market manipulation.

By 1984 anyone (male or female) with cholesterol over 200 could receive the dreaded diagnosis and a prescription for pills. Then it was moved down to 180. Today, we’re down to recommended levels of less than 100 and drugs are prescribed to children as young as 10 years old.

This is Absolutely Insane!

I am always amazed by what these companies are able to get away with.

Kind of makes the drug company manipulation resulting in tens of billions of dollars of profit, at the expense of hundreds of thousands of lives by not addressing the real causes, seem relatively insignificant in light of the bigger picture.

To top off the insanity, if you’ve had a heart attack, you get to take cholesterol-lowering medicines even if your cholesterol is already very low -- after all, if you had a heart attack your cholesterol must be “too high” at its current level, according to the prevailing theory.

But does anyone know whether the very low cholesterol levels currently recommended are actually beneficial?

No. In fact, there is no evidence to support their low target numbers, and, what's more, the combination of two or three statin drugs that patients can be prescribed to hit those targets will invariably do far more harm than good in the long run.

Pfizer in Legal Trouble Over Lipitor Again

This isn’t the first time Pfizer is in trouble over their fraudulent claims of what Lipitor can do for you. In 2005 they were sued by healthcare advocates for lying to women and seniors when they claimed Lipitor would reduce their risk of having a heart attack.

The group argued that the drug not only did not work, but that women who took Lipitor ran a 10 percent higher risk of heart attacks than those taking a placebo.

I don’t know the conclusion of that case, but it surely didn’t stop Pfizer from plowing forward with even more absurd claims, which the FDA bought hook line and sinker.

In 2005 Pfizer sold almost $11 billion worth of Lipitor, but after the FDA approved it for reducing stroke and heart attacks risks among diabetics their sales rose to $13 billion in 2006.

This is an unbelievable “oversight” by the FDA, in light of the fact that Lipitor can double the risk of a deadly stroke for diabetics!

Why Statins are Your WORST Option

Statins such as Lipitor are a particularly bad choice for diabetics, but they are a poor treatment even if your only worry is your heart health.

Now, statins do lower LDL (bad) cholesterol very well. The problem is they lower it too well, because cholesterol is still a necessary and natural chemical that your body needs. Cholesterol:

Waterproofs your cell walls
Helps repair cells
Is vital for digesting fats, regulating hormone levels, and neurological function

Despite cholesterol's infamous reputation, having too little of it in your body is as dangerous, if not more so, than too much. Therefore, the result of taking statin drugs can be numerous dangerous side effects, including:

Muscle pain and weakness (most likely due to the depletion of Co-Q10)
Dizziness and cognitive impairment,
Depression
Pancreatitis
Increased cancer risk
Heart failure

The last one is rather counter to the whole supposed point of cholesterol-lowering drugs, don't you think?

And there is this additional evidence that it more than doubles your risk of stroke if you are diabetic, in return for no benefits whatsoever -- unless you enjoy anything on this list; these are the possible consequences of taking statins in strong doses or for a lengthy period of time:

Depression of mental acuity
Anemia
Acidosis
Frequent fevers
Cataracts

What is Your Underlying Problem, and How Can You Treat THAT?

Make no mistake, Lipitor completely fails to treat the underlying problems causing your high levels of cholesterol. Statins are non-specific inhibitors of a number of very important liver enzymes, including the enzyme that causes your liver to make cholesterol when it is stimulated by high insulin levels.

A far more sensible treatment therefore, is to simply shut down the enzyme that makes cholesterol by reducing your insulin and leptin levels, which is the underlying cause of your high cholesterol.

By eliminating sugar and most grains, you won’t cause this important enzyme to be blocked, and you also will not block other vital coenzymes such as CoQ10.

This is also exactly what you should be doing if you are diabetic.

To normalize your cholesterol level naturally, and keep your diabetes under control at the same time, these three primary strategies work well 99 percent of the time if properly implemented:

Exercise daily
Eat a low grain, low sugar diet
Take a high quality omega-3 supplement

The omega-3 fats in fish oil will influence your HDL cholesterol levels far more safely and effectively than taking a pill -- and for a small fraction of the cost.

