Towards a new Zeitgeist for health and the environment!
Felix Bast
Centre for Botany, Central University of Punjab, Mansa Road, Bathinda, 151001, Punjab, India
Perils of modern living is a subject that has kindled human ingenuity since time immemorial and is perhaps an immortal topic that will continue to be relevant no matter how much we progress in our quality of life. I am not a cantankerous sceptic who incessantly vex about changing postmodern cultural landscapes and technological marvels; of course, progresses in science and technology over the last two centuries have tremendously helped to improve human quality of life and life expectancy. I am an ardent supporter of a number of technological innovations that many of the ‘informed citizen’ label as perils; for instance, Internet and social media, GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms) and Nuclear Energy. However, there were times when I pause to consider aren’t we marching towards heedless retrogressive and conscious self-abuse. Consider, for example, state of our environment. Air quality (also water quality) in all of our cities have considerably deteriorated over the past many decades. If we could turn back a century, the air quality of New Delhi would then have been a lot better than the current air quality at some of the pristine North Indian towns. This issue is extrinsic one, as the air quality depends upon a number of parameters (urban expansion, industrialization, number and sate of vehicles, and so on), and as an individual, our choices are limited (other than ‘getting out of the gas chamber’ of course; and those “air purifiers” are nothing but advertisement propaganda). However, in several of the other cases, the problem is very much intrinsic; our own personal choice. For example, consider our changing food habits. Although the current scientific consensus is that trans fats are invidious for our health as it causes coronary heart disease, we continue to buy and treat our children with such food items that contains plenty of trans fats, for example, cakes, brownies, chocolates, ice creams, biscuits, cookies, jalebis, pastries, potato chips, any food cooked with Vanaspati oil (street food like chhole bhature, puri, samosa, parantha and aloo tikki are all loaded with trans fats) and so on. Children’s birthday parties are turning out to be feasts of trans fats! The irony is that even the highly educated are reluctant to exercise their free will to stay away from these; it is like a physician advising his patients to quit smoking while clandestinely he smokes. Turn back a few decades; most of these innovations (hydrogenated cooking oils for instance) did not even exist then. Evidently, quality of our life at various facets have tremendously depreciated, but these are masked by improvements in other vantage points of our life, for example, progresses in modern medicine so that our overall life expectancy continued to increase. We could still increase our life expectancy, as well as that of our children by exercising some conscious choices that are vested upon us.
Consider, for example, school lunch boxes. In my school days two decades ago I used to bring my lunches in those inconspicuous round steel containers, that we called ‘chottupathram’ (rice container). Since then, these containers have become old-fashioned and obsolete; the trending fashion in schools these days is one of those chic and colorful lunch boxes with images of famous cartoon characters and animals- seemingly designed with child-centered philosophy sensu Rousseau (after 18th-century French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau). These lunchboxes are examples of what German philosopher Georg Hagel had popularized as Zeitgeist- the idea that society consisted of a collective consciousness that moved in a distinct direction, dictating the actions of its members. A related logical fallacy is called ‘groupthink’ in which we tend to think the way our peers think and adapt to the cultures of our peers. Another German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer considered the world as the product of our blind and insatiable metaphysical will- the way we select our strongest desires from choices of various desires at present. Society dictates to purchase those trendy, colorful lunchboxes for my daughters to affirm my position as a virtuous parent. Those are irresistible to the kids; if I insist my daughter to bring the food in steel lunch boxes- a Zeitgeist of a generation earlier, she would be ridiculed at her school and branded as old-fashioned, the groupthink dictates! She will be disappointed and will soon demand to ‘upgrade’ her lunchbox to more trendy! It would be no upgrading, I tell you. Almost all of these school lunch boxes are made with a plastic subtype called Polycarbonate. Polycarbonate plastics (and anything else that contains ‘epoxy’ resins) invariably leach out a synthetic chemical called Bis Phenol-A (BPA). This chemical structurally resembles female reproductive hormone estrogen and, if it gets inside our body, binds to the receptors where estrogen would normally bind. This would