Press Release > Environmental Chemicals Harm Reproductive Health: Ob-Gyns Advocate for Policy Change

[proverbialwisdom]

Last edited Sun Sep 29, 2013, 04:38 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.asrm.org/Environmental_Chemicals_Harm_Reproductive_Health/

AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE

Highlights from Fertility and Sterility: Environmental Chemicals Harm Reproductive Health

September 24 , 2013
by: ASRM Office of Public Affairs
Published in ASRM Press Release

Ob-Gyns Advocate for Policy Changes to Protect Health

Washington, DC—Toxic chemicals in the environment harm our ability to reproduce, negatively affect pregnancies, and are associated with numerous other long-term health problems, according to The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (The College) and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). In a joint Committee Opinion, The College and ASRM urge ob-gyns to advocate for government policy changes to identify and reduce exposure to toxic environmental agents.

“Lawmakers should require the US Environmental Protection Agency and industry to define and estimate the dangers that aggregate exposure to harmful chemicals pose to pregnant women, infants, and children and act to protect these vulnerable populations,” said Jeanne A. Conry, MD, PhD, president of The College.

“Every pregnant woman in America is exposed to many different chemicals in the environment,” said Dr. Conry. “Prenatal exposure to certain chemicals is linked to miscarriages, stillbirths, and birth defects.” Many chemicals that pregnant women absorb or ingest from the environment can cross the placenta to the fetus. Exposure to mercury during pregnancy, for instance, is known to harm cognitive development in children.

The scientific evidence over the last 15 years shows that exposure to toxic environmental agents before conception and during pregnancy can have significant and long-lasting effects on reproductive health. “For example, pesticide exposure in men is associated with poor semen quality, sterility, and prostate cancer,” said Linda C. Giudice, MD, PhD, president of ASRM. “We also know that exposure to pesticides may interfere with puberty, menstruation and ovulation, fertility, and menopause in women.”

Other reproductive and health problems associated with exposure to toxic environmental agents:

* Miscarriage and stillbirth
* Impaired fetal growth and low birth weight
* Preterm birth
* Childhood cancers
* Birth defects
* Cognitive/intellectual impairment
* Thyroid problems

Approximately 700 new chemicals are introduced into the US market each year, and more than 84,000 chemical substances are being used in manufacturing and processing or are being imported.“The scary fact is that we don’t have safety data on most of these chemicals even though they are everywhere—in the air, water, soil, our food supply, and everyday products,” Dr. Conry said. “Bisphenol A (BPA), a hormone disruptor, is a common toxic chemical contained in our food, packaging, and many consumer products.”

“To successfully study the impact of these chemical exposures, we must shift the burden of proof from the individual health care provider and the consumer to the manufacturers before any chemicals are even released into the environment,” said Dr. Conry.

Certain groups of people and communities have higher exposures to harmful environmental chemicals than others. “For example, women exposed to toxic chemicals at work are at higher risk of reproductive health problems than other women,” Dr. Conry said. “Low-wage immigrants who work on farms have higher exposures to chemicals used on the crops that they harvest.”

“As reproductive health care physicians, we are in a unique position to help prevent prenatal exposure to toxic environmental agents by educating our patients about how to avoid them at home, in their community, and at work,” Dr. Giudice said.

What can physicians do?

* Learn about toxic environmental agents common in their community
* Educate patients on how to avoid toxic environmental agents
* Take environmental exposure histories during preconception and first prenatal visits
* Report identified environmental hazards to appropriate agencies
* Encourage pregnant and breastfeeding women and women in the preconception period to eat carefully washed fresh fruits and vegetables and avoid fish containing high levels of methyl-mercury (shark, swordfish, king mackerel, tilefish)
* Advance policies and practices that support a healthy food system
* Advocate for government policy changes to identify and reduce exposure to toxic environmental agents

“Exposure to Toxic Environmental Agents,” a committee opinion, is published in the October issue of Fertility and Sterility.

For examples of toxic environmental exposure patient history forms, go to http://prhe.ucsf.edu/prhe/clinical_resources.html

For the Breast Cancer Fund’s recent report on prenatal BPA exposure and breast cancer risk, see http://www.breastcancerfund.org/

The American Society for Reproductive Medicine, founded in 1944, is an organization of more than 7,000 physicians, researchers, nurses, technicians and other professionals dedicated to advancing knowledge and expertise in reproductive biology. Affiliated societies include the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology, the Society for Male Reproduction and Urology, the Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, the Society of Reproductive Surgeons and the Society of Reproductive Biologists and Technologists. www.asrm.org

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (The College), a 501(c)(3) organization, is the nation’s leading group of physicians providing health care for women. As a private, voluntary, nonprofit membership organization of approximately 57,000 members, The College strongly advocates for quality health care for women, maintains the highest standards of clinical practice and continuing education of its members, promotes patient education, and increases awareness among its members and the public of the changing issues facing women’s health care. The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), a 501(c)(6) organization, is its companion organization. www.acog.org

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/23/environmental-chemicals-pregnancy-risk/2857753/
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/09/24/environmental-chemicals-pregnancy-risk-report-claims/

Report: Environmental chemicals pose pregnancy risk
Lauran Neergaard, Associated Press 6:38 p.m. EDT September 23, 2013

Certain chemicals are linked to infertility, miscarriages and birth defects.

