E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSResearchers at the Harvard School of Public Health found that eating canned soup boosts urine concentration of the chemical bisphenol A (BPA) in humans. BPA is raising concerns among some health experts for its potential health effects in children, infants and fetuses. NBC's Robert Bazell has more.
By Karen Rowan
MyHealthNewsDaily
Eating canned food every day may raise the levels of the compound bisphenol A (BPA) in a person's urine more than previously suspected, a new study suggests.
People who ate a serving of canned soup every day for five days had BPA levels of 20.8 micrograms per liter of urine, whereas people who instead ate fresh soup had levels of 1.1 micrograms per liter, according to the study. BPA is found in many canned foods — it is a byproduct of the chemicals used to prevent corrosion.
When the researchers looked at the rise in BPA levels seen in the average participant who ate canned soup compared with those who ate fresh soup, they found a 1,221 percent jump.
"To see an increase in this magnitude was quite surprising," said study leader Karin Michels, an associate professor of epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health.
The levels of BPA seen in the study participants "are among the most extreme reported in a nonoccupational setting," the researchers wrote in their study. In the general population, levels have been found to be around 1 to 2 micrograms per liter, Michels said.
The study noted that levels higher than 13 micrograms per liter were found in only the top 5 percent of participants in the National Health and Examination Survey, which is an ongoing study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
"We are concerned about the influence of [hormone-disrupting] chemicals on health in general, and BPA is one of them," Michels told MyHealthNewsDaily.
The study is published online todayin the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Weigh in on Facebook: Will this finding impact how much canned soup you slurp?
Soup for lunch
The study included 75 people, whose average age was 27. One group of participants ate 12 ounces of fresh soup every day at lunchtime, while the other ate the same amount of canned soup each day. Urine samples were collected from the participants on the fourth and fifth days of the study.
BPA was detected in 77 percent of people who ate the fresh soup, and all of the people who ate the canned soup, according to the study.
Only a few studies had previously looked at BPA levels from eating canned foods, and those relied on asking people how much of the food they usually eat comes from cans, Michels said. The new study was the first in which researchers randomized participants to eat a small serving of canned food or fresh food, and measured the resulting difference in their urine BPA levels, she said.
"We've known for a while that drinking beverages that have been stored in certain hard plastics can increase the amount of BPA in your body. This study suggests that canned foods may be an even greater concern, especially given their wide use," said study researcher Jenny Carwile, a doctoral student at Harvard.
BPA and health
A 2008 study of 1,455 people showed that higher urinary BPA levels were linked with higher risks of developing cardiovascular disease and diabetes, and abnormal concentrations of certain liver enzymes, even after factors such as age, body mass index and smoking were taken into account.
And other studies have linked BPA levels in a woman's urine during her pregnancy to health problems in her child.
It is not known how long the levels of BPA might remain high, according to the study. However, it is also not known whether such a spike, even if it isn't sustained for very long, may affect health, the researchers wrote.
The study was limited in that all of the participants were students or staff at one school, and a single soup brand (Progresso) was tested, but the researchers wrote that they expected the results to apply to canned foods with a similar BPA content.
"Reducing canned food consumption may be a good idea, especially for people consuming foods from cans regularly," Michels said. "Maybe manufacturers can take the step of taking BPA out of the lining of cans — some have already done this, but only a few."
The study was funded by the Allen Foundation, which advocates nutrition research.
Leave a Comment:
Campbell's Chicken Soup is mmm, mmm, endocrine disrupting good!
our regulatory agencies are just rubber stamps for the industrial complex; the additives they put in food, line the can's have for years been warned as unhealthy, dangerous and yet no one does a damn thing; eat only frozen vegetables, make your soup from scratch, look at the ingredients in the can, my God, the stuff is enough to kill a horse !
We gave up eating anything (unless necessary) out of cans for this very reason... the corporations and food packagers don't want to talk about the toxins used in processing and canning but they are a real threat. Not only BPA either, even so-called "BPA-free" cans contain other (sometimes just as bad) toxic chemicals.
The real lesson here is, don't eat processed and canned foods. Whenever possible eat fresh. For example my family loves beans - we gave up cans alltogether and now soak our dry beans overnight and cook them up the next day. Not only are they BPA free but they are more nutritious, contain no preservatives like the canned stuff, and they TASTE BETTER. The last canned food we gave up was coconut milk... I did some research and found that you can make your own from shredded/dried organic coconut - it tastes so much better and has none of the preservatives and chemicals used in packaging.
Give up the cans - none of them are safe. Glass is OK, but you often still have the preservatives.
Good God!
How can Corporations screw up soup?
