Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Review of 17α-ethynylestradiol in water across 32 countries: Estrogenic effects

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 166 posts

Re: Review of 17α-ethynylestradiol in water across 32 countries: Estrogenic effects

#41

Post by gcr »

marricks wrote: post #23

Apparently everyone is downvoting everything they can because this is a sensitive topic. I'd just like to call out, where feminization is a major concern (US, maybe Europe), there is less than 1ng/L of this compound in water, see elsewhere on this thread for the graphic. The lowest dose of EE2 for trans-women is 2mg a day orally. That means whatever the dosage is in the US it's less than 1/10th* of what trans folk fi…

Another important point is that trans women typically start on an antiandrogen as well as an estradiol supplement. Testosterone's effects are orders of mag stronger than estrogen, so trans women typically have to take drastic measures to significantly reduce testosterone first so the estrogen can work, such as taking large amounts of spironolactone or cyproterone acetate or orchiectomy; without these measures, estrogen isn't nearly as effective. You don't exactly see much spironolactone in the water supply! (Personal anecdata)

Re: Review of 17α-ethynylestradiol in water across 32 countries: Estrogenic effects

#42

Post by DoingIsLearning »

> Another potential contamination of EE2 is aquaculture. Based on a recent investigation, high concentrations of EE2 ranging from Why is aquaculture waste water contributing to EE2 contamination?

What step in aquaculture would create this..

Re: Review of 17α-ethynylestradiol in water across 32 countries: Estrogenic effects

#43

Post by lazide »

__s wrote: post #3
swayvil wrote: post #2

2 obvious questions (because I can't penetrate this stuff) Is this feminizing our population? Does this affect the way we think?

What does feminizing mean?

To expand on the Wikipedia article of a peer comment:

- feminine features such as gynocomastia (used to be very rare, now quite common)

- decrease in sperm counts across the male population, which has been well documented.

- statistically significant decreases in traditionally male ‘problems’ (violent crime being one obvious one), but also aggressiveness in general. Well documented, but there are many possible causes there.

- behaviors that change from stereotypical male behaviors (which female->male trans folks I’ve know say were clearly from testosterone) towards more female ones. Including aggressive seeking of sex, towards general ‘meh’.

As to what is causing it or why, who knows - but that’s what it means, and it does seem to be a thing.

Re: Review of 17α-ethynylestradiol in water across 32 countries: Estrogenic effects

#44

Post by marricks »

oceanplexian wrote: post #35
marricks wrote: post #23

Apparently everyone is downvoting everything they can because this is a sensitive topic. I'd just like to call out, where feminization is a major concern (US, maybe Europe), there is less than 1ng/L of this compound in water, see elsewhere on this thread for the graphic. The lowest dose of EE2 for trans-women is 2mg a day orally. That means whatever the dosage is in the US it's less than 1/10th* of what trans folk fi…

This still sounds concerning to me, if the dose is 2mg for a healthy adult what is it for children and infants? What about babies in the womb? We saw the same exact thing with PFAS/PFOA, the experts said it was harmless, present in impossibly small quantities, and it would "pass right through you" for literally years. But then it turned out the experts were completely wrong. They found 2000PPM of PFAS in my Mom's wel…

For this specific chemical, it actually has been studied since at least 1943[1] and used in a few different medical contexts. That mean it has a leg on some random pollutant never considered for medicinal use.

Does that mean it's great in drinking water? No... but I think we shouldn't just jump from one type of catastrophizing to the next. There's endless questions we can ask to scare ourselves, but maybe it's a better use of our time to point that concern on things which we already know or damaging our kids, like: lead in drinking water, malnutrition, lack of affordable pre school options, etc etc.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethinylestradiol

Re: Review of 17α-ethynylestradiol in water across 32 countries: Estrogenic effects

#45

Post by wjnc »

oceanplexian wrote: post #35
marricks wrote: post #23

Apparently everyone is downvoting everything they can because this is a sensitive topic. I'd just like to call out, where feminization is a major concern (US, maybe Europe), there is less than 1ng/L of this compound in water, see elsewhere on this thread for the graphic. The lowest dose of EE2 for trans-women is 2mg a day orally. That means whatever the dosage is in the US it's less than 1/10th* of what trans folk fi…