lead to a host of health issues including chromosome damage in ovaries, decreased fertility in males, cardiovascular system damage, increased risk of breast and prostate cancer and so on. Increased public awareness and legal intervention lead to a decrease in BPA containing plastics in developed countries. BPA is banned or restricted in several countries including USA, Canada, EU, Japan, Australia, New Zealand and even in many developing countries including Brazil, Argentina, Philippines, Taiwan, China and Malaysia. To bypass these enforcements, the plastic manufacturers increasingly replace the BPA with BPS (Bis Phenol-S) and BPF (Bis Phenol-F) for the sake of getting “BPA-Free” certification in those countries. Newer research has revealed that BPS and BPF are as dangerous as BPA and therefore its consumption should be completely avoided (Rochester and Bolden 2015). In India, regrettably, indeed, BPA is not banned, nor any restrictions on its sale are in force, which is an utter disappointment to scientifically conscious citizen (Mahamuni and Shrinithivihahshini 2017). In 2013, a draft was prepared by the Bureau of Indian Standards to restrict BPA in feeding bottles, but due to peer pressure from plastic industry, the government stayed away from legalizing these draft guidelines. The question of whether the industrial growth or the health of its citizens- especially the vulnerable citizens including pregnant women, infants, and children- is more important to a government is arguably an ethical question; I would choose the latter by all means. To penetrate the customer niche of informed citizens, many companies voluntarily mark their products with ‘BPA-Free’ logo. A study in 2014 concluded that a vast majority of these proclaimed ‘BPA Free’ products that included infant feeding bottles from well-known brands tested positive for BPA (Shrinithivihahshini et al. 2014). How will you know whether plastic that you buy is BPA/BPS/BPF free? One easy way is to look for the “fine print.” Most of the plastic products have a tiny triangular (with three arrows) recycle symbol, usually underneath the containers.
Look out for the number inside this symbol. The number would be 7 for Polycarbonate (sometimes code “PC” can also be found) — that would mean you should avoid this product, as all polycarbonate leaches out BPS or its analogs. Another method uses a standard chemical, Iron (III) Chloride that can be found in chemistry labs. We will first make an ‘indicator’ working solution by mixing a quarter teaspoon of Iron (III) Chloride with a cup of water. We would then place the plastic to be tested in just boiled water for 5 minutes. Subsequently, we will take the plastic out and use a cotton swab soaked in alcohol to rub the surface of the plastic. Let the cotton swab dry to evaporate the alcohol in it. On a white surface (such as a tile), place a drop of indicator solution that we made earlier, and dip the cotton swab in it, to allow it to soak up the indicator liquid. The cotton swab will turn into purple, blue or green if BPA is present in plastic. Repeat the same experiment with a swab that is rubbed on a steel or glass container (our negative control), to make sure no color appears for this swab. Recently I have ordered one best-selling water bottle through Amazon India website and did this test in my lab. Of course, it tested positive, and in light of the 2014 study quoted earlier, this came as no surprise at all. Moreover, the plastic number underneath the triangular symbol was 7 (PC). What do these numbers signify?
These numbers engraved on plasticware is technically called Resin Identification Code (RIC). These codes are universal valid throughout the world. There are seven numbers 1 through 7, and these numbers are mere labels for categories of plastic resins used for the manufacturing, it is not ordered in any sensible manner. In other words, as the number increases you can’t conclude that these are safer or vice versa. Let us first consider the most dangerous plastics. RIC №1 is PET or PETE (Poly Ethylene Terephthalate Ester), which leach Antimony- a dangerous carcinogenic chemical, and phthalates-an endocrine disrupter like BPA. PET is commonly found in soft drink and mineral water bottles, pickle and jam containers and so on. In one well-known study (Westerhoff et al. 2008), authors analyzed antimony contents in 63 well-known brands of bottled water in EU and Canada places where law enforcement for public health and safety are amongst the most stringent in the world. Authors found that Antimony contents of water marketed in PET bottles were 100 times the concentrations found in typical groundwater (2 parts per trillion). They have also found that the longer mineral water sits on the shelf, the more concentrate Antimony gets. Brominated compounds are also present in PET and get leached into the food; Bromine is a known central nervous system depressant, and consuming food stored in PET containers and bottles are linked to depression and other neurological symptoms As a rule of thumb, never reuse a container made of PET, and never consume the food in it if the container is