Skip to content

Women's Voices for the Earth

Navigation
... SC Johnson to phase out phthalates from products Children's Bath Products Contain Contaminants Are some chemicals more dangerous at low doses? Child Obesity Is Linked to Chemicals in Plastics Saving Face: How Safe Are Cosmetics and Body Care Products? FDA relied heavily on BPA lobby 3 Bets "Toxic Substances Control Act - Plain and Simple" Cracking the Autism Riddle: Toxic Chemicals, A Serious Suspect in the Autism Outbreak Rep. Israel bill wants cleanser ingredients listed Chemicals and Our Health Autism: It's the Environment, Not Just Doctors Diagnosing More Disease Let the Baby Have His Bottle? Evaluating the Dangers of Bisphenol A Environmental Groups and Chemical Industry Agree on Regulating Toxics? Reduce Fetal Exposure to BPA and Phthalates, Experts Say Younger Girls, Bigger Breasts: Are Chemicals to Blame? Report Warns of Nano-Sunscreen Risks What's the Right Answer to the Germ Question? Discontinued Flame Retardant Detected in Baby Products and Dust A Bad Mix: Exposure May Be "Safe" Only With One Chemical at a Time The Claim: Cinnamon Oil Kills Bacteria Hispanics Face High Cancer Risk from Breathing Household Chemical With Soap and Water or Sanitizer, a Cleaning That Can Stave Off the Flu Children's Diseases Linked to Chemicals on the Rise, Professor Says What if Being Fat is Not Your Fault? America's Obesity Epidemic May Be Fueled by Chemicals in Everyday Products BPA in the Womb Shows Link to Kids' Behavior Doctors and Nurses Carry a Burden of Toxic Chemicals Just Like Yours. . . And Your Children's Momentum for revamp of toxins law Study: Chemicals, Pollutants Found in Newborns What Health Reform Won't Heal: The Effect of Environmental Toxins on Sex and Reproduction ...
Home » News & Publications » Media Stories » Environmental Health News » Younger Girls, Bigger Breasts: Are Chemicals to Blame?

Younger Girls, Bigger Breasts: Are Chemicals to Blame?

Double X

Florence Williams

July 28

We’ve all heard the stories and seen the evidence: Girls are getting breasts a lot earlier than we remember from our own elementary school days. Nobody really knows why. But because girls are also getting chubbier (along with the rest of the population), that’s been the favored theory of causation. Here’s the general evolutionary scenario: If you can eat more, you can reproduce earlier. And in fact, thanks to better nutrition and less disease, the average age of sexual maturity in girls has dropped slowly but steadily, about three months per decade, since 1850.

In 1997, though, Marcia Herman-Giddens, a scientist at the University of North Carolina, noticed that the pace of advancing puberty had greatly, unexpectedly, accelerated. And that’s no longer a good or neutral thing, because girls who enter puberty on the early end of the spectrum are at greater risk for breast cancer later on. They also tend to suffer more psychological and behavioral problems such as depression and substance abuse.

Read more.

powered by Plone | site by Groundwire