Plastics: The Sixth Basic Food Group — Part 1

Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients, Jan, 2001 by Rose Marie Williams

Agitated by the unwholesomeness of the whole mess, an email was sent to Sarah Johnston, Executive Director of the Northeast Organic Farming Association of New York, asking about organic requirements for packaging and plastic lined cans. Ms. Johnston replied that the American Organic Standards do not deal with potential leaching of packaging materials into foods. Agreeing that this is a serious issue, however, she promised to look into it further.

"Plastics -- An Important Part of Your Healthy Diet"

So claims a full-page advertisement from the American Plastics Council in a National Geographic, 2000 Magazine, suggesting that plastics could be thought of as "the sixth basic food group." "Oh, you certainly wouldn't eat them, but plastic packaging does help protect our food in many ways," assures the ad.

Granted, plastic delays spoilage. However, we are indeed "eating" plastic chemicals. Unbeknown to most consumers, many foods leach chemicals from plastic packaging materials and plastic microwave containers. In addition, children are being exposed to chemicals in plastic baby bottles, teething rings, and plastic toys. Perhaps plastic truly has become the sixth basic food group, after all.

Chemical Industry & Health Advocates Spar

The Nov/Dec 1999 issue of Mother Jones Magazine letters section featured what amounted to a verbal sparring match between Courtney M. Price, VP, Chemstar Chemical Manufacturers Association of Arlington, Virginia, and Jon R. Luoma. Mr. Luoma authored an article titled, "System Failure," which appeared in the July/Aug. issue of Mother Jones.

Ms. Price attacked Mr. Luoma for implying that all phthalates are endocrine disrupters, which she indicated is wrong, and jabbed him for mentioning a "flurry of studies" on phthalates, which she claimed did not exist. Mr. Luoma countered these attacks by indicating each of Ms. Price's jabs was "an obfuscation or an outright error."

He defended his position by qualifying the "flurry" of studies showed "endocrine disrupter effects on the male reproductive system," and that "phthalates did their damage as anti-androgens, blocking testosterone," and thus "inducing feminization symptoms in male lab rats." [10]

The stakes are high on both sides, and undoubtedly, the scientific controversy and the verbal sparring will heat up, while those suffering the greatest blows will be the uninformed consumers.

References

(1.) Lee, John, R, MD, The John R. Lee, MD, Medical Letter, Phoenix, AZ, Jan., 2000.

(2.) Ibid.

(3.) World Wildlife Fund Magazine, "Chemicals That Compromise Life: A Call to Action," Wash., DC, 1998.

(4.) Citizen's Petition Newsletter, Amherst, NH, Summer/Fall 1998.

(5.) World Wildlife Fund Magazine, Chemicals That Compromise Life: A Call to Action," Wash., DC, 1998.

(6.) Rogers, Sherri, MD, Total Wellness Newsletter, Syracuse, NY, July, 2000.

(7.) Ibid.

(8.) Consumer Reports Magazine, "Your Health," June, 1998.

(9.) Ibid.

(10.) Mother Jones Magazine, "Letters Section," Nov/Dec. 1999.