exposed to high temperatures-like inside a car parked in the scorching sun for several hours. Oily food stored inside PET bottles are very dangerous, so avoid purchasing oils, pickles, and sweet dishes that are packed in PET containers. In my modest survey of all known curd brands available in Punjab and Delhi, all of which came in PET containers as no law exists in India preventing its use (while in developed countries rules do exist that dairy products should be packed in RIC №5, as explained later). I have come across many environmentally conscious people who keep on recycling PET bottles as water bottles and fridge bottles. While recycling is good for the environment, recycling PET bottles is a dangerous practice for your health, and the chances are high that you might develop a chronic disease in the long run. (I am not against recycling other plastics like shopping bags instead of trashing them and buying every time; at least those do not get in our bodies that easily! I use Furoshiki-the traditional Japanese cloth bags- inspired cloth shopping bags that I can fold and keep it in my pocket). As a general rule of thumb, storing solid items (like cereals, grains, etc.) in plastic containers is safer than powdered items, which is more safer than liquid items (as area of contact with plastic surface progressively gets larger, allowing more dangerous chemicals to leach into the food). Most of the restaurants in India pack the food for home delivery in these plastic bags, and that is a dangerous predicament, especially given that the food is very hot, oily and semi-solid; we should desist from placing orders with such firms. PET bottles are undeniably ‘use and throw’ commodity, a huge burden for our planet (like the rest of plastics, these are non-biodegradable). PET — RIC №1- should be avoided whenever it is possible, and never reuse it for the sake of your health! RIC №3 is Poly Vinyl Chloride (PVC). PVC is known to leach bisphenol A (BPA), dioxins, phthalates, cadmium, lead, mercury and so on, and therefore it is very dangerous. Phthalates are well-known ‘gender-benders’; its consumption makes males more feminine. Phthalates also cause Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in school children (Kim et al. 2009). When PVC is burned, dioxins are released and is a known human carcinogen. PVC is used in most of the household plastic materials in India, for example, containers, buckets, mugs, restaurant-packing materials, food wraps, toys and so on. The tradition of using plastic buckets for drinking water disbursement (in communal feasts, marriage feasts, etc.) should be avoided. We should stay away from using PVC pipes for potable water supply plumbing. In summary, distant yourself from PVC at all costs. RIC №6 is Polystyrene (PS). PS leaches styrene-a dangerous carcinogen when hot or oily food items are stored in it. PS is also commonly used in disposable cups and food containers (for example, teacups in railways). This is especially alarming, as when hot tea or coffee is poured, PS readily releases styrene intoxicating the users. Styrene is well known to cause solid cancers, especially pancreatic cancers (Kolstad et al. 1995). We should refrain from using any food or water contacted with PS surface by all means. RIC №7 is Polycarbonate (PC). As already explained, PC is perhaps the most dangerous (along with PVC) plastics available in the market as of this writing, and we should eschew doubtlessly. Sensu stricto, №7 encompasses “all the rest” that not only includes PC but mixtures of various plastics (all are harmful); but almost the entire consumer plastics with RIC №7 engraving are PC type, leaching BPA. In summary, watch out for “1367”- Types 1, 3, 6 and 7 are the most dangerous plastics in the market!
Now, let’s turn our attention towards the second group of plastics that are less dangerous than the earlier types, however, pose significant health risks when reused for long. RIC №2 is High-Density Poly Ethylene (HDPE) that leach nonylphenol, a dangerous endocrine disrupter like BPA. HDPE is commonly found in grocery plastic bags, milk and juice cartons and so on. This plastic is relatively safe for limited uses provided food is not hot or oily. RIC №4 is Low-Density Poly Ethylene (LDPE). Like HDPE, it can release nonylphenol. LDPE is commonly used in toys, food wraps, tetra pack cartons, disposable cups, and storage containers. RIC №5 is Polypropylene (PP), commonly found in many household food containers that tend to be more expensive than the rest. PP has shown to be releasing plastic stabilizing substance oleamide into the food. Heated PP also releases chemicals that could induce asthma. RIC Nos 4 (LDPE) and 5 (PP) are relatively safer plastics for limited use when used with no hot or oily substances. About the safety of plastics, unfortunately, we have nothing that can be called ‘safe’; every kind of plastics are significantly dangerous than alternatives. Perhaps if you are left with no choice and have to buy a food storage container or water bottle, remember “245”; Types 2, 4 and 5 are relatively less dangerous than all other types of plastics.
