Producing Safer Plastics

Seeking methods to replace estrogenically active compounds

March 16, 2011 RSS Feed Print

Comment (6)
Tweet

Usey predicts that plastic items will not become more expensive to produce this way, “since we’re not talking about retooling, only minor tweaks in processing and material selection," he says. “The end product should cost about the same."

Manufacturers’ willingness to make yet another market change may be another story, however. “There is consensus that this is coming," Usey says. “But many of the companies are waiting until consumers demand this solution."

However, several companies have jumped on board. Hydrapak, an Oakland, Calif. sports water bottle manufacturer is making an EA-free product co-developed with PlastiPure. Two baby bottle companies, Ajmerani and Adiri, also hope to have EA-free products on the market sometime this year, Usey says.

“The smaller companies seem to have more of an innovative philosophy, and are more aggressive and interested," Usey says. “These will precede the much larger market."

In the meantime, PlastiPure is working with a Vancouver manufacturer to develop EA-free flexible plastics, such as baby bottle liners, food storage bags, freezer and microwave bags, and stretch/cling wrap. The idea is to use them in products targeted to consumers potentially most vulnerable to low levels of synthetic chemicals with estrogenic activity, including pregnant women, infants and young children.

“We believe these products will have wide consumer appeal and societal benefit," Usey says.

---

Follow U.S. News Science on Twitter.

Tags:: innovation,; product safety,; plastic,; chemistry,; technology,; environment

Reader Comments Read all comments (6)

Add Your Thoughts Comment Name State Email

Please enter the two words below into the text field underneath the image.

Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

There is a vast difference between raw "NATURAL" phytoestrogens and highly refined estrogen disruptors, which are structured differently than anything found in Nature.
Aside from all the so-called hard science that sceptics proclaim to understand, what about the natural senses we were born with? I can feel the adverse effects of plastics on my skin, my tongue and the reactions in my body chemistry. I don't need a scientific study to tell me what my senses clearly feel.
Argue all you want in favor of the unstable molecules in synthetic industrial petrochemicals. But it's time people have a restrained respect for the subtle levels which the body operates at. Let's stop pretending we can trifle with Nature on our terms with the untold number of made-up chemicals. We are part of Nature--not its dictator. Wise people err on the side of Nature--which will always humble us in time if we don't manage resources well.

ginaann of CO 4:40AM May 09, 2011

I appreciate Mr. Randi's comments; I'm a big fan of his namesake.
Please pardon me for dealing with the personal issues first: although I was a founder of Neocork, I have had no association with them or any of their competitors for several years. I do not know their current sales figures. Mr. Randi's comments are inaccurate in that regard.
Unfortunately, one cannot see into the future and anticipate research that has not yet occurred. Had I been in possession of that extraordinary faculty, I would certainly have chosen the materials for the cork differently. Of course, I would also have bought Apple stock, made several sizeable Super Bowl bets, and applied for the Randi Million Dollar Challenge. We have not measured the estrogenic activity of Neocorks, but have examined the estrogenic activity from other brands of plastic corks. In the case of the most popular brand, the levels of EA are rather high.
The issue of phytoestrogens, which have been naturally occurring in our food supply since the beginnings of our species, versus xenoestrogens, which are industrial chemicals to which we have only recently begun to be exposed for several decades, is an interesting one about which which there is currently quite a bit of research interest and certainly no end of controversy. We disagree with the notion that full, comprehensive, and detailed epidemiological data be present before consumers, manufacturers, and regulators take action IF the potential problem can be easily avoided. And as I said previously, we also disagree with the notion that researchers who develop accepted, peer-reviewed, and validated test methods should be debarred from using these test methods to find ways in which potential health problems can be avoided.
We are fully confident about the validity of our research and its results. If people have disagreements with our research and the results, we encourage vigorous debate in scientific journals rather than vague, ad hominem attacks in internet comment boards.

Stuart Yaniger of TX 2:26PM April 25, 2011

It's just commercialism trying to masquerade itself as science & bad science at that - like all snake-oil/medicine show salesmen - it's the old trick; create a fear in the public's mind & then offer to take it away. The paper entitled:
"Most Plastic Products Release Estrogenic Chemicals:
A Health Problem That Can Be Solved"
establishes this intent from the get-go. It then proceeds to analyse the "oestrogen-like" compounds in plastics while all the time ignoring the fact already noted by Don of CA that there is no proof that these compounds are harmful to health. There is no attempt to address this in the paper. Health is mentioned only three times in the paper (once being the title). But as the title says this fear can be taken away by buying "our product" or certifying your production methods using "our certification company".
A tell-tale warning signal is the reference to "baby bottle" 12 times throughout the paper & 2 references to the plastic nipple of the baby bottle.
An interesting aside is a company called Neocork, who introduced the plastic wine cork to the market back in 1999. According to the company's website the cork (or closure as they call it) is made up of an extruded low density foamed polyethylene core with a thermoplastic elastomer outer skin which is then overprinted. I wonder has this been tested for estrogenic chemicals or have these corks been leeching xenoestrogens into the wine-drinking public for over a decade now causing the health problems that PlastiPure & Certichem can solve? What makes it ironic is that Stuart Yaniger is the founder & chief technical officer & plastics expert for Neocork. According to their website they are shipping tens of millions of corks every month around the world and presumably causing untold damage to the health of millions if PlastiPure's claims are to be believed. I see no published tests in the paper cited or elsewhere which would put the wine-drinking public's mind at ease?

j. Randi of VA 1:33PM April 23, 2011

Producing Safer Plastics

Seeking methods to replace estrogenically active compounds

Reader Comments Read all comments (6)

Rankings Lists

U.S. News & World Report

Sections

Producing Safer Plastics

Seeking methods to replace estrogenically active compounds

Related News

Reader Comments Read all comments (6)

Subscribe

Rankings Lists

U.S. News & World Report

Sections