There is yet another study (Environmental Health Perspectives, Oct 6th, 2009) on the negative effect of Bisphenol-A (BPA), which is a hormone disrupting chemical found in plastics. It’s also in the interior can liner of practically every canned food you can buy in the grocery store.
Here’s the article at Yahoo:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/hsn/20091007/hl_hsn/plasticschemicaltiedtoaggressioninyounggirls
Also remember that just because two things are proved to be related (correlation) doesn’t by itself prove that one thing causes another to happen (causality). That’s what the Yahoo article is describing when it says “not everyone agreed with the study’s conclusions”. It’s a limitation of the design of this particular study (and many other studies, actually). Proving causality is a more difficult proposition.
Of course, there continues to be a mounting body of factual and scientific evidence linking BPA with negative impacts on humans. One little puff of smoke doesn’t necessarily mean there’s a fire, but big, billowing towers of the stuff usually implies some form of combustion. Some folks believe the BPA evidence is a puff of smoke. Others believe it’s a mushroom cloud of sky-darkening proportions. What do you believe?