I just ordered a batch of 10 bottles off eBay...works out to about $4 each with delivery. I should be just about set for life now with Nalgenes.

I've been using some old translucent Nalgene bottles for years (since about 1975 or so). They've got little brown spots in the bottom from the iodine stains (the water purfication standard of those day). I've poured boiling water into them to make a hot jello drink while backpacking.

I'm not dead yet. Never spent a night in the hospital either - except when I was born.

Here we go again:



full article: http://www.physorg.com/news162133540.html

Labeling this whole case as scare or BS is not counterargument at all. "I am not yet dead." or "I like Nalgenes, I will continue to use them!" type comments are not arguments either. I think some people defend polycarbonate bottles without evidence as if they are hard-core fans. What´s importatnt is that the research in this area continues. It´s good to keep of track of new studies.

All this study says is that some BPA in the plastic seems to get into the water. Which we might expect.

We still have no evidence if BPA is harmful to humans and if so, in what dosage. It should be noted that the concentration of BPA in their urine was already X ppm before they started and only went to 1.69X after drinking from the PC bottles. Also note that the article doesn't report what the actual concentrations where. For all we know, the normal level could be 3 molecules of BPA per thousand gallons and drinking from the bottles brought it up to 5 molecules.

We could just as well say:
New study shows that drinking water often results in increased levels of water in the urine. Exposure to water has been shown to cause drowning in certain animals, such as lab rats. Therefore we should stop drinking water.

This is the problem with most "science" reporting and a lot of the science itself.

No one is trying to present a counterargument (at least not me). I think most are just stating that we don't care about this "study", which seems a bit over the top to me, the way it's described. If you don't want to drink from Nalgene bottles ... then don't. I won't try to counterargue with you and convince you that you should.

Oh my! Blast needs to hang out with guys more... All those females at home are starting to get to him!

I think there is such evidence and it continues to accumulate.

Just a few examples:

Bisphenol A linked to metabolic syndrome in human tissue

Bisphenol A linked to chemotherapy resistance

Higher urinary levels of commonly used c...sease, diabetes

Our Exposure to Controversial Chemical May be Greater than Dose Considered Safe

If you search for BPA on physorg.com you will get this list: http://www.physorg.com/search/?search=BPA . I reccomend reading the articles.

Also this is quite interesting. Quoted from this article: Study: BPA research might have been bias



And from this article: Better science, please



This is also interesting article (note it is older then some articles I linked before): Hot liquids release potentially harmful chemicals in polycarbonate plastic bottles

From your link:
Prior to boiling water exposure, the rate of release from individual bottles ranged from 0.2 to 0.8 nanograms per hour. After exposure, rates increased to 8 to 32 nanograms per hour.

Belcher stresses that it is still unclear what level of BPA is harmful to humans. He urges consumers to think about how cumulative environmental exposures might harm their health.

To put things in perspective 1 nanogram = 0.0000000000022 pounds or 0.000000000001 kg for our non-American readers. That's eleven zeros to the right of the decimal point.

Let's say I fill my 1 liter Nalgene bottle with boiling water to keep my feet warm overnight. If the water in my bottle remained boiling all night long (say eight hours) and then I slammed the whole liter of water, worst case is I would imbibe 256 nanograms of BPA which is 0.00000000056 pounds of BPA.

Now if we look at O'Connor's & Chapin's often-quoted paper on the xenoestrogen effects of BPA we see he had to give dose of 1.5mg of BPA per kilogram of body weight per day for the entire gestation period to get any measurable effects.

Hmm, 256 nanograms equals 0.000256mg, so someone would need to drink 5859.4 liters of BPA-contaiminated water per kilogram of their weight daily for nine months to suffer these effects.

-Blast, Ph.D.

Bisphenol A linked to metabolic syndrome in human tissue

Doesn't say how much the hormone was supressed. Water can cause drowning.

Bisphenol A linked to chemotherapy resistance
Again, how much resistance?

Higher urinary levels of commonly used c...sease, diabetes

See, there is still no evidence.

Our Exposure to Controversial Chemical May be Greater than Dose Considered Safe
How, exactly, was the "safe" dose determined to begin with? We still don't know how much is harmful.

Hot liquids release potentially harmful chemicals in polycarbonate plastic bottles
So? How liquids release more BPA than cold but we we still don't know how much is bad. According to the previous article, 1 microgram per kg of body mass is considered "normal exposure" (doesn't say over what time period) and this article says hot water causes a up to 32 nanograms per hour of release. Let's say you boil some water and leave it in the bottle for three hours and then drink it, that's about 100 nanograms of BPA added to your exposure. Uh, that's an increase in exposure of 0.1% Wow.

What Blast fails to mention is that for some of us, drinking water that had been anywhere NEAR our feet all night (especially after a long hike) could be potentially fatal. I think my wife really loved me right up until I took my shoes off after that first long hike...