I must say I really got a kick out of Robert Jarvik’s public statement where he says in closing:

“I am a medical scientist specializing in advanced technology to treat heart failure who understands that no one in his or her right mind would want an artificial heart if it could be avoided with preventive medicine.”

I didn’t say it was a good kick.

To infer that statin drugs are somehow related to preventive medicine is again a grossly misleading statement. There is nothing preventive about these drugs; they do not fix any underlying health issues that might cause problems in the future. Instead they raise your risks of other serious health complications that might cost you your life far sooner than your high cholesterol might have.

Time!

Today I am wondering what it is like to have free time ... I mean, life is just so busy with school, dance, piano, group school, gym, awana, youth group, church and other activities that come around.

I just can't imagine what it is like to have so much extra time that I would be bored. A mother the other day said she did something (not sure what) because she was bored! That was the word that caught my attention .. How can a mother of any child at any age be bored?

I had to laugh to myself, not trying to seem like I was being nosey, but I really wanted to shout WHAT?

Now, I probably am a bit more busy then the average mom. We do run a farm, Home School our kids and I also have a home business helping other moms make money from home. I know I could give a few things up to free more time,by making choices ... It was just something that I thought to be funny.

Cancer-Causing Chemical Found in Children's Bath Products

Children's Health
Cancer-Causing Chemical Found in Children's Bath Products
By
Feb 8, 2007 - 11:39:32 AM

CANCER-CAUSING CHEMICAL FOUND IN CHILDREN'S BATH PRODUCTS

Women's Shampoos and Body Wash also Contaminated

(HealthNewsDigest.com) - WASHINGTON — A hidden cancer-causing petrochemical has been found in dozens of children's bath products and adults' personal care products, in some cases at levels that are more than twice the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's lenient recommended maximum.

Laboratory tests released today revealed the presence of 1,4-Dioxane in products such as Hello Kitty Bubble Bath, Huggies Baby Wash, Johnson's Baby Wash, Scooby-Doo Bubble Bath and Sesame Street Bubble Bath. The tests also found the carcinogen in Clairol Herbal Essences shampoo, Olay Complete Body Wash and many other personal care products.

1,4-Dioxane is a petroleum-derived contaminant considered a probable human carcinogen by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and a clear-cut animal carcinogen by the National Toxicology Program. It is also on California's Proposition 65 list of chemicals known or suspected by the state to cause cancer or birth defects. Because it is a contaminant produced during manufacturing, the FDA does not require it to be listed as an ingredient on product labels.

The problem of 1,4-Dioxane contamination in personal care products is highlighted in a new book, "Safe Trip to Eden: Ten Steps to Save the Planet Earth from the Global Warming Meltdown," by David Steinman. The laboratory results were released jointly today at the National Press Club by Steinman and the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, a coalition of U.S.-based health and environmental groups working to protect cosmetics consumers from toxic chemicals and hold companies accountable for the safety of their products.

"Regrettably, 1,4-Dioxane contamination is just the tip of the iceberg," said Jeanne Rizzo, R.N., executive director of the Breast Cancer Fund, a founding member of the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics. "Because the FDA does not require cosmetics products to be approved as safe before they are sold, companies can put unlimited amounts of toxic chemicals in cosmetics."

Steinman said parents should be outraged that companies are willing to spend a significant amount of money on entertainment licensing agreements that entice children but won't spend pennies to remove contaminants such as 1,4-Dioxane.

"Consumers who have young children, as I do, have the right to expect the highest purity in children's products," Steinman said. "I call on American consumers to say no to dangerous petrochemicals in their children's cosmetic and personal care products."

Contrary to what many consumers may believe, the FDA does not review or regulate cosmetics products or ingredients for safety before they are sold to the public and has no legal authority to require safety assessments of cosmetics.

Devra Lee Davis, professor of epidemiology and director of the Center for Environmental Oncology at the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, said that the usual regulatory approach of assessing risk one chemical at a time does not account for the combined effects of very low levels of hidden contaminants in personal care products and from other sources. "We must lower exposures to controllable agents that we know or suspect cause cancer," she said.

