I am a self-professed environmental health wingnut. It
drives my wife crazy, as I really know how to take the fun out of many
pleasures in life: from a nice meal, to a fun toy, to a roaring campfire. I’ve
always had these types of leanings, but my subject matter knowledge was greatly
expanded as a result of the school environmental health research I led in 2011.
Recently, I’ve been self-reflective about these principles and how far I can
take my desire for a healthy lifestyle, before it also becomes a miserable
lifestyle saddled with fear, constant avoidance and workarounds? I truly
believe that the risk of impacts to our health from environmental exposure has
been slowly and quietly becoming more severe. But at the same time it may be
that, as consumers, we can only take this so far before we turn our lives
completely upside-down. As such, I offer you an examination of this slippery
slope to reinforce that there are no absolutes, but each person must define the
line where they find it worth it to bother changing habits and lifestyles.
Bisphenol A, or BPA, is by all accounts one of the latest
villains of public health. A known endocrine disruptor, BPA has been used
widely in plastic products and various resins and coatings for decades. Concern
has been mounting over how much BPA we are exposed to, as studies have shown
its prevalence in the bloodstream and urine of humans, in umbilical cord blood,
and in breastmilk; as well as having linkages to various types of cancers and
developmental disabilities. We are often exposed to BPA in many ways that we
may not realize, as it is commonly found in the linings of canned food (beans,
vegetables, fruit) and drinks in metal cans (soda, beer, fruit juice), on
thermal paper receipts, in polycarbonate reusable plastic bottles (think Nalgene
bottles and the five-gallon translucent blue bottles used on water coolers),
and probably other potential sources for exposure that are not often talked
about. Combine these frequent exposures with other prevalent environmental
toxins, such as PFOAs found in non-stick cookware coatings, TCE in dry cleaning
solvents and PBDE flame retardants in many synthetic consumer products (TVs,
stereos, fleece pajamas, mattresses,
molded foam cushions in couches), you end up with a pretty serious poison
cocktail right in your own home without really realizing it.
We environmental health zealots and over-reactors do what we
can to eliminate exposures wherever possible: buying food products fresh,
frozen, or in glass jars; replacing Teflon cookware with uncoated wares; trying
not to handle thermal receipts, etc. But does this just give us a false sense
of security? Our actions seem simple and effective, but the problems we hope to
avoid are often much more complicated than they appear. Here are some examples:
Avoid thermal paper? Studies have shown that BPA is present in
trace amounts in many types of paper, as a result of often being commingled
with thermal paper in the recycling process;
Purchase BPA-free products? BPA
is indeed starting to be voluntarily phased out by many manufacturers; however,
it is generally being replaced by Bisphenol S, a compound that has not been
deeply studied for its relative health impacts compared to BPA;
Purchase organic? Recent
revelations have shown that organic brown rice syrup, for unfortunate reasons,
can have high levels of arsenic (we found out that organic brown rice syrup was
a main ingredient in the baby formula we were feeding our infant, which we have
since switched to a non-organic brand)
Prefer glass to metal cans? I
have witnessed firsthand one tomato sauce and salsa producer that distributes
food in glass jars, but uses imported tomatoes out of #10 cans, most likely
lined with BPA.
But the real basis for my case is…restaurants. That’s right,
restaurants. Everyone eats out, some of us more than others. We patronize
restaurants so that we can cede control and responsibility for preparing meals
to someone else. We also implicitly trust that they are preparing food in a
safe and healthy manner, but give little further thought to what happens in the
kitchen. Out of sight, out of mind, right? Having worked in several restaurants
over the years, I can personally attest to the numerous environmental health
practices of concern that are standard operating procedure:
- Heavy and sometimes complete reliance on canned ingredients; (Potential BPA Exposure)
- The constant use of polycarbonate storage containers that are frequently exposed to high heat (hot soups, being run through dishwashers); (Potential BPA Exposure)
- Large quantities of plastic wrap that are placed over both hot and cold foods, and sometimes put in microwave ovens; (Potential PVC and Phthalate Exposure)
- The prevalence of industrial-grade detergents and cleaning products like quarternary ammonia; and,
- The industry standard of using thermal paper for customer receipts. (Potential BPA Exposure)
Thankfully, non-stick cookware is seldom used, in my
experience; it doesn’t stand up to the abuse of the commercial kitchen
environment. Unlike other changes resulting from consumer demand like organic
and locally sourced food, there has been little to no pressure on the commercial
food industry (including manufacturers, vendors, and restaurants) to address
any of these health issues. So is this going to change anytime soon? It’s
doubtful, given that there aren’t clear alternatives for all of these avenues
for negative health impact, and it would be pretty difficult to turn the food
industry upside-down to accomplish these changes.
The restaurant environment is merely one example of the way chemicals can
infiltrate our lives and our bodies without us even realizing. Just imagine all
of the other hidden exposures from the places where we live, work and play. As
such, I have come to the conclusion that the real change needs to happen
through legislation and policy change (there are already several organizations
working on this), which is a long and protracted process with no clear
expectation of complete success. BPA happens to have been one that has been
studied in great depths, which has been the basis for the legislation that
exists in places like Connecticut and California. The real challenge with
environmental health is that the real damage to our health results from long-term,
low-level exposure, which makes it very difficult to pinpoint specific toxins
and to build science and legislation around it.
So while we’re waiting for science and policy to catch up, I
suggest we all adhere to some basic words of wisdom: 1) everything in moderation,
2) use common sense, and 3) you can’t control everything (even if you would
like to), so sometimes you just need to relax and go with the flow. And, it is
okay to eat in restaurants…
