Early Puberty

[Alix]

Seems to be a topic of interest here so I thought I'd provide a place to discuss it.

GotGarlic posted some info in this thread about the BGH.

It is my understanding from years of reading and assimilating information that puberty is starting earlier for many reasons.

One of the most important is that our overall nutrition is better now than it used to be. Lets just go with say the Middle Ages. They didn't have access to all the nutrition we have now. In the winter, seeing a piece of fruit would be pretty rare unless it had been made into jam or dried at harvest time. So, their puberty was later simply because their bodies weren't at peak efficiency.

Another reason is because our society (North American society) is leaning heavily (excuse the pun) toward obesity. The word obese does not necessarily refer to those who are really huge, it refers instead to your BMI. You can Google this easily but here is a link to an easy one. (PS, go to the advanced one) You will be surprised at how little it takes to be referred to as obese. Having said that, girls who have even a slightly elevated BMI will begin to develop earlier because the body requires fat to produce estrogen which of course is the beginning of menses etc.

OK, now that I've bored you all senseless let me also throw in a small reassurance for the Dads out there with daughters. Girls can start "budding" and showing signs of that lovely hormonal roller coaster for YEARS before they actually have a period. Many many girls start that dreaded cycle when they are as young as 8 or 9 and don't begin menses until 12-14. (Which is considered the norm now.) That didn't sound as reassuring as I meant it to. LOL. Sorry guys.

OK, and now my own personal observation is that genetics plays a part too. If Mom started early, chances are pretty good her daughter will too. If daughter has a genetic predisposition to being heavier, well...see above for the BMI info. Some folks it is just bred into genetically. Now whether this is influenced by genetic stuff we eat or whether it is a natural progression is beyond my scope. I plan to do some more reading to figure that one out.

Anyone have thoughts to share here?

PS. Found out my BMI puts me in "Overweight" as opposed to "Obese", whew. Although on another calculator I was Obese dang it all.

 

[quicksilver]

All I remember is noticing in the '80s kids looked like 20+ year olds (size-wise) and have, since. And not all necessarilly obese. Just larger.
I was always small. I look at my old elementry school class pictures and don't believe how small I was and still am. (5'3 -115lbs-52 yrs old) compared to today's kids.
I was called a skinny-balink (if anyone knows that term).
But to me, I was normal. Fed and ate well.
Much, Much better than today's kids. A home cooked meal every night. No fast food. Even pizza was home made.
For my age group back then, I was normal height. Just skinny. That's a family on the female side thing.
I see many youth, since the '80s, tower over their parents and teachers. And I know many who's diets consist, at least 1/2 the week, on fast food.
Getting fresh pineapple, peaches, etc., in January, I don't think is the reason why, as we had fresh, seasonal stuff all winter too. (beets, parsnips, potatoes...) and we did our own canning and pickling, etc. which kept the nutritional content.
I know kids don't eat breakfast like we used to - home cooked, fresh everyday. And we didn't have today's obesity problems.
Mom's told us to got outside and play, even in winter.

In 7th & 8th grade girls were "developing".
My mother's generation, she told me was 10th & 11th grade. (during the depression).
I can read all I want on BMI, etc, But know it's not due to anything good, or chemicals or what have you.
Kids are definately less physical, and eat alot more empty calories. Then add your chemicals.
They also get less sleep. And if you read those studies, they say, when a body is deprived of sleep, it craves food. The opposite works as well. When you don't eat, or eat poorly, you tire.
That's my take, and no solution or answers why.

​

 

[Alix]

Quicksilver, thanks for the reply. Maybe I'm missing it, but I'm not sure what your "take" is? Are you saying that growth hormones in our food is the reason for earlier puberty? Or nutrition levels?

When you state that girls hit puberty in later grades with our Mom's generation are you taking into account the Depression? I know my Mom was growing up then.

And by better nutrition and things available, I didn't mean to suggest fresh fruit necessarily. Just the fact that we can EAT at all is better nutrition. Folks in past times didn't necessarily have much food at all throughout the winter months. I'm not going to give a history lesson, but suffice it to say, even FAST food is an improvement. (If you tour a museum take a look at the size of the armor back then. People in general were much smaller. Men were tall at 5' 7".) Though it does tie right back into that obesity thing.

Sorry if I'm being dense. Just wanting a little clarity for myself personally.

 

[quicksilver]

I think the hormones are after the fact. The 3rd or 4th, or 5th influence.
Heredity, nutrition, sleep, activity.