We have yet another type of plastics, cheap Chinese ones that usually floods your house if you have little children (I have two daughters!). By the way, in countries where BPA is banned, ban is not applicable for the goods that are manufactured for export to other countries! (Yes, human selfishness at its height). Return gifts on birthdays! As deceptive as it seems, these plastics comes with no standard numbers, so the manufacturers expect its customers to do inorganic chemistry detective work, which is an impossible affair for almost all of us. My suggestion is to distrust such sly manufacturers and avoid any plastics that comes with no identifier numbers, no matter how appealing it may seem. Even if the RIC numbers are printed, the trust is still a major decision factor; what if a firm that embosses RIC №5 (PP) on a product that was, in reality, made of RIC №7 (PC) and swindle its customers? As no legal enforcement exists in India regarding the safety of plastics, consumer worry in this angle is positively warranted. An ingenious way to check the quality of plastic is to pour water into it halfway through and let it sit at room temperature for one day. When you open the bottle and take a deep sniff after one day, you could smell leached phthalates and other synthetics if the plastic is dangerous. This is because most of the resins used in plastic manufacturing are aromatic, and we can trust our sense of smell if it gets leached. When PET or PVC burns in your vicinity even though it is burning a few blocks away, won’t you feel something is not right? You would be whiffing minuscule quantities of dangerous chemical dioxin then. If you could smell the plastic in the bottle, you should discard it immediately for the sake of yours and your family’s health!
Fortunately, we do have healthy alternatives for all of these. For example, my family and I use steel water bottles. Steel bottles, especially the insulated ones (for example, Milton ThermoSteel), tend to be a little heavier and expensive, but this is immensely helping our environment (by reducing the non-biodegradable pollutants), and our health. One good Stainless Steel 304 18/8 (stainless steel, like plastics, are also graded by numbers called SAE- Society of Automotive Engineers- Steel Grades; please look up in internet) bottle can last a lifetime. Deciding never to buy a mineral water bottle and instead to carry a reusable and safe water bottle also reduce our carbon footprints tremendously; mineral water bottles are often bottled at plants situated far away, and it travels hundreds of kilometers burning hundreds of tones of fossil fuels before it reaches our stores. I also carry a steel travel mug (Contigo Snapseal) to carry hot drinks and to use it wherever in place of disposable cups (for example, in long train journeys, or in office parties). Steel lunchboxes are still the best choice for both school and office. It might not be trendy for the kids, but nothing matters more than their health. Finally, my ingenious solution worked for my daughter’s lunchbox preference; all I did was to order colourful stickers of her favourite animation characters (Sarah and Duck, Dora the Explorer, Frozen etc.) so that she can have her (steel) lunchboxes with a different trendy plastic stickers every month! At least, those plastic stickers do not come in contact with her food, to get into her body, for my peace of mind. In my opinion, the school authorities should intervene to ban the irresistible plastic lunchboxes from the school, for the sake of our posterity! One can look up for self-conviction in websites like Amazon UK, Amazon Japan, Amazon Germany, etc. for popular lunch boxes; popular lunchboxes in most of the developed countries are steel or rubberized glass. I have lived in Japan for many years, and I can vouch that school lunch boxes in Japan, the so-called O’Bento, are always in bamboo boxes. O’Bento is so much part of the Japanese tradition, and they have whole academic programs about these packed lunches, and programs on how to pack a healthy lunch for the pupil regularly appear on their TV channels. Japanese kids have that luxury of eating in bamboo lunch boxes; it is a pity we do not have! I have been using leak-proof glass lunch boxes (Borosil) to my office, as it let me microwave it before consumption. In the supermarket, I exercise my volition as well. Instead of jams, pickles and so on that comes in plastic containers; I always choose the ones in glass containers. Instead of cooking oils that come in plastic containers, one can buy those that come in metal containers (I use cooking sprays instead, that comes in metal canisters and last very long). Commodities that are marketed in sealed plastic bags possess a substantial health hazard. This is because while sealing, plastic materials readily release dioxins, phthalates, BPA and other insidious chemicals, which instantaneously get into the food items that it contains. In many parts of India (especially in Chennai during summers), it is a common practice to sell drinking water in these transparent plastic pouches. It is also a quotidian affair for roadside vendors (especially in North India) to pack hot tea in plastic shopping bags. Of course, these bags are leak-proof, but by the time one consumes this, tea would have been infused with all kinds of dangerous carcinogenic and teratogenic substances. Instead of milk bags that come in plastic PET bags in India that no one talks or cares about (these bags too possess similar health hazards like that of drinking water pouches), one can buy milk in vending machines at stores (for example, Mother Diary throughout Delhi-NCR allows one to pour milk into their containers). In places where these vending machines are not available, one can choose to buy milk from the local dairy, or buy milk in cartons instead of bags. However, beware that most of these ‘tetrapack’ juice or milk cartons contain ‘soak proof shield’ –a market gimmick for plastic lining, which consists of RIC №3 or 7 resins with epoxy groups readily releasing BPA. Paper plates, albeit such an innocuous name, are not merely paper but contain layers of plastic coating to make it soak-proof. The similar plastic lining can also be found on the surface of ‘paper plantain sheet’ (SAS being a popular brand)- as a substitute for the real plantain (banana) leaves to serve South Indian meals. Most of us do not realise that these plastic lining can readily release dioxins, phthalates and BPA when hot or oily food items are poured in it. Cans- tin containers for packed food items and drinks- too have plastic linings. While canned food does not constitute a sizeable fraction of Indian food market, canned drinks like soft drinks (Coke, Pepsi etc.) and beers are ubiquitous. Instead of plastic food containers to store the leftover food in the fridge, we have invested on glass containers- a decision I will never regret even though many of our containers have fallen and broken!