Overlord-are you kidding? Fresh is just as dangerous! Between all the e.coli and salmonella scares, I'm terrified to eat anything anymore, lol!
Canned stuff, yeah, it's nasty compared to fresh. I love making big batches of homemade chicken soup. I guess I'll have to move to a farm and make EVERYTHING fresh and can it in glass.
Don't worry if the right gets control like they want there will be no E.P.A or F.D.A and many other organisation that watch out for us common type people all in the holy name of small government. Remember what you can't read won't hurt you
Aye gwad! What the hell are we eating? I just watched a local newscast about "Chinese honey laundering" here. The stuff has a little honey mixed with metals, various chemicals, feces and other wastes. Additionally, according to the report, very little American processed honey contains any pollen. Then I read this about soup and canned food. Apparently the only difference in human and pet foods are the labels. After robbing us into abject poverty, "wallstreet" means to kill us.
I stopped eating anything canned right after someone here on Newsvine mentioned about it a couple of years ago (thank you!) . It's amazing that nobody who I talked to thereafter ever heard about this.
MIKE THE VET...so the FDA will look out for us? How long have you been eating stuff out of cans? Just like the SCC let mr. Madoff go and screw people for 60 billion, even after being told of his conspiracy? You're brainwashed by the ultra-liberals who have taken over the universities and media of the US. The government can't run even simple things like the post office efficiently, let alone health care or food safety. The "small government" people would eliminate crap agencies, like the fda, and private companies, such as consumer reports, would give the consumer the information they need, do a much better job and save the taxpayers tens of billions. Ron Paul is our only hope or we're going to be living in a banana republic with a worthless currency.
@ dave-4342450
Hi Dave,
Since you are all-too-ready to trust the private sector to their own devices and self-regulate. Here's some reading material
The Jungle
Andrew Carnegie
JP Morgan
It was people like these and numerous situations that led to the passing of laws like the Sherman Anti-Trust Act and numerous other consumer protections.
You lack the fundamentals of economics to understand that a purely unregulated market will consume itself with inefficiency as collusion and monopolization supersede efficient practices and innovation.
Remember, a perfectly efficient market requires symmetric information and the ability for businesses to transition seamlessly into and out of the market based on which can provide a better service to customers, and that those customers are perfectly informed of the best product/service in the market, which dictates the demand, hence the price, and thus the entry/exit of competition.
Monopolization both manipulates price and can act as a barrier to the entry of new competition, neither of which fosters an efficient market of any sort.
If you were informed of these basic principles, you would see that Ron Paul's statements are fundamentally flawed and his assumption are overly optimistic, if not completely unrealistic.
The private sector cannot be trusted to self-regulate, not even Alan Greenspan agrees with this anymore.
While there's indeed corruption in government, and plenty of corporate cronyism to go around...this calls for better oversight and accountability, not removal of the enforcers of the rules that (should) protect us all.
If murderers run rampant in your neighborhood, and your police force is bought off by the murderers, do you get rid of the police force, or do you sort out the corruption so that you can get rid of the murderers?
Hummmmmmmmmmm ..... Back to the soup kitchens! .....
Seriously? No...Really?!: I can seldom ever add anything of value by way of reply to your posts. Having said that though, I must say, you are one informed, logical and articulate individual. I thoroughly enjoy your posts. Best regards
@ Mac Forrester
Much appreciated! You are too kind! and likewise with your comments
Happy (almost) Thanksgiving, everyone!
...avoid the canned cranberries, unless you feel the BPA adds that necessary *zing to your dish!
We have been trying to eliminate BPA from our lives for a while now. I was really shocked to learn recently that the lids we use for home canning are coated with this same BPA garbage. I have resorted to freezing or drying for preservation.
Getting BPA free canning lids is a challenge. One can only hope that since the food isn't actually in contact with the lid, there is less (if any) contamination.
@ Mike the Vet,
I'm informed on basic economics. You're probably a keynesian while i'm an austrian. Another words, you believe in astrology, while i believe in astronomy. The government should follow only its constitutional authority, and protect our borders and enforce the rule of law. The founding fathers warned us of this, but I suppose you're smarter than them? Once you let politicians form giant bureaucracies, common sense, efficiency, and tons of money are all lost. Free market forces work, period.
We cannot win...period.
Corporations, Wall Street, and the 1% see the 99% as little more than bacteria.
Unfortunately, our Government is a subsidiary of the above Sith forces.
@Never: Lumping together the upper 1% of earners (those making in excess of $250,000 per year) is quite frankly unfair. Many small business owners are in the "1%" yet instead of pocketing the money, they feed it back into their business. My uncle, for instance, owns a small business that distributes and installs windows and doors, and could be in that 1%, and re-invests the profit back into the company in the form of more workers, etc.