And....off topic....what I also find strange is, cycles were later, but lifespans were shorter. In general. Not due to an accident or bacterial or virual infection.
Go figure.

​

 

[Alix]

Got it now. Thanks. And I think I'd be close to your assessment. I'd just reverse your first two, but they are closely linked in my mind. Mine would be more like: Nutrition, heredity and others unspecified after that.

The longevity thing is a whole other debate I think. We don't die of as many diseases as we used to, childbirth is somewhat safer, and again, better food so less starvation. At least on this continent.

 

[Adillo303]

Don't know if I should be asking questions here, but, the effects on our lives of what we eat, what chemicals are in the things that we eat and what we really know about the effects of all this interests me.

Alix - you place Nutrition first in your prioritized list. Someone else, I believe GB, has said that there is no research that says BGH is a factor. Is it possible that it could be a factor and we don't know it yet?

 

[GotGarlic]

Don't know if I should be asking questions here, but, the effects on our lives of what we eat, what chemicals are in the things that we eat and what we really know about the effects of all this interests me.

Alix - you place Nutrition first in your prioritized list. Someone else, I believe GB, has said that there is no research that says BGH is a factor. Is it possible that it could be a factor and we don't know it yet?

Anything is possible What we know now, though, is that when BGH is ingested orally, it's broken down during digestion into amino acids and peptides, the basic cell building blocks that are in everything we eat. See this thread for more info: http://www.discusscooking.com/forums/f129/bovine-growth-hormone-47882.html

 

[Maverick2272]

As I said in the other thread, some have suggested a link to BGH, some to kids being overweight (BMI). They are just suggestions though, and opposing ones, and unless they can back them up with more studies or more conclusive facts than just observation they should not be given any more weight other than as something to consider and definitely something worth exploring.

Myself I lean towards a domino effect. Better nutrition leading to more kids being overweight as well as just plain having stronger bodies and stronger systems, higher levels of vitamins and minerals, leading to hitting puberty earlier. But I also think genetics do play a roll in that, and wouldn't rule out other factors such as BGH. For that matter, Lord knows what all we are doing and putting in our environment that could be having effects on us.

Questionable funding aside, Cornell's study concluded that long term studies were needed. That doesn't strike me as 'conclusive findings' but rather 'preliminary findings'. If your findings were conclusive, you wouldn't need additional studies to be sure. We have also seen many instances in the past where in the short term something was found to be safe or of no harm to us or the environment, only to find out in long term studies that it didn't remain true.

For this reason I would not rule out BGH as a contributing factor until the long term studies are concluded and they are able to remove the statement "more studies needed" and replace it with "conclusive findings".

Still, this has had no effect on how I purchase milk or other dairy, since there is a big difference between something causing harm and something being a contributing factor in early puberty (maybe).

 

[Andy M.]

...Questionable funding aside, Cornell's study concluded that long term studies were needed. That doesn't strike me as 'conclusive findings' but rather 'preliminary findings'. If your findings were conclusive, you wouldn't need additional studies to be sure. ...

From the last paragraph of the Cornell link (emphasis is mine):

"While short-term studies have not indicated other effects of bGH (allergies or other effects), more long-term studies on possible effects of bGH are needed."

I read this as a statement related to only the side effects of BGH. I feel they answered the primary concern, the effect of BGH on human growth, conclusively.

 

[Fisher's Mom]

I think as Alix said, there are many contributing factors to earlier puberty but it seems to me that what girls eat - good and bad - has the greatest impact on the numbers overall. It's true that "extra" body fat signals the body that reproduction is "safe", meaning enough stored fat for a developing fetus. But it's also true that too much body fat - true obesity - retards this and actually causes a delay or cessation in menstruation. There seems to be a BMI window that helps trigger puberty.

Inactivity I think plays a part. We know that women and girls who exercise heavily or are dedicated athletes often do not have regular periods. I have also read some research to suggest that our higher protein intake in North America may trigger earlier puberty. But genetics also figure in strongly, too. Generally girls who reach puberty at early ages such as 9 and 10 have mothers and grandmothers who also had relatively early puberties.

The main reason this is of great interest to me is that I believe it contributes to increasing numbers of teen pregnancies. Puberty triggers an instinctive and hormonally fueled interest in the opposite sex to ensure population. If you couple this with advertising and movies and music videos that glamorize and promote teen sexuality, it's a wonder to me that any of them manage to make it to 20 without at least one child in tow!

 

[Maverick2272]

From the last paragraph of the Cornell link (emphasis is mine):

"While short-term studies have not indicated other effects of bGH (allergies or other effects), more long-term studies on possible effects of bGH are needed."

