Although, I agree with the scientists' statements that these findings are "informed speculation", I still firmly believe that all these chemicals in our food & consumer products are adversely affecting our health in the developed world.
At least, the agriculture in the developing world is still done the old way, so the concept of "organic" food is still prevalent in the developing world. The hormone-disrupting chemicals / steroids given to animals flow through into our bodies & disrupt our hormones, causing several kinds of diseases, for which researchers haven't been able to find the root causes because it'd due to what we are putting in our mouths.
Now, people will say, well, then buy organic. There are several problems with that, too. Some "organic" food is not organic at all. The rise of the organics industry has also given rise to people who are passing off non-organics as organics. On top of that, organic food is expensive (unlike, in developing world), & thanks to the free trade deals, economy, class segregation etc etc in the society, it's usually the poor who relies on non-organics & consequently, suffers from its long-term consequences.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The data suggests the high economic impact of chemicals in pesticides, plastics & flame retardants.
The team, led by New York University, said the estimates were conservative.
However, experts cautioned the findings were "informed speculation" & called for more detailed research.
Endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) can be physically similar to the hormones that naturally control our body's physiology so mimic their function. They can also block the function of hormones.
They have been linked with declining sperm counts, some cancers, impaired intelligence, obesity & diabetes. The main concern surrounds their impact during early development.
The authors of the study argued that limiting exposure would have significant benefits.
Many of the conditions linked to EDCs are also influenced by a wide range of other environmental influences. And some scientists contest the levels in the environment are not high enough to influence health.
The international research team acknowledge "there is uncertainty" & adapted techniques used by the International Panel on Climate Change to balance the uncertainty with the potential scale of the impact.
Their mathematical models suggested that across the 27 members of the EU, the most likely cost was €157bn ($173bn; £113.6bn) a year, but could be much higher. That equates to 1.2% of Europe's GDP.
This included healthcare costs as well as lost economic potential.
Their calculations said it was more than 99% certain that at least one of the chemicals was indeed having an impact on health.
The major economic impact was from pesticides (€120bn; $132.3bn; £86.8bn), followed by chemicals found in plastics (€26bn; $28.7bn; £18.8bn) & flame retardants (€9bn; $9.9bn; £6.5bn).
Dr Leonardo Trasande, a paediatrician at the New York University school of medicine, told the BBC: "These results suggest that regulating endocrine disrupting chemicals could produce substantial economic benefit that would be less than the cost of implementing safer alternatives & produce net economic benefits."
The studies looked at less than 5% of suspected EDCs & did not look at conditions such as cancer & female reproductive diseases. Hence the scientific team argue that these are conservative estimates.
******************************************************
The team's conclusions:
• Male reproductive disorders cost €4bn ($4.4bn; £2.9bn) per year
• Premature deaths, including through cardiovascular disease, cost €6bn ($6.6bn; £4.3bn) per year
• Obesity & diabetes cost €15bn ($16.5bn; £10.9bn per year)
• Neurological impact, including reduced intelligence, cost €132bn (£145.6bn; £95.5bn) per year
******************************************************
At least, the agriculture in the developing world is still done the old way, so the concept of "organic" food is still prevalent in the developing world. The hormone-disrupting chemicals / steroids given to animals flow through into our bodies & disrupt our hormones, causing several kinds of diseases, for which researchers haven't been able to find the root causes because it'd due to what we are putting in our mouths.
Now, people will say, well, then buy organic. There are several problems with that, too. Some "organic" food is not organic at all. The rise of the organics industry has also given rise to people who are passing off non-organics as organics. On top of that, organic food is expensive (unlike, in developing world), & thanks to the free trade deals, economy, class segregation etc etc in the society, it's usually the poor who relies on non-organics & consequently, suffers from its long-term consequences.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The data suggests the high economic impact of chemicals in pesticides, plastics & flame retardants.
The team, led by New York University, said the estimates were conservative.
However, experts cautioned the findings were "informed speculation" & called for more detailed research.
Endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) can be physically similar to the hormones that naturally control our body's physiology so mimic their function. They can also block the function of hormones.
They have been linked with declining sperm counts, some cancers, impaired intelligence, obesity & diabetes. The main concern surrounds their impact during early development.
The authors of the study argued that limiting exposure would have significant benefits.
Many of the conditions linked to EDCs are also influenced by a wide range of other environmental influences. And some scientists contest the levels in the environment are not high enough to influence health.
The international research team acknowledge "there is uncertainty" & adapted techniques used by the International Panel on Climate Change to balance the uncertainty with the potential scale of the impact.
Their mathematical models suggested that across the 27 members of the EU, the most likely cost was €157bn ($173bn; £113.6bn) a year, but could be much higher. That equates to 1.2% of Europe's GDP.
This included healthcare costs as well as lost economic potential.
Their calculations said it was more than 99% certain that at least one of the chemicals was indeed having an impact on health.
The major economic impact was from pesticides (€120bn; $132.3bn; £86.8bn), followed by chemicals found in plastics (€26bn; $28.7bn; £18.8bn) & flame retardants (€9bn; $9.9bn; £6.5bn).
Dr Leonardo Trasande, a paediatrician at the New York University school of medicine, told the BBC: "These results suggest that regulating endocrine disrupting chemicals could produce substantial economic benefit that would be less than the cost of implementing safer alternatives & produce net economic benefits."
The studies looked at less than 5% of suspected EDCs & did not look at conditions such as cancer & female reproductive diseases. Hence the scientific team argue that these are conservative estimates.
******************************************************
The team's conclusions:
• Male reproductive disorders cost €4bn ($4.4bn; £2.9bn) per year
• Premature deaths, including through cardiovascular disease, cost €6bn ($6.6bn; £4.3bn) per year
• Obesity & diabetes cost €15bn ($16.5bn; £10.9bn per year)
• Neurological impact, including reduced intelligence, cost €132bn (£145.6bn; £95.5bn) per year
******************************************************
No comments:
Post a Comment