There had been a lot of public sensitization and civil enforcement against plastics off late. However, most of these enforcements were against a minority subtype of plastics, the plastic shopping bags. While something is better than nothing and this indeed is a welcome step, a vast majority of plastics- especially those that pose the highest health hazard to the population like food containers, water bottles, soft drink bottles, milk bags, baby feeding bottles etc.- remain eluded from this enforcement and that is a pity. It seems like almost everyone believes plastics are bad for the environment. However, most of us fail to understand that we are very much part of this environment, and what is not good for the environment are also not good for our health. Another subtype of plastics that completely escaped the attention from sensitized citizens is microplastics, which are commonly found in a number of cosmetic goods and consumer plastics like foam mattresses and bean bags. Microplastics once released to the environment gets accumulated in Marine organisms such as tiny zooplankton, ultimately leading to its death. It gets concentrated in higher trophic levels progressively with each higher-level predator. Some of which goes in our seafood too, ultimately impairing our health. Microplastics are now found everywhere from Arctic herring to Antarctic krills and pose the greatest challenge to the Marine biodiversity yet. The government should urgently intervene and take the first, baby step, by banning BPA- the most obvious and rational step to take. There should be a mechanism for the government to periodically check the plastic goods for harmful chemicals and take appropriate actions against the defaulters. Unfortunately, such a system is non-existent in India. Labels such as ‘food-grade plastic’ are deceptive and make no sense, as none of the plastics is safe. After all, the ball is in our field and we should decide by ourselves would we like to make a self-goal; all we should do is to discern good from bad and exercise our conscious volition to avoid plastics altogether and instead go with biodegradable and healthy alternatives like glass, steel, ceramics, wood, cloth and so on. We should gear our posterity towards a new Zeitgeist prioritizing their health and environment, rather than senseless Vanity Fair. For, we have only one life, and one earth.
References
Kim B-N, Cho S-C, Kim Y, Shin M-S, Yoo H-J, Kim J-W, Yang YH, Kim H-W, Bhang S-Y, Hong Y-C (2009) Phthalates exposure and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in school-age children. Biological psychiatry 66 (10):958–963
Kolstad HA, Juel K, Olsen J, Lynge E (1995) Exposure to styrene and chronic health effects: mortality and incidence of solid cancers in the Danish reinforced plastics industry. Occupational and environmental medicine 52 (5):320–327
Mahamuni D, Shrinithivihahshini ND (2017) Need for regulatory policies in India, on the use of Bisphenol A in food contact plastic containers. CURRENT SCIENCE 113 (5):861
Rochester JR, Bolden AL (2015) Bisphenol S and F: a systematic review and comparison of the hormonal activity of bisphenol A substitutes. Environmental health perspectives 123 (7):643
Shrinithivihahshini N, Mahamuni D, Praveen N (2014) Bisphenol A migration study in baby feeding bottles of selected brands available in the Indian market. Current Science 106 (8):1081
Westerhoff P, Prapaipong P, Shock E, Hillaireau A (2008) Antimony leaching from polyethylene terephthalate (PET) plastic used for bottled drinking water. Water Research 42 (3):551–556
About the Author
Dr. Felix Bast is a popular science writer and a scientist based at the Central University of Punjab, Bathinda, India. His new book “Voyage to Antarctica” is expected to be released later in 2017.
This article first appeared in the January 2019 issue of Dream 2047. The issue is accessible here.