From mercury to pesticides, Americans are exposed daily to environmental chemicals that could harm reproductive health, the nation's largest groups of obstetricians and fertility specialists said Monday.

The report urges doctors to push for stricter environmental policies to better identify and reduce exposure to chemicals that prove truly risky. But it's likely to scare pregnant women in the meantime.

That's because during the first prenatal visit, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists wants doctors to ask mothers-to-be about their exposure to different chemicals. They're also supposed to teach women how to avoid some considered most worrisome during pregnancy.

<>

The industry's American Chemistry Council said current environmental regulations offer enough consumer protection, and that the new report will create "confusion and alarm among expectant mothers" and distract them from proven steps for a healthy pregnancy.

Link from comment posted by: cmo | September 24, 2013 at 09:58 PM: http://www.ageofautism.com/2013/03/from-the-editor.html

[proverbialwisdom]

1. More.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=225501821
Missed this story in the MSM

http://www.asrm.org/Environmental_Chemicals_A_Pregnancy_Risk/

Report: Environmental Chemicals A Pregnancy Risk

September 24 , 2013
by: AP via NPR
Published in AP via NPR

From mercury to pesticides, Americans are exposed daily to environmental chemicals that could harm reproductive health, the nation's largest groups of obstetricians and fertility specialists said Monday.

Read the full article: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=225501821

Link from: https://www.facebook.com/ASRMFB

[proverbialwisdom]

2. "An embargo will lift this evening on a Joint Committee Opinion issued by ASRM & ACOG which urges"

http://www.asrm.org/ASRM_ACOG_Issue_Opinion/

ASRM and ACOG Issue Opinion Advocating for Reduction in Toxic Environmental Agents

September 24 , 2013
by: ASRM Office of Public Affairs
Published in ASRM Bulletin Volume 15, Number 30

An embargo will lift this evening on a Joint Committee Opinion issued by ASRM and ACOG which urges government policy changes to identify and reduce exposure to toxic environmental agents.

The opinion is being published in the journals of both organizations.

Environmental Chemicals Harm Reproductive Health
Ob-Gyns Advocate for Policy Changes to Protect Health

Washington, DC—Toxic chemicals in the environment harm our ability to reproduce, negatively affect pregnancies, and are associated with numerous other long-term health problems, according to The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (The College) and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). In a joint Committee Opinion, The College and ASRM urge ob-gyns to advocate for government policy changes to identify and reduce exposure to toxic environmental agents.

“Lawmakers should require the US Environmental Protection Agency and industry to define and estimate the dangers that aggregate exposure to harmful chemicals pose to pregnant women, infants, and children and act to protect these vulnerable populations,” said Jeanne A. Conry, MD, PhD, president of The College.

<>

SHOUT IT!

[Uncle Joe]

3. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, proverbialwisdom.

[proverbialwisdom]

5. Thank you, it's for all DUers purportedly grounded in the scientific approach to problem solving.

On May 30, 2013, there was a piece on SCOPE, the Stanford University Medical School site, with the title, 'Director of Stanford Autism Center responds to your questions on research and treatment." Here's an excerpt.

http://scopeblog.stanford.edu/2013/05/30/director-of-stanford-autism-center-responds-to-your-questions-on-research-and-treatment/

Director of Stanford Autism Center responds to your questions on research and treatment
Lia Steakley on May 30th, 2013

<>

"How meaningful are environmental factors, such as nutrition and exposure to toxins during pregnancy, in terms of autism risk?"

Feinstein's answer:

"During pregnancy, proper nutrition and taking reasonable measures to avoid exposure to known environmental toxins are basic steps an expectant mother, and family, can take to promote a baby's health and minimize risks of medical problems for the newborn. This principle certainly applies to giving birth to a baby with a healthy brain and nervous system, and pregnant women should consume proper nutrients to support brain development. There are a number of known toxins, including lead, alcohol, mercury, tobacco, various insecticides, petrochemical products and some medicines that are harmful to fetal development. An important area of concern is our current environment and findings showing that food and water sources, and other common materials, can contain man-made chemicals.

"A great deal of scientific attention is now being focused on the potential consequences of some of these chemicals on the bodily organs, including the brain, as well as possible mutagenic or harmful effects on the reproductive organs and human genes. There is a very real basis for concern that environmental toxins play a direct causative role or increase the risk for neurodevelopmental disorders, including ASDs. There is now much research underway to discover what types of chemicals present in the environment might be causatively implicated in ASDs."