The generalization of the "1%" is equivalent to lumping the 99% into welfare abusers and drug addicts.
If he is re-investing the profits back into the business, then he doesn't fall in the 1% category, since that is adjusted gross income and the profits re-invested would NOT be included in that adjusted gross income, even as a sole proprietor or S-corp.
The smart people will win. The smart people don't listen to the government. The smart people don't let the government make decisions about what is in the best interest in their families. The smart people have a small business selling a necessary product and are doing fine. The smart people didn't accrue a ton of debt because the Jones did. Yup. we're gonna miss you 99'ers lol
Only Conservatives would want us to keep eating BPA-laden Chicken Noodle Soup...just to "conserve" the wivestale that it cures colds.
Heck of a job, Corporate USA.
@anti-trust: That's now how tax laws work. As sole owner of his business, when the books get balanced at the end of the year, all profits after overhead and payroll are counted as "personal income." Doesn't matter if he throws it back into the company, it's still taxed the same. Gross receipts minus gross expenditures equals income, since it's a private small company.
So your uncle is the sole proprietor and takes the net profit as income?
How many people did you say work there full time?
It is unfair and also probably incorrect. The 1% includes wealth (what you own outright) and income combined. And remember, some millionaires have zero, and even negative income some years, after their accountants get done whipping the figures.
Not all millionaires are part of the 1%. Small businesses, that earn around a million dollars in a year may not be among the 1%. When we are identifying the "real" 1% they are multi-millionaires and billionaires who also own about 65% of all privately held stock.
@ Never Stop Asking Questions- and it's you Liberals who point the fingers at everyone but themselves, and continue to do nothing. Bravo.
Matt, if you going to argue in favor of the well-off, at least get your numbers right...the top 1% is not $250K but over $350K...and while I'll be the first to say that $350K is not "rich" if you live in NYC, LA and a few other places...you've got to admit that at $350K per year you're pretty well-off no matter where you live. And, at over a million per year? Well then tax break excuses become meaningless and ridiculous and piggish, and frankly, unpatriotic...
Take note soup makers of the world. We just stopped buying your crappy poisonous product.
caligula and matt, the point being that if a solely owned business is making an income of 250 (or 360) K a year, that is not all profit and solely going back into the pocket of the owner, the majority is being put back into the business so it is not all "income". at 250k per year for the business, the owners personal income could easily be as low as 30k. so, no Matt, your uncle is NOT part of the "1%".
Matt,
You said he throws the money back into the business in the form of more workers. That's payroll and wouldn't be taxed as income. Any other money he throws back in would be the cost of running the business and would not be taxed as income. If he ends up with profits he doesn't want to be taxed on, all he has to do is spend those profits on the business before the books are balanced for taxes at the end of the year, and they are no longer profits to be taxed, but rather more business expenses. If he forgets and is taxed on some money, but then throws it back into the business next year, it can balance with next year's taxes.
A bit more complicated than that, but basically, business owners do not pay income taxes on money they spend on their business.
How do you think it should be changed specifically?
@Matt
Even if you make 250k or even 1 million a year your still not part of the 1% the1% are multi millionaires and billionaires, a million dollar a year income to them is chump change!
actually our government created the 1 % by distorting the free market with crony capitalism. So funny how the left likes to blame the rich when it's the government that changes the rules so they can keep out free market forces.
dave...you live in a alternate reality...it must be nice for you there... 8-}
Caligula, if you disagree with a point, make a point back. It's such a brilliant retort to say someone else is just crazy. Brilliant.
Dave
u have it wrong the 1% distorted our government to keep themselves the 1%!
Did they test the participants urine before the test as well?
How else are you going to check a % increase?
The "increase" was between those that ate canned soup as opposed to those who ate fresh soup. Not an increase as to each participants previous levels of BPA. Which was my question. Surprised that 14 people so far can't comprehend what they read.
"When the researchers looked at the rise in BPA levels seen in the average participant who ate canned soup compared with those who ate fresh soup, they found a 1,221 percent jump."
Thank God it was only in their urine.
Thanks for the laugh.
Why don't they remove it from all canned goods?
Because then the cans they use would rust in the warehouse before they're filled with soup and go through the canning process.
Let this be a lesson folks, if you buy canned foods from a store, make sure it's in a glass jar, at least that way the only BPA you'll ingest is from the amount on the lid as opposed to the entire interior of the container leaching into the contents you're going to eat.
