Never Let the Facts Ruin A Good Story

I’ve heard all my life that there are two sides to every story. But “facts” spreading like wildfire on digital and social media these days can make it seem like there may be far more than two sides, and with no sure way to tell if any of them are actually based in truth. Perhaps it’s time to learn how to “interrogate” media articles so that you can form your own opinion. 

We talked last time about the real possibility that chemicals leaching out from single-use plastics could contribute to obesity. A just-published report said scientists examined 34 different plastic products and identified 11 chemicals that could affect human metabolism and contribute to weight gain. The products included beverage bottles, kitchen sponges, yogurt containers, and hair conditioners. Martin Wagner, a co-author and associate professor at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, said their experiments showed that "ordinary plastic products contain a mix of substances that can be a relevant and underestimated factor behind [being] overweight, and obesity."

The study itself, published in Environmental Science & Technology, determined some plastic products contained known metabolism-disrupting substances, and while others didn’t, they still induced the development of fat cells. "It's very likely that it is not the usual suspects, such as bisphenol A, causing these metabolic disturbances," said Johannes Volker, one of the study's authors. "This means that other plastic chemicals than the ones we already know could be contributing to overweight and obesity." Sounds rather ominous, doesn’t it? Another reason to avoid single-use plastics, right?

From BPA to phthalates, we’ve talked about problems with infertility and human development caused by these “forever chemicals” and the scientific proof backing up their bans. But, for every study pushing for chemicals to be banned, it seems you can find another, frequently backed by industry groups, suggesting the test results weren’t convincing enough and refuting the results.

So, there’s no surprise here. As quickly as the “plastic makes you fat” study is published in a reputable scientific journal, Caroline Rainsford, head of scientific services at the Cosmetic, Toiletry, and Perfumery Association (CTPA), quickly jumped in to refute it. In a blog post, she wrote "It’s certainly true that the study’s authors looked at packaging samples and found some of these samples contained chemicals they suspect to have metabolism-disrupting effects....just not the shampoo bottles!” So, at least we know our shampoo bottles are safe, and the CTPA is in the clear. Well, at least the trade group has cleared itself, so that’s comforting.

Rainsford questioned how relevant the study is when compared to real life exposure. To get results that suggested the forever chemicals contributed to weight gain, the scientists extracted the chemicals, concentrated them in a solvent and then tested them on fat cells grown in a lab. "The results from the study certainly give us a fascinating insight into the behavior of fat cells in the presence of certain chemicals,” Rainsford writes, “[a]lthough we do have to consider what might happen outside of a lab. Are we exposed to the same amount of chemicals from plastic packaging when using everyday products? How will the chemicals get into our bodies?"

By now you may be forming the conclusion, with an attitude of “interrogating media articles,” that this blog post from Caroline Ransford sounds like a hired gun speaking on behalf of a trade organization with a vested interest in countering scientific results unfavorable to the trade group. Ransford concludes, “it’s important to consider whether there could be something else that is either responsible for, or contributing to, a study result. In this case, we know that there are many factors behind obesity which are complex and interlinked. Linking obesity to a single cause is likely to be an oversimplification.”

If you think that might be the scientific equivalent of yelling “Squirrel!”, wait for blog post’s big finish: “It’s always exciting to see new scientific research, especially that which relates to the cosmetics and personal care industry – which has science at its foundation.  Research drives new innovations in product performance, safety and sustainability and can help us focus on areas where more science is needed to address data gaps or uncertainties.”

“But this headline-grabbing story is a reminder that in every case, it is helpful to approach new science with a critical eye, an open mind… and to draw your own conclusions.” 

I think we can probably agree that Ransford gets the last point right. In light of all the contradictory information being published on the risks of forever chemicals to your clients and your family, you need to be ready to interrogate the opinions in the media and come to your own conclusions. Have you decided what level of risk you are willing to accept?