And from Harvard's leaders on autism research,

http://najms.net/wp-content/uploads/v06i03.pdf#page=34

A Special Issue of NAJMS: ADVANCES IN AUTISM 2013
Preface to the special issue of autism

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD), the fastest-growing complex neurodevelopment disorder, continues to rise in its prevalence, now affecting up to 1 in 50 children in the USA, and averaging 1% globally, according to the latest CDC report. More children will be diagnosed with ASD this year than with AIDS, diabetes & cancer combined in the USA. ASD costs the nation $137 billion a year and this debt is expected to increase in the next decade. Hence, ASD has become a huge healthcare burden and global threat, categorized by the CDC as a national public health crisis.

ASD is characterized by social-communication impairment, and restricted, repetitive, and stereotyped patterns of behavior, which cause significant disability for those affected. With its etiology still largely unknown, and its pathophysiology poorly understood, ASD currently has no universally accepted therapy. ASD is affecting more and more families; unmet services and limited resources need to be addressed urgently. Researchers, clinicians, healthcare providers, social agencies and government need to coordinate efforts to develop more effective treatments and a satisfactory continuum of care, across the lifespan. Ultimately, a cure needs to be sought for the various subtypes of ASD that exist.

The current issue of North American Journal of Medicine and Science (NAJMS) represents a continuation of our previous two special issues on autism (NAJMS Vol. 5 Issue 3 and Vol. 4 Issue 3) published in July 2012 and July 2011, respectively. In this issue, we are honored to have another panel of expert researchers and clinicians on the frontlines of ASD research and treatment to present their newest research findings and views from different perspectives.

This issue of NAJMS consists of five original research articles, two comprehensive reviews, one case report and two commentary articles, covering topics in genetics, pathogenesis, metabolic disorder biomarkers of ASD, and a clinical study, that bring into focus our newest understanding and treatment strategies.

<>

The data presented in Dr. Mumper’s review of the medical literature, suggests that ASD may be impacted by environmental toxicants, duration of breastfeeding, gut flora composition, nutritional status, acetaminophen use, vaccine practices and use of antibiotics and/or frequency of infections. In her current general pediatric practice (Advocates for Children), she has noted a modest trend toward a lower prevalence of ASD than in her previous pediatric practice or recent prevalence estimates from the CDC.

<>

The final commentary was written by Dr. Herbert, who presents her paper entitled "Everyday Epigenetics from Molecular Intervention to Public Health and Lifestyle Medicine." She asserts that it may well take a grass roots epigenetic/lifestyle medicine revolution to avert the worsening health trends we are facing in the setting of a progressively more toxic and endangered planet. She posits that everyday epigenetics can inform science of what is
possible so that society can respond on an appropriate scale to the magnitude of the crisis we are facing.

<>

Xuejun Kong, MD
Editor-in-Chief, NAJMS
Department of Medicine
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Harvard Medical School

Christopher J. McDougle, MD
Guest Editor, NAJMS
Lurie Center for Autism Massachusetts General Hospital
Harvard Medical School

http://www.rescuepost.com/files/j-child-neurol-2013-herbert-and-buckley-0883073813488668-1.pdf

Autism and Dietary Therapy : Case Report and Review of the Literature
Martha R. Herbert and Julie A. Buckley
J Child Neurol published online 10 May 2013 DOI: 10.1177/0883073813488668

Related: http://www.democraticunderground.com/101672031

[proverbialwisdom]

4. Related news on very recent PEW Health and NRDC actions.

Last edited Sun Sep 29, 2013, 04:40 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3705099

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=B846909A-A5E3-4A27-A8DA-631FD66F9DED

POLITICO
NRDC to launch attack on food ingredient approvals
By: Helena Bottemiller Evich
September 10, 2013 04:30 PM EDT

http://www.pewhealth.org/other-resource/pew-examines-gaps-in-toxicity-data-for-chemicals-allowed-in-food-85899493633

Aug 14, 2013
PEW EXAMINES GAPS IN TOXICITY DATA FOR CHEMICALS ALLOWED IN FOOD
Project: Food Additives Project

The peer-reviewed journal Reproductive Toxicology published a paper from The Pew Charitable Trusts' food additives project examining the data used to make safety recommendations for chemicals added to food sold in the United States. The analysis of three major sources of toxicology information found significant gaps in the data for chemicals that are added to food and food packaging.

<>

Only one in five chemicals has been evaluated using the simplest lab animal test recommended by FDA to evaluate safety.
Only one in eight chemicals that FDA recommended be evaluated for reproductive or development problems had evidence it was tested for these effects.

The lack of data means that often we don’t know whether these chemicals pose a health risk to the hundreds of millions of Americans who eat food with untested chemical additives.