Sadly, it's impossible to escape ingesting a certain amount of the pollution in our society, we've contaminated the water with lead and feces; we've contaminated our foods with pesticides and poisoned the water table beneath the soil with the petrochemical fertilizers; we can't help but breathe the air that's full of every carcinogen known to man.
But we're all still here...sure, we will all come down with some sort of cancer or another later on in life from all of the pollutants wreaking havoc on our DNA, but this is the cost of progress. Things are still a lot better than they used to be, food is significantly cheaper and more plentiful than ever.
Eventually we will figure out safer alternatives to BPA much in the way we no longer use asbestos in insulation and brakes or lead in paint. But we will most likely ALWAYS be trading one pollutant for another.
Personally I'd rather have progress, get cancer treatments in my 60's and die when I'm around 100 than not have progress, eat food and live in a clean environment, and die of the flu when I'm 40
But that's just me.
Whatever doesn't kill you can only make you stronger...right?
Mmm. Feces.
Except for strokes, heart attacks, amputations, and permanent paralysis
But I guess you're right
Hey, don't knock feces until you've tried it! Heck, if you've eaten at a fast food place, you probably already have!!!
I'm lovin' it!
What they really need to do is a study of the various brands and the levels contained therein so that people can make an informed decision on which ones to avoid. These narrow studies are really inadequate to provide a usable benefit and mostly alarmist and don't identify maximum levels.
The FDA says it is okay to use BPA in food stuff and yet they want to take away our access to all vitamin and mineral supplements. Go figure.
The corporations know whats good for us.
And they make sure that the government makes sure
I feel safer already!
I think its more unsafe walking in front of bus.
I think shooting yourself is probably more dangerous than walking in front of a bus
I thought if its in the urine then that means our bodies are filtering the stuff out efficiently.
Would you like some melamine with your BPA?
Here's an idea. Make your own soup.
Do you need someone to tie your shoes, also?
I'm hungry.
Not all of us are standing in the kitchen all day. Why do you think canned soup got to be popular in the first place?
Ok compare this to ancient times....... the romans flavored their wine with lead and the egyptians made their makeup shiny using plutonium or uranium i cant remember which, but anyway everything we consume is polluted and has been that way ever since humans have existed and yet still we are at top of food chain.
You should stock up on Campbell's Chicken Noodle.
The ancient Egyptians used kohl, a mixture of copper and lead with soot, to outline their eyes. Certainly, it was not plutonium or uranium.
Dude, Plutonium doesn't exist naturally and Uranium wasn't purified into a metal until the late 19th century.
It was lead they crushed up for makeup and that went on until Victorian times. It was lead acetate the Romans added to wine because it made it sweet.
Yes, and now we know better. Glass jars are clean, reusable, and recyclable. What is the point of scientific investigation if not to change the way we do things for the better?
These manufacturers know they are selling poison. They know how to avoid it, and they continue to do things as cheap as possible. So long as our population continues to increase, corporations will always perform better doing things the cheap way. A growing population is a fail safe which ensures the company will profit even when they make a crappy product.
Morlack...please...go ahead and swallow some mercury for me...it is natural you know...one thing is for sure...it is a cure for ridiculous arguments...
Campbells MMM MMM Good.
Well....................On the Bright side. Your "pee" should be less corrosive on Ye old house pipes. Thank you Campbells.
I wonder if Bob Vila consulted for Campbells, this is starting to make sense!
What if they pee on me? Am I still at risk?
I have had more requests for food donations this year than any in recent memory. And non-perishables are the only things they can take; it's got to come in a box or a can. And vegetables don't come in boxes.
I now know what to get my boss for Christmas!
A can of soup? :D
I've been a high school teacher for 24 years. There is something seriously wrong with children today and harmful chemicals in their food, air, and water is a major cause for their intellectual, emotionals, and physical problems.
EDIT!!!! remove the "s" from "emotionals." No rude comments, please, about how you bet I'm a bad teacher because I can't spell....
No, what's wrong with them is LOPD. Lack Of Parental Discipline. Don't sweat the typo.
Eh, I think you've both got it right. Food today isn't really nutritious, is full of artificial crap that causes ADHD and who knows what else, but if you think about it, isn't it the parents' fault for feeding them that kind of crap? We need to get back to the basics, of parents actually taking the time to care for their kids properly. Soup is probably one of THE easiest things on the planet to make. It's what the poor used to do with leftovers to survive. It's not that hard, and there are a million cookbooks on the subject!