I read this as a statement related to only the side effects of BGH. I feel they answered the primary concern, the effect of BGH on human growth, conclusively.

I think other effects leaves it pretty wide open, for all we know BGH could effect human growth only over the long term and not show up in short-term studies.
In whole, when I read that entire statement, it seems full of rather vague terminology. As if they were unwilling to be conclusive in their statements and findings.

 

[jkath]

My opinion (and it is just that)
The hormones in the meats, etc, I think are really a factor, but even moreso,
is the lousy pre-packaged, fast-food, soda-laden, deep fried daily intakes.

I remember in school there was 1 kid in the grade people called "fat". Looking at his photo now, he was plump, at best.
We ate breakfast, had healthy lunches and didn't have sugary snacks throughout the day before dinner. Milk was something we all drank and liked! I remember soda wasn't something you had, unless it was in a rootbeer float (and that was only every few months).

For anyone who hasn't seen the movie "Supersize Me", I recommend it as something all pre-teens and teens should watch (except that one part where the girlfriend is interviewed about you-know-what)

BTW, I'm not sure the BMI link is awake today...it said "jkath, you're underweight". Says I need to gain another 6 pounds.......um, no......

 

[jpmcgrew]

Some research also suggests that some breast cancers may also be linked to hormones in our food as well. All I say is if you can get the cleanest most natural meats and milk you can get do it It's starting to be big movement on peoples part to be able to get legal raw organic milk again these days. In the 70s my mother would buy raw milk from a dairy farmer although it was supposed to be illegal I grew up on it all through my teenage years. We must remember there are powerful rich lobbyists in the government that can sway the information we get.

 

[jpmcgrew]

It has also been suggested that stress could be a factor in early puberty. Maybe natures way to keep humans procreating I don't know.

 

[Maverick2272]

Some research also suggests that some breast cancers may also be linked to hormones in our food as well.

I did a search on that and came up with this (I checked on the website and you are free to use anything from the page, no copyright infringement problems, but sorry I don't know how to highlight it as a quote so I put it in parenthesis):

"Even the FDA admits that cows injected with rBGH could suffer from increased udder infections (mastitis), severe reproductive problems, digestive disorders, foot and leg ailments, and persistent sores and lacerations."

"In a 1998 survey by Family Farm Defenders, it was found that mortality rates for cows on factory dairy farms in Wisconsin, those injecting their herds with rBGH, were running at 40% per year. In other words, after two and a half years of rBGH injections most of these drugged and supercharged cows were dead. Typically, dairy cows live for 15-20 years. "


So, not healthy for the cows either. And there was this:

"BGH "treatment" causes significantly increased levels of another growth hormone called IGF-1 in the milk, according to a 1990 study sponsored by Monsanto and published in Science. Bovine IGF-1 is identical to the IGF-1 naturally found in humans."

Which led to this corresponding to your statement:

"Despite warnings from scientists, such as Dr. Michael Hansen from the Consumers Union and Dr. Samuel Epstein from the Cancer Prevention Coalition, that milk from rBGH injected cows contains substantially higher amounts of a potent cancer tumor promoter called IGF-1, and despite evidence that rBGH milk contains higher levels of pus, bacteria, and antibiotics, the FDA gave the hormone its seal of approval, with no real pre-market safety testing required."

I cut and pasted here as best I could keeping it as short and to the point as possible, but here is the link to the website I found it at:
Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH) in milk threathens our health

A couple of other noteworthy things:

Cornell University received funding for its study from Monsanto. Monsanto is the manufacturer of rBGH sold to farmers as PISOLAC. This is what is termed conflict of interest.

Several key decision makers in the FDA's approval of rBGH were former employees of Monsanto, including Michael Taylor. This is also termed conflict of interest.

So, on one side you have a study funded be an interested party that concludes long term studies are needed, and on the other side you have consumer groups and several scientists (and even a couple of reports from Monsanto themselves) providing data of possible and serious health risks from rBGH that need long term studies to verify, resolve, prove, disprove etc.

So no, I can't see this issue as resolved conclusively.

 

[GotGarlic]

...I cut and pasted here as best I could keeping it as short and to the point as possible, but here is the link to the website I found it at:
Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH) in milk threathens our health

When I read about the background of the person who owns this Web site, I'm not reassured by her qualifications to comment on these issues in any authoritative way: Shirley's Testimonial: How I achieved optimum health after a lifetime of suffering

A couple of other noteworthy things:

Cornell University received funding for its study from Monsanto. Monsanto is the manufacturer of rBGH sold to farmers as PISOLAC. This is what is termed conflict of interest.