[proverbialwisdom]

6. CJR - When scientists attack

http://www.cjr.org/the_observatory/bpa_enviornmental_health_news.php

3:30 PM - October 3, 2013

When scientists attack
A laurel to Environmental Health News for taking a hard look at the politics behind a controversial editorial

By Alexis Sobel Fitts

Spend extended time reading the science press, and it’s easy to think that science is a one-note story about the amazing discoveries that happen in test tubes and laboratories. In reality, there’s a plethora of under-covered science angles, most notably the politics of research funding and science policy.

That’s why Stéphane Horel and Brian Bienkowski deserve a laurel for an article released last month by Environmental Health News, investigating a group of scientists who authored a controversial editorial. The piece under scrutiny condemned a proposed regulatory policy for endocrine disruptors. Instead of rehashing the science with a tired ‘he said, she said’ model, the EHN reporters chronicled the scientists’ financial and political affiliations—weaving a comprehensive story of the influences behind science policy.

In June, the European Commission leaked a draft document proposing a regulation of endocrine disruptors—chemicals (most famously bisphenol A, known as BPA) commonly found in consumer products including food, fragrances, and plastics, that can impact hormone regulation and production. Though endocrine disruptors have been linked in laboratory studies to cancer and chronic disease, their effects on human health is still uncertain, and the draft document announced the European Union’s intention to be the first country to regulate them specifically.

In July, the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology published a scathing editorial, signed by 18 established scientists and journal editors, that critiqued the plan as based on a shoddy understanding of science.

“The currently drafted framework is based on virtually complete ignorance of all well-established and taught principles of pharmacology and toxicology,” wrote the scientists. “Regulations that profoundly affect human activities, that legally impose significant fines and even detention, should not be based on irrelevant tests forced to be forced to be regarded as relevant by administrative dictates.” If you take their argument to its logical conclusion, it’s beyond a policy critique; it’s a rallying cry. The authors are arguing that pharmaceutical policy, essentially, should be more influenced by the people who understand it best—the scientists. (The authors wrote a similar open letter to the EU’s chief science adviser, which was published in over a dozen other journals.)

But here’s the problem with that argument: One month later, a group of 41 scientists published “Science and policy on endocrine disruptors must not be mixed: a reply to a ‘common sense’ intervention by toxicology journal editors,” in Environmental Health, a journal unaffiliated with Environmental Health News. This piece picked apart the original editorial for misrepresenting the scientific consensus on endocrine disruptors. The 18 scientists’ view was “unfounded,” they wrote, “as it is neither based on the fundamental principles of how the endocrine system works and how chemicals can interfere with its normal function, nor does it consider the consequences of that interference.” The back-and-forth got bigger in August, with a group of 104 scientists publishing an additional critique of the first editorial in the journal Endocrinology.

It’s easy to get caught up in trying bring balance to this kind of argument—and most publications, like Nature covered the row in a straightforward back-and-forth. But Environmental Health News reporters dug through the backgrounds of the 18 original editorial writers, finding potential conflicts of interest with 17. (They’re published on a separate page: here.) The problematic affiliations range from slight (patents with the drug company Merck, which produces BPA) to the major (significant research funding from pharmaceutical companies, affiliations with the European Chemical Industry Council.)

“We do not believe the discussion on the conflicts of interests will serve anybody because it takes away the focus from the real issue,” Daniel Dietrich, the editorial’s lead author told Environmental Health News.

We beg to differ. As EHN points out, “the new rules would have sweeping, global ramifications because all companies that sell a variety of products in Europe would have to comply.” Having a piece of journalism that contextualizes the science behind the argument is a significant part of the real issue.

Alexis Sobel Fitts is an assistant editor at CJR

http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/news/2013/eu-conflict
http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org
http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/news/2013/pdf-links/2013.06.11%20EDC_Recommendation%20Commission%20Draft.pdf
http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100421/full/4641122a.html
http://www.altex.ch/resources/open_letter.pdf
http://www.ehjournal.net/content/12/1/69
http://endo.endojournals.org/content/early/2013/09/18/en.2013-1854
http://www.nature.com/news/journal-editors-trade-blows-over-toxicology-1.13787
http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/news/2013/eu-conflict
http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/news/2013/eu-conflict-list
http://www.cefic-lri.org/projects/1272363156/172/HBM3-Data-on-in-vitro-metabolism-and-mechanisms-of-action-in-combination-with-kinetic-modelling-integrating-in-risk-assessment/

Article from: http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_28443.cfm

[proverbialwisdom]

7. Yesterday, linked to Yahoo's homepage.

Last edited Thu Oct 17, 2013, 11:46 AM - Edit history (1)

http://news.search.yahoo.com/search?p=bisphenol+BPA&ei=UTF-8&fr=yfp-t-900&fr2=newsdd