There are a thousand reasons why home-made food is a rarity today, but the main reason is that most households require two incomes to provide a comfortable environment (no, not a lavish, gadget-filled one) for the children. The days of Mom in a housedress, cleaning the home, doing all the shopping, packing the kids' lunches and preparing a fresh, nutritious dinner are long gone. I grew up in that type of home. I couldn't afford to do it myself because of the huge jump in the cost of raising children (No, I didn't have eight.) and sending them to college. You have to shortcut the cooking when you work all day and come home to laundry, dinner, homework and cleaning. That's just the way it is. The day is only so long.
@ jean pear
Indeed, and considering that wages have stagnated for the better part of 30 years for the middle class, this 2-income household is quickly going to become the 3-income household.
Gotta compete with the Chinese after all! How many of your kids will you be sending into hand-severing, $1/day indentured servitude? I'm thinking on sending mine to the lumber mill, and he ain't even born yet...I consider this investing for the future!
That is what freezers are for.....and the kids can help prepare those meals too....it's a good lesson for all of them, male and female. Don't just prepare enough for one meal when fixing something. Cook enough that you have several meals that can then be packaged, frozen, and re-heated on those days when you don't have time to prepare something from scratch. What's that old Pillsbury slogan....there's nothing like something from the oven?
I was baking cakes and cookies from scratch at age 5, helped in the kitchen for many meals, as well as preparing my own lunches for school (when I didn't eat that god awful cafeteria food.) Kids today expect everything to be put in front of them instantaneously with no effort on their part.
I've got just one question: WHO CARES? Absolutely everything in this world is potentially dangerous if you eat or drink too much of it. Too much water can throw your electrolytes out of whack and can even be fatal. Someone above remarked that, if it's showing up in your urine, it means your kidneys are filtering it out of your system. You know what? He's right. So why worry about it?
A country song from a few years ago got it exactly right: No matter what you do, when your time comes, YOU'RE STILL GONNA DIE!
Maybe all the BPA coursing through your veins is responsible for your inability to think clearly. Since there are clean alternatives to everything, laziness and greed are directly responsible for the mass poisonings that happen every day. You don't seem to know much about anatomy either, so maybe you should worry about it.
Who cares? Anyone with a family history of endocrine disorders, for starters. The parents of small children. Anyone who cares for their health. Yes, you're still going to die, but I'd prefer it not be at age 49.
blahblah - what part did he get wrong about anatomy? Lol I think you must've been talking about yourself! I'm inclined to agree with JMC - the real important question here would be answered by a study that looked at the harms of elevated BPA and measured them directly. All sorts of chemicals can be said to skyrocket after you do something, whether that's harmful is a different story. You can't avoid all harmful things in life, because living itself leads to death, right along with all the stress over worrying that the latest health fad is going to lead to your untimely demise.
Dont worry about what in the cans since Obamacare will thake care of us all when we get sick from this stuff...Right?...Right? ;=)
hey that's my schtick.
Why do they need to put anything in an aluminum can anyway? Aluminum doesnt rust. Even if it does corrode slightly we all know aluminum in those microscopic levels isnt hurting anyone, but chemical @!$%# does. Stop putting toxic @!$%# in our food!!!
Since when are soup cans made of aluminum? Sure soda cans are and without a lining they corrode, imparting a bad flavor on the drink, reducing shelf life. Aluminum can cause Alzheimer's genius. Small doses of things can add up over time. It's called bio-accumulation. You should have said stop putting our food in toxic @!$%#. I agree with you that there are safe cost-effective alternatives.
Pouches. They do it with tuna, why not with soup?
Wow blahblah, you did it again! Aluminum doesn't cause Alzheimer's. You really like to spout false facts don't you?
The plastic in those pouches is just as chemically harmful as the chemicals in the coating on the "tin" and aluminum cans. All metal cans have some type of coating on the inside. How do I know? I worked for Campbell Soup Company in Napoleon, OH for seven years. The only potentially safe container is glass, but then you have the metal lid on the glass jar that is also lined with chemical coatings.
one day something's bad for you, a year later it's good for you. i guess if it tastes good and smells good, eat it.
My philosopy is if you can boil it, it's dinner.
If it were only as simple as dying. Living a degraded life for a period before dying is the biggest downside of many of these low-grade poisons. It makes dying from a sudden heart attack a kind coup-de-grace compared to a cancer rotting some internal organ, or mental problems that disconnect you from loved ones.
Children seem to be most susceptible to foreign substances and there certainly seems to be lots of concern about increases in autism, ADHD/ADD, asthma, cancer and allergies.
And I wouldn't put too much stock in urine being the last you see of some toxin that entered your body. That's just where some BPA ends up after screwing with your endocrine and nervous system.
Read "The History of Campbell's Soup," by I.P. Freely.