The FDA has been measuring 1,4-Dioxane levels since 1979, but because the agency has little authority or enforcement capacity over the cosmetics industry, it has worked with manufacturers to reduce levels on a voluntary basis only. In 2000, the FDA recommended that cosmetic products should not contain 1,4-Dioxane at concentrations greater than 10 ppm (parts per million); yet some 15 percent of products tested exceeded even these lenient guidelines. This limit, however, also does not take into account that babies exposed to 1,4-Dioxane from baby shampoo may be exposed at the same time to 1,4-Dioxane from bubble bath, body wash and many other products.

More than two dozen products were tested at Steinman's request by West Coast Analytical Service, an independent testing laboratory specializing in trace chemical analysis. Among the products tested:

Product and 1,4-Dioxane concentration:

Baby & Children's Consumer Products
Disney Clean as Can Bee Hair & Body Wash (Water Jel Technologies): 8.8 ppm
Disney Pixar Cars Piston Cup Bubble Bath (MZB Personal Care): 2.2 ppm
Gerber Grins & Giggles Gentle & Mild Aloe Vera Baby Shampoo: 8.4 ppm
Hello Kitty Bubble Bath (Kid Care): 12 ppm*
Huggies Baby Wash Shea Butter: 4.0 ppm
Huggies Natural Care Baby Wash Extra Gentle and Tear Free: 4.2 ppm
Johnson's Head-to-Toe Baby Wash (Johnson & Johnson): 5.3 ppm to 6.1 ppm
Johnson's Kids Tigger Bath Bubbles (Johnson & Johnson): 5.6 ppm to 7.9 ppm
Johnson's Kids Shampoo Watermelon Explosion (Johnson & Johnson): 10 ppm*
Lil' Bratz Mild Bubble Bath (Kid Care): 3.7 ppm
L'Oreal Kids Orange Mango Smoothie Shampoo: 2.0 ppm
Mr. Bubble Bubble Bath Gentle Formula with Aloe: 1.5 ppm
Rite-Aid Tearless Baby Shampoo: 4.3 ppm
Scooby-Doo Mild Bubble Bath (Kid Care): 3.0 ppm
Sesame Street Wet Wild Watermelon Bubble Bath (The Village Company): 7.4 ppm

Adult Consumer Products
Clairol Herbal Essences Rainforest Flowers Shampoo: 23 ppm*
Olay Complete Body Wash with Vitamins (normal skin): 23 ppm*
Suave Naturals Passion Flower: 2.0 ppm

Steinman's book explains what Americans can do today to be "green patriots" and curb the nation's dependency on foreign oil. The new laboratory results reveal the health risks posed by the same petrochemicals that are part of what he calls the nation's growing oil addiction.

Women and girls use an average of 12 personal care products daily, according to a 2004 survey conducted by the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics.

www.HealthNewsDigest.com

© Copyright by HealthNewsDigest.com

Check out the following link for information on making a simple shopping decision to change your home to safer products saving your family's health, time and money.

Home Spray Cleaners Could Raise Asthma Risk

Home Spray Cleaners Could Raise Asthma Risk

By Serena Gordon, HealthDay Reporter

FRIDAY, Oct. 12 (HealthDay News) -- Using household cleaning sprays and spray air fresheners just once a week can increase your risk of developing asthma, new research suggests.

Whether or not the cleaning products are a direct cause of asthma, or simply a trigger for people who already have the disease, isn't clear from this epidemiological study. However, the European team involved in the study believes that spray cleaners can be a cause of new-onset asthma, because the people included in this study did not have asthma or asthma symptoms at the start of the study.

The use of spray cleaners as little as once a week increased the risk of developing the respiratory ailment by nearly 50 percent, the researchers found."

Cleaning sprays, especially air fresheners, furniture cleaners and glass cleaners, had a particularly strong effect. The risk of developing asthma increased with the frequency of cleaning and number of different sprays used, but on average was 30 to 50 percent higher in people regularly exposed to cleaning sprays than in others," said the study's lead author, Jan-Paul Zock, a research fellow at the Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology at the Municipal Institute of Medical Research in Barcelona, Spain.

