They're off again

The following a rather dry peer-reviewed paper has been the basis for a lot of hot air about phthalates this week http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/members/2005/8100/8100.pdf. The Miami Herald for example ran a story on it summed it up as 'Study maps harm to male genetalia' https://registration.miami.com/reg/login.do?url=http://www.miami.com%2Fmld%2Fmiamiherald%2Fliving%2Fhealth%2F11751275.htm (and you have to log on)to see the story .

The implication in most of the reporting has been that there is a 'highly significant relationship between human exposure to phthalates and adverse changes in the genitals of baby boys' amd that its all down to phthalates.

The study does not make any attempt to quantify the effect of oestrogenic chemicals that are present in the US environment from the female contraceptive pill. Nor does it examine the relationship between exposure to other phytoestrogens such as are found in soy. Lets do the same study looking at inuit children and see how we fare.

The European Council for Plasicisers and Intermediates has, according European Chemical News (See links, you'll have to subscribe), decided the paper 'looked hard to find something in order to make a preconceived point.'