Several key decision makers in the FDA's approval of rBGH were former employees of Monsanto, including Michael Taylor. This is also termed conflict of interest.

So, on one side you have a study funded be an interested party that concludes long term studies are needed, and on the other side you have consumer groups and several scientists (and even a couple of reports from Monsanto themselves) providing data of possible and serious health risks from rBGH that need long term studies to verify, resolve, prove, disprove etc.

It's actually pretty common for companies to hire university researchers to conduct studies for them; it's called *independence*. You're assuming that because Monsanto paid for the study, that the scientists came up with results that Monsanto wanted to see. That would be unethical, and as someone who has worked in a medical school for 10 years, it's not the way good science works. Cornell University is pretty well regarded for its research activities.

So no, I can't see this issue as resolved conclusively.

Have you ever wondered why the anabolic steroids that some athletes take have to be injected, while other steroids, such as Prednisone, can be taken orally? It's because the digestive process renders the anabolic steroids inactive - it breaks them down into component parts, just as it does with BGH. BGH is biologically active in cows, but not in humans. No amount of further research will change that fact.

 

[Claire]

Oh, dear. I scanned all of the input and may have missed this, but even when I was a teenager, moving around the world, it was a given that girls matured faster in warmer climes. Mexican, South Asian, etc gals had their periods sooner. Florida and other southern -- i.e., Texan, South CA girls matured faster than northern gals. One time a neice of mine had her first period when she was at my house. My sister wasn't around and was shocked. "He double hockey sticks, I didn't have mine for another few years!" My neice was born and raised in southern Florida. As our population centers head more and more south, girls are starting earlier. Yes, some of the outward signs are cultural. But the true physical maturing DOES happen faster in warmer climates.

 

[Maverick2272]

It's actually pretty common for companies to hire university researchers to conduct studies for them; it's called *independence*. You're assuming that because Monsanto paid for the study, that the scientists came up with results that Monsanto wanted to see. That would be unethical, and as someone who has worked in a medical school for 10 years, it's not the way good science works. Cornell University is pretty well regarded for its research activities.

Just because it is common doesn't make it ethical or right. We saw what happened when tobacco companies funded research about the effects of tobacco. And no that is not called *independence* that is called *reliance*.

After reading that Monsanto paid for the study on their product, I am not reassured on Cornell's qualifications in regards to this study either.

One difference between her and them is she gathered the information and listed the sources, some including the FDA and Monsanto themselves as well as other scientists, something you neglected to mention. I also don't think she took money from interested parties in order to do it either.

But by your reasoning, since she gathered the information instead of conducting the study herself personally, I should ignore everything you wrote as well since you did not personally do the study either but rather 'gathered' the information to post here.

I also think it is neat how everyone continues to sidestep the IGF-1 issue, something that serious is worth investigating.

Just because someone chooses to gather information for themselves without the backing of major companies and universities doesn't mean what they have to say should immediately be dismissed. We have seen that tactic played out before as well, we can't attack where they got the information from, so instead we attack them.

 

[Alix]

Maverick, BMI is a proven factor in early onset of puberty in girls. I don't have the research at my fingertips as I have it in hard copy at work. I'll check it out tomorrow and see if I can find an internet link for you to read. The body requires a certain level of body fat to produce estrogen as I said earlier and if young girls are a bit heavy it happens earlier. (Incidentally, check your PMs later)

Fisher's Mom, I know what you mean about their poor hormones kicking into gear. I just read some research about how hard it is on adolescents mental health when they develop physically earlier than they used to. They have all the physical signs and urges, but not the emotional maturity needed to deal with everything thats being thrown at them. I seem to recall someone is putting together a study on early maturation and links to serious mental health issues in adolescents.

 

[Maverick2272]

Got the PM, will look at it in a bit, thanks!

I am not saying BMI isn't a factor, I know it is, but there are also other factors involved including environmental effects. Lord knows how all this pollution as well as all these chemicals will be effecting the human race over the long term.

These are things we all need to be wary of and keep a close eye on, especially (as ties into the original thread) we are wanting to bring kids into this world and have something to hand down to them as a legacy (that won't kill em anyway!).

As Albert Einstien put it, "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them."

We need to think better with each generation, not just except things at face value or as is and assume its OK. Don't be afraid to ask questions, or to question things. Thinking for yourself is one of the few true freedoms we have.