Results of the study were expected to be published in the second October issue of the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine.

The most important thing consumers need to know, cautioned Zock, is that "cleaning sprays -- for sale in all supermarkets -- are not harmless, and their use may involve serious health risks.

"Previous research has found an association between asthma and being employed as a professional cleaner. Other studies have also noted a link between respiratory symptoms and certain cleaning products, but Zock and his colleagues wanted to learn if typical household exposures to cleaning products would have any effect on the development of asthma.

Drawing on a 10-country database, called the European Community Respiratory Health Survey, the researchers identified more than 3,500 people without any history of asthma or asthma symptoms. All reported being responsible for the cleaning of their homes.

After an average of close to nine years of follow-up, face-to-face interviews were conducted, and the study volunteers were asked about the types of cleaning products they used and how often they used them. They were also asked if they had been diagnosed by a physician as having asthma, or had been treated with asthma medications during the study period. The researchers also performed lung-function tests on the study volunteers.

Overall, 42 percent of the study volunteers reported using a spray cleaner at least once a week. Glass cleaning sprays were the most commonly used sprays, with about 22 percent reporting using them at least once a week.

Liquid multi-purpose cleaners were also frequently used -- just over 83 percent said they used such a product at least once a week. However, the researchers didn't find any association between asthma and properly used liquid cleaners.

Weekly use of a spray cleaner increased the risk of having current asthma by 45 percent in women and 76 percent in men. Among those who used the cleaning sprays at least four days a week, the risk of asthma was more than doubled.

Zock said it's too soon to tell people to swear off spray cleaners altogether, but added, "Nevertheless, from the perspective of precaution, we may recommend to use sprays only when really necessary. In most cases, it is possible to replace the spray by non-spray cleaning liquids and to do the cleaning properly. If [sprays are] used, people can protect themselves by opening windows, avoiding the application near the breathing zone, and by using masks or other types of personal respiratory protection."

"Cleaning compounds are generally just tested to make sure that they don't kill people or cause cancer," noted Dr. David Rosenstreich, director of the division of allergy and immunology in the department of medicine at Montefiore Medical Center and Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York City.

"But, these products may not be safe for asthmatics to breathe in. And, if it's not safe for asthmatics, it's probably not safe for anyone else," he said. His advice: "Switch to liquid cleaning products rather than aerosols. If there's any difference in cleaning, it's a small sacrifice to be made in terms of protecting your respiratory health."

Zock did add one caveat, however. "Don't forget that old-fashioned liquid cleaning products can involve risks for respiratory disorders as well. The most notorious example is bleach, particularly when mixed with other cleaners -- something that should never be done."

To learn more about what causes asthma, visit the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America.

Copyright © 2007 ScoutNews, LLC. All rights reserved.

URL: http://health.msn.com/centers/asthma/artic...1858>1=10501

Tests reveal high chemical levels in kids' bodies ..

October? It feels like spring!

October .. a time where you are raking leaves, jumping high. Carving Pumpkins and baking pies.

Not this October though. With tempratures reaching almost 80 this last few weeks, people on the news have been hitting the beach. The pumpkins came much earlier this year. I hope it isn't a sign of the worse winter in years. They are calling for frost this coming week. Seems pretty funny since we have been walking in bare feet.

Our new puppy is now 4 months old. We took her to get her fixed this past Friday and we are told her to keep her quiet and rested for the next 10 days. I have yet to figure out what we should do to keep her down. She doesn't seem to remember she just went through surgery.

Annual Barn Party is coming up soon .. Pig Roast, Football, games for the kids. Hay Ride out to the field. What a great time to fellowship with friends and time to make new ones.

November is right around the corner .. 9 weeks until Christmas .. Kids are practicing for the Christmas Musical now. What a wonderful time of year .. it will soon bring everyone much cheer.

Have a safe October and next month, we shall have to talk again. God Bless~ Connie

How do you plan meals?

Well, The kids and I were having our normal weekly meal planning talk when the question came up, how does everyone else plan their meals.

We plan our meals and shopping list at the same time. I have save receipts, so the kids understand how much (about) everything costs, so we don't go over budget.

1st day of blogging

Well, I am somewhat new to this and thought it would be fun to have a way to connect with other of similar interest.

I don't do much posting on the Internet, only because of the people out there that don't believe the way you do are mostly negative and I don't have the personality to blow it off easily.

We have been in our 2007 school year for about 3 weeks now and finally getting settled into our routine once again. We don't home school year around, like many other families in our HS group do. We take the summers off for soccer, picnics, fair and fun family events.

I would like to put a cow in the freezer very soon .. just have a difficult time convincing the DH.

We dont have room for even a half of a cow in our freezer, so I am going to try my hand at canning beef. If you have any words of wisdom there, I would love to hear. I do have a few ladies at church that can every year, so I may bend their ear one day.

Far More Exposure to Harmful Chemicals in Household Cleaners ..

Americans are exposed to far more of a controversial chemical than previously thought -- levels that likely surpass the government's current safety standard and which have been shown to cause harm in animals, according to a joint statement issued by 38 leading scientists.

While the chemical, bisphenol A, is hardly a household word, it is found in nearly every home and nearly everybody. Government tests have found bisphenol A, which is used in plastic baby bottles, dental sealants and linings of metal cans, in 95 percent of people studied.

While scientists haven't yet conducted definitive studies in people, animal tests have linked bisphenol A, which acts like a hormone, to problems such as obesity, early puberty, hyperactivity, and abnormal sexual behavior and reproductive cycles.

In their joint statement, however, scientists say they took a conservative approach, including only statements backed by many strong studies.

Scientists agreed that even very low doses cause profound effects on laboratory animals, particularly during pregnancy and infancy. The chemical can permanently rewire genetic programming before birth, potentially predisposing exposed animals to cancer. Bisphenol A also changes brain structure, body size and behavior in animals studied, scientists said.

Researchers issued their statement, published in Reproductive Toxicology, after reviewing about 700 animal studies.

The Environmental Protection Agency says bisphenol A is safe in doses of up to 50 micrograms per kilogram of body weight, per day. But a paper presented Thursday, Aug. 9, concludes that the high levels of bisphenol A in human blood and tissue suggest people are actually exposed to 10 times that amount.

One of the scientists, Retha Newbold of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, says researchers need to find ways to measure whether people have been exposed to bisphenol A before or after birth, and if exposure increases their disease risk.

Researchers agree many questions remain, such as: Does bisphenol A, like mercury, build up as it moves through the food chain? Could that explain why there's so much of it in our bodies?

The scientists' findings are at odds with other recent analyses, according to a statement released by the American Chemistry Council, which notes that the European Food Safety Authority has concluded that consumers are not at risk from the chemical. A report on bisphenol A being prepared by the National Toxicology Program's reproductive health center -- which held a hearing on the issue on Monday, Aug. 13 -- will provide a more balanced and accurate picture, said the council's Steven Hentges.

In the past two years, lawmakers in California, Maryland and Minnesota have introduced bills to ban bisphenol A in children's products. None succeeded. California is still considering a bill to ban similar chemicals from children's products.

Frederick vom Saal, a professor of reproductive biology and neurobiology at the University of Missouri-Columbia who signed the joint statement, says manufacturers should voluntarily get rid of bisphenol A. He asks, "Why would you subject your baby to something that you know is a sex hormone?" (end report)

Clean and Pure Living

BABY SHAMPOO STUDY RAISES CHEMICAL CONCERNS

Lipitor Ads Spark Congressional Probe

Time!

Cancer-Causing Chemical Found in Children's Bath Products

Home Spray Cleaners Could Raise Asthma Risk

Tests reveal high chemical levels in kids' bodies ..

Tests reveal high chemical levels in kids' bodies

October? It feels like spring!

How do you plan meals?

1st day of blogging

Far More Exposure to Harmful Chemicals in Household Cleaners ..

About Me

Links

Categories

Recent Entries

Friends