This still sounds concerning to me, if the dose is 2mg for a healthy adult what is it for children and infants? What about babies in the womb? We saw the same exact thing with PFAS/PFOA, the experts said it was harmless, present in impossibly small quantities, and it would "pass right through you" for literally years. But then it turned out the experts were completely wrong. They found 2000PPM of PFAS in my Mom's wel…

2000 PPM is 0.2% or one-in-fivehundred, right? That’s massive pollution. My layman’s logic would suggest you need to dump 0.2% of total aquifer volume of 100% PFAS to reach that level? And then I expect pollution to spread in a semi-sphere unless there are rocky sediments. Edit: thinking more about water, perhaps you can dump less in wetter conditions and then in a drought get higher values because PFAS won’t evaporate. But still, it suggests tons and tons of dumping?

Re: Review of 17α-ethynylestradiol in water across 32 countries: Estrogenic effects

#46

Post by gcr »

elil17 wrote: post #39
marricks wrote: post #23

Apparently everyone is downvoting everything they can because this is a sensitive topic. I'd just like to call out, where feminization is a major concern (US, maybe Europe), there is less than 1ng/L of this compound in water, see elsewhere on this thread for the graphic. The lowest dose of EE2 for trans-women is 2mg a day orally. That means whatever the dosage is in the US it's less than 1/10th* of what trans folk fi…

Trans women typically take E2 (bioidentical estrogen), not EE2. EE2 is 100 times more potent than E2 for certain endocrine interactions. Unlike E2, EE2 is not a naturally occurring hormone. E2 causes female puberty when administered to males (except for menstruation), but EE2 isn’t necessarily going to do the same thing because it is a different molecule. While worrying about “feminizing” is probably hype, worrying a…

Back in the day ('70s and '80s i think), trans women used to take synthetic estrogens (such as premarin, IIRC was the drug of choice) before switching to bioidentical estrogen from estradiol tablets in the '90s and '00s, I think because bioidentical E is seen as more effective with a softer side effect profile than the synthetics, in particular bioidentical doesn't hurt the liver as much.

Drinking horse piss in the 70s sure was metal though. ("pre-mar-in" = "pregnant mare urine," a source of estrogen since 1930).

(folk knowledge and personal anecdata)

Re: Review of 17α-ethynylestradiol in water across 32 countries: Estrogenic effects

#47

Post by sudosysgen »

baldisbasics wrote: post #38

I swear, everyone in my part of the US had massive hair shedding around 2018 or so (man and woman, young and old). We speculated at the time that maybe something in the water supply was causing everyone to lose hair in clumps, and by golly this appears to match with our pet theories.

Estrogen doesn't cause hair loss in general.

Re: Review of 17α-ethynylestradiol in water across 32 countries: Estrogenic effects

#48

Post by sudosysgen »

marricks wrote: post #23

Apparently everyone is downvoting everything they can because this is a sensitive topic. I'd just like to call out, where feminization is a major concern (US, maybe Europe), there is less than 1ng/L of this compound in water, see elsewhere on this thread for the graphic. The lowest dose of EE2 for trans-women is 2mg a day orally. That means whatever the dosage is in the US it's less than 1/10th* of what trans folk fi…

Your math is a bit off. 4 liters would be 4 nanograms, which is 250,000 times less than a trans woman would take (in the milligrams, not micrograms)

Re: Review of 17α-ethynylestradiol in water across 32 countries: Estrogenic effects

#50

Post by throwaway0x7E6 »

marricks wrote: post #27
georgia_peach wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ideology doesn't factor into this. There is something in the water that shouldn't be there, and someone put it there---largely without permission. And what constitutes a "low dose" frequently changes by several orders of magnitude depending on who does the study, and who paid for the study.

I agree! I explicitly state that I don't think random pollutants are good in that comment and there could be other reasons to care about it. I'm merely calling out that the thing most people freak out about with this compound (feminization) is not worth freaking out about .

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN