Skip to content

Advertisement

You're viewing the new version of our site. Please leave us feedback.

Learn more

Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine

Open Access

Relationship between dietary factors and bisphenol a exposure: the second Korean National Environmental Health Survey (KoNEHS 2012–2014)

Annals of Occupational and Environmental MedicineThe official journal of the Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Medicine201729:42

https://doi.org/10.1186/s40557-017-0200-1

Received: 20 April 2017

Accepted: 15 September 2017

Published: 18 October 2017

Abstract

Background

This study was aimed at finding out the exposure level of bisphenol A (BPA), a well-known endocrine disruptor, in relation to dietary factors using a data representing the Korean general population.

Methods

This study was performed on 5402 adults aged 19 years and older based on the Second Korean National Environmental Health Survey (KoNEHS 2012–2014). The data analyzed urinary BPA concentration in relation to socio-demographic variables, health behavior-related variables, and dietary factor-related variables. Odds ratio (OR) was calculated through a logistic regression analysis after dividing the participants into high BPA exposure group and low BPA exposure group based on the top 75 percentile concentration. The logistic regression analysis was carried out considering the appropriate sample weight, stratification, and clustering of the second KoNEHS sample design.

Results

The group drinking bottled water at home and the group using zip-top bags/plastic bags showed significantly higher urinary BPA concentration in female. OR tends to increase as the intake frequency of frozen food increased and OR of frozen food consumption of more than once a week was 1.48 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02–2.24) for male and the group drinking bottled water showed significantly higher OR of 1.45 (95% CI 1.06–2.17) after adjusting the related factors for female.

Conclusions

BPA levels were high in female using bottled water and in male consuming frozen food, and therefore bottled water and frozen food need to be avoided to reduce BPA levels.

Keywords

Bisphenol aDietary factorsKorean national environmental health survey

Background

Bisphenol A (BPA) is synthesized by the condensation of two phenols with one acetone and used as a monomer [1]. After BPA was first synthesized in 1891, it has been in commercial use from early 1950s [2].

BPA is mainly used to make polycarbonate plastic, epoxy resins, and thermal paper [1]. Polycarbonate plastic is clear, shatter-resistant and used to make common consumer goods, such as water bottles, food storage containers while epoxy resin is used as coatings on the inside of cans to prevent rust and corrosion [3]. In these cases, BPA is released as free form and can be absorbed into the body [4].

BPA, a well-known endocrine disruptor, interacts with female hormone receptors and activates the female hormones, showing weak estrogenic effects [2]. Such effects have been confirmed in animal testing as well, with signs of lower sperm counts, uterotrophic effects, precocious puberty effects on female animals, and effects on male reproductive organ development observed [5]. In human, it is associated with behavior disorder, such as aggression and hyperactivity, drug addiction, recurrent miscarriages, diabetes, coronary heart diseases, and liver toxicity [3, 5, 6].

In a study describing estimated BPA daily intake based on urine BPA concentration data in 30 countries worldwide, the estimated BPA daily intake was especially high for adult population of Daejon, Korea in an areal analysis [7]. In another study describing urinary BPA concentrations in general population in seven Asian countries, the geometric mean (GM) of urinary BPA in Korean general population was the highest after creatinine adjustment [8]. Therefore, the level of BPA exposure in Korean adult population is considered to be higher than those in other countries.

Direct contact with products containing BPA is the main source of BPA exposure with the main exposure route being diet via food and drink [5, 7]. Because over 90% of BPA exposure is from diet, BPA body burden can be associated with dietary habits [5, 9]. In previous studies, other related factors of BPA exposure were age, gender, Body Mass Index (BMI), household income, and smoking [1014].

Even though a nationwide biomonitoring of BPA exposure was conducted on the Korean general population, there is still not enough number of studies exploring the relation between BPA exposure level and dietary factors. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to analyze the relationship between urinary BPA concentration and dietary factors using data representing the Korean general population.

Methods

Study participants

This study was analyzed based on the Second Korean National Environmental Health Survey (KoNEHS 2012–2014). The second KoNEHS is designed to understand the Korean population’s exposure level of environmental pollutants and explore the influencing factors. The KoNEHS is conducted every 3 years by the National Institute of Environmental Research under the Ministry of Environment.

The second KoNEHS area consisted of 16 cities and provinces nationwide and for the survey sample size the enumeration district of the National Population and Housing Census 2010 was used as the population with the initial stratification classified by local administration. The secondary stratification was classified by socio-economic factors, using the stratified multistage cluster sampling applied with the proportional allocation of square root of population to extract 400 sample enumeration districts. Around 15 people from each sample enumeration district were surveyed targeting total of 6478 Koreans aged 19 years and older. The survey consists of an environmental exposure-related questionnaire, clinical tests, and analysis of environmental harmful substances in biological samples.

In this study, 5402 subjects (2488 men, 2914 women), excluding 928 subjects whose urinary creatinine concentration exceeded the proper range of 0.3–3.0 g/L and 215 subjects with missing urinary BPA concentration data, were included among the total participants of 6478 people. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of Kyung Hee University Hospital (KHUH 2017–03-049). And this study only used the published data of the second KoNEHS.

Variables

Urinary bisphenol A

Urinary BPA concentration was measured by Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatography - Mass Spectrometry (UPLC-MS) using spot urine. After hydrolyzing the urine sample with ß-glucuronidase/aryl sulfatase-degrading enzyme, the metabolites of BPA were extracted with ethyl ether and measured. The principle of analysis figures out the value of sample concentration using the calibration curve constructed by the Standard Addition Method which adds a fixed amount of standard solution to the sample [15]. The outcome of the calibration standard solution was set at reference value ±15% and the precision of reproducibility of the test method was indicated with a relative standard deviation of 15% while the QC (Quality Control) sample was used for measurement accuracy. QC standard solution was used for internal quality control and analyzed with precision and accuracy. The Method Detection Limit (MDL) of BPA metabolite was 0.15 μg/L. The value below MDL was substituted with the values with MDL divided by square root of 2 while the final BPA concentration was calculated after adjusting urinary creatinine concentration.

Dietary factors

The variables related to potential BPA exposure among the variables associated with dietary factors were reclassified in the following manner for this study. The type of drinking water at home was classified into filtered water, tap or boiled water, bottled water, and mineral or ground water while the frequency of canned food consumption and frozen food consumption were classified into rarely consumed, consumed less than once a week, and consumed more than once a week. Food containers used in refrigerator were classified into glass/metal/porcelain ware, plastic ware, and zip-top bags/plastic bags.

Potential confounders

The study participant’s socio-demographic variables and health behavior-related variables were classified in the following manner. Among the socio-demographic variables, the age was classified into units of 10 years from the age of 19. Body Mass Index (BMI) was classified into underweight for BMI of less than 18.5 kg/m2, normal weight for BMI of 18.5–25 kg/m2, and overweight for BMI of greater than or equal to 25 kg/m2, whereas the level of educational attainment was classified into less than high school, graduated from high school, and graduated from junior college or more. The marital status was classified into single, married, and others (divorced/death of spouse/separated) while the household income was classified into four groups according to the quartile. Alcohol consumption was classified into non-drinker for participants who did not drink at all or drank in the past but not anymore, light drinker for participants drinking less than heavy drinker, and heavy drinker for participants drinking 3 times and more a week and drinking more than 7 glasses per occasion for male (more than 5 glasses for female). The exercise status was classified into exercising group for participants exercising more than 3 times a week over 20 min and sweating during workout and non-exercising group for participants who do not fall under the exercising group. Smoking was classified into smoker for participants currently smoking and non-smoker for those who never smoked or quit smoking.

Statistical analysis

The final data analysis of this study was analyzed by applying the weights presented in the original publicly open final dataset in accordance with the KoNEHS analysis guideline. The frequency and proportion of each variable were presented after gender stratification to figure out the general characteristics of the participants and chi-square tests were carried out to analyze the difference in the distribution of each variable. The geometric mean (GM) of urinary BPA was calculated by converting the natural logarithm because the urinary BPA level shows right deviation. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied to compare the geometric mean value of metabolites in relation to dietary factors and Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) to compare the geometric mean value with adjustments made to each variable. Odds ratio (OR) was calculated by using logistic regression by dividing the participants into high exposure group and low exposure group based on the top 75 percentile concentration (male: 2.37 μg/g creatinine, female: 3.15 μg/g creatinine). The logistic regression analysis was carried out considering the appropriate sample weight, stratification, and clustering of the second KoNEHS sample design. After gender stratification, in Model 1, no adjustments were made while age, BMI, socio-economic variables, health behavior-related variables and dietary factors were adjusted in Model 2. The IBM SPSS (version 19 for Windows) was used for the statistical analysis and the statistical significance level was set at p < 0.05.

Results

Table 1 shows the characteristics configuration of the study participants analyzed in this study (Table 1). Male accounted for 2488 (46.1%) and female 2914 (53.9%). The GM of the urinary BPA concentration was 1.33 μg/g creatinine for male and 1.77 μg/g creatinine for female, with female showing significantly higher concentration (p < 0.001). For age, urinary BPA level increased with age for both male and female showing a decreasing tendency after the age of 50s for male and the age of 40s for female. For male, urinary BPA concentration increased significantly as alcohol consumption increased with the heavy drinker group showing the highest concentration of 1.58 μg/g creatinine. For female, a statistical significant difference was observed in relation to the educational attainment with the high school graduates showing the highest concentration of 1.91 μg/g creatinine, followed by junior college graduates or more, and junior high graduates. For household income, urinary BPA concentration increased significantly as the income increased with the highest income class showing the highest concentration of 2.05 μg/g creatinine in female.
Table 1

Demographic distributions of the study subjects and urinary concentration of bisphenol A (μg/g creatinine) according to general characteristics

Category

Total

Male

Female

 

Total

Male

Female

n (%)

n (%)

n (%)

p value*

GM (SE)

95% CI

p value

GM (SE)

95% CI

p value

GM (SE)

95% CI

p value

Total

5402 (100)

2488 (46.1)

2914 (53.9)

 

1.55 (1.01)

1.52–1.60

 

1.33 (1.02)

1.29–1.38

 

1.77 (1.02)

1.71–1.83

<0.001

Age

19–29

467 (8.6)

235 (9.4)

232 (8.0)

0.032

1.55 (1.05)

1.42–1.69

<0.001

1.34 (1.07)

1.18–1.52

0.021

1.79 (1.06)

1.59–2.02

0.003

(years)

30–39

909 (16.8)

400 (16.1)

509 (17.5)

 

1.57 (1.03)

1.49–1.70

 

1.34 (1.05)

1.23–1.46

 

1.79 (1.04)

1.65–1.94

 
 

40–49

1046 (19.4)

473 (19.0)

573 (19.7)

 

1.63 (1.03)

1.53–1.72

 

1.37 (1.05)

1.25–1.51

 

1.89 (1.04)

1.76–2.04

 
 

50–59

1207 (22.3)

524 (21.1)

683 (23.4)

 

1.67 (1.03)

1.58–1.77

 

1.47 (1.04)

1.35–1.59

 

1.85 (1.04)

1.72–1.98

 
 

60–69

1082 (20.0)

523 (21.0)

559 (19.2)

 

1.50 (1.03)

1.42–1.59

 

1.30 (1.04)

1.19–1.41

 

1.72 (1.04)

1.59–1.86

 
 

≥70

691 (12.8)

333 (13.4)

358 (12.3)

 

1.31 (1.04)

1.22–1.41

 

1.15 (1.05)

1.01–1.28

 

1.48 (1.05)

1.05–1.63

 

BMI

<18.5

139 (2.6)

45 (1.8)

94 (3.2)

<0.001

1.56 (1.08)

1.33–1.83

0.949

1.39 (1.16)

1.04–1.84

0.530

1.65 (1.10)

1.36–1.99

0.744

(kg/m2)

18.5–24.9

3138 (58.1)

1393 (56.0)

1745 (59.9)

 

1.55 (1.02)

1.50–1.60

 

1.31 (1.03)

1.24–1.38

 

1.77 (1.02)

1.70–1.85

 
 

≥25.0

2125 (39.3)

1050 (42.2)

1075 (36.9)

 

1.56 (1.02)

1.50–1.63

 

1.37 (1.03)

1.29–.1.45

 

1.78 (1.03)

1.68–1.88

 

Education

≤ Middle school

1811 (33.5)

673 (27.0)

1138 (39.1)

<0.001

1.52 (1.02)

1.45–1.59

0.171

1.33 (1.04)

1.24–1.43

0.904

1.64 (1.03)

1.56–1.73

0.001

High school

1655 (30.6)

764 (30.7)

891 (30.6)

 

1.61 (1.02)

1.54–1.69

 

1.32 (1.04)

1.23–1.41

 

1.91 (1.03)

1.80–2.03

 

≥ College

1936 (35.8)

1051 (42.2)

885 (30.4)

 

1.54 (1.02)

1.48–1.61

 

1.35 (1.03)

1.27–1.43

 

1.81 (1.03)

1.70–1.92

 

Marital

Single

568 (10.5)

319 (12.8)

249 (8.5)

<0.001

1.48 (1.04)

1.37–1.60

0.351

1.36 (1.06)

1.22–1.51

0.784

1.66 (1.06)

1.48–1.86

0.101

status

Married

4302 (79.6)

2053 (82.5)

2249 (77.2)

 

1.57 (1.01)

1.53–1.62

 

1.33 (1.02)

1.27–1.38

 

1.83 (1.02)

1.76–1.90

 
 

Others

532 (9.8)

116 (4.7)

416 (14.3)

 

1.50 (1.04)

1.38–1.62

 

1.40 (1.09)

1.18–.1.68

 

1.52 (1.05)

1.39–1.66

 

Household

1st quartile

1489 (27.6)

695 (27.9)

794 (27.2)

0.355

1.47 (1.03)

1.40–1.55

0.002

1.27 (1.04)

1.18–1.36

0.258

1.68 (1.03)

1.57–1.79

0.016

income

2nd quartile

2510 (46.5)

1168 (46.9)

1342 (46.1)

 

1.54 (1.02)

1.48–1.59

 

1.34 (1.03)

1.26–1.41

 

1.74 (1.03)

1.65–1.82

 
 

3rd quartile

1352 (25.0)

598 (24.0)

754 (25.9)

 

1.68 (1.03)

1.59–1.77

 

1.41 (1.04)

1.30–1.52

 

1.93 (1.03)

1.81–2.06

 
 

4th quartile

51 (0.9)

27 (1.1)

24 (0.8)

 

1.72 (1.14)

1.32–2.24

 

1.47 (1.21)

1.02–2.12

 

2.05 (1.21)

1.42–2.98

 

Smoking

None or Ex-smoker

4380 (81.1)

1579 (63.5)

2801 (96.1)

<0.001

1.61 (1.01)

1.56–1.65

<0.001

1.35 (1.02)

1.29–1.41

0.467

1.77 (1.02)

1.71–1.83

0.705

Current smoker

1022 (18.9)

909 (36.5)

113 (3.9)

 

1.35 (1.03)

1.27–1.43

 

1.31 (1.03)

1.23–1.39

 

1.71 (1.09)

1.44–2.03

 

Alcohol

None

2163 (40.0)

709 (28.5)

1454 (49.9)

<0.001

1.56 (1.02)

1.50–1.63

0.282

1.26 (1.04)

1.17–1.35

0.001

1.74 (1.02)

1.66–1.82

0.326

Light drinkera

2762 (51.1)

1393 (56.0)

1369 (47.0)

 

1.53 (1.02)

1.48–1.59

 

1.31 (1.03)

1.25–1.38

 

1.79 (1.03)

1.71–1.88

 

Heavy drinkerb

477 (8.8)

386 (15.5)

91 (3.1)

 

1.65 (1.04)

1.51–1.80

 

1.58 (1.05)

1.43–1.74

 

1.98 (1.10)

1.64–2.40

 

Exercise

No

3918 (72.5)

1743 (70.1)

2175 (74.6)

<0.001

1.55 (1.02)

1.50–1.60

0.683

1.33 (1.02)

1.27–1.39

0.826

1.75 (1.02)

1.68–1.82

0.246

Yesc

1484 (27.5)

745 (29.9)

739 (25.4)

 

1.57 (1.03)

1.49–1.65

 

1.34 (1.04)

1.25–1.44

 

1.83 (1.03)

1.71–1.96

 

*p value calculated by chi-square tests

GM geometric mean/SE standard error/CI confidence Interval

Light drinkera: drinking less than heavy drinker/Heavy drinkerb: drinking ≥3 times a week and ≥7 glasses per occasion for male (≥5 glasses for female)

Exercisec: exercising ≥3 times a week over 20 min and sweating during workout

Urinary BPA concentration according to dietary factors after gender stratification was presented in Table 2 before and after adjustments were made to the related factors (Table 2). For male, participants drinking bottled water showed the highest concentration of 1.46 μg/g creatinine. The concentration increased as the intake frequency of canned food and frozen food increased. Furthermore, users of zip-top/plastic bags showed the highest concentration without statistical significance in male. For female, participants drinking bottled water showed the highest concentration of 1.87 μg/g creatinine (p = 0.011). The concentration increased as the intake frequency of canned food and frozen food increased. In addition, users of zip-top/plastic bags showed the highest concentration of 1.81 μg/g creatinine (p = 0.036).
Table 2

Urinary geometric mean (GM) concentration of bisphenol A (μg/g creatinine) according to variable categorized by dietary factors

 

Male

Female

 

Crude

Adjusteda

Crude

Adjusteda

Category

n (%)

GM (SE)

95% CI

p value

GM (SE)

95% CI

p value

n (%)

GM (SE)

95% CI

p value

GM (SE)

95% CI

p value

At-home drinking water

 Filtered water

972 (39.1)

1.30 (1.03)

1.22–1.38

0.141

1.29 (1.03)

1.21–1.37

0.102a

1180 (40.5)

1.78 (1.03)

1.71–1.85

0.037

1.81 (1.03)

1.74–1.88

0.011*

 Tap or boiled water

907 (36.5)

1.30 (1.03)

1.23–1.40

 

1.31 (1.03)

1.22–1.39

 

1172 (40.2)

1.67 (1.03)

1.60–1.74

 

1.68 (1.03)

1.63–1.77

 

 Bottled water

309 (12.4)

1.48 (1.06)

1.29–1.66

 

1.46 (1.06)

1.28–1.63

 

285 (9.8)

1.89 (1.06)

1.70–2.07

 

1.87 (1.06)

1.68–2.04

 

 Mineral or ground water

300 (12.1)

1.40 (1.06)

1.21–1.59

 

1.43 (1.06)

1.24–1.60

 

277 (9.5)

1.85 (1.06)

1.66–2.04

 

1.83 (1.06)

1.64–2.01

 

Canned food intake

 Rarely

1235 (49.6)

1.30 (1.02)

1.23–1.37

0.433

1.31 (1.02)

1.24–1.39

0.082b

1482 (50.9)

1.72 (1.02)

1.64–1.80

0.130

1.75 (1.02)

1.67–1.84

0.068

 < Once a week

846 (34.0)

1.36 (1.03)

1.28–1.46

 

1.33 (1.03)

1.25–1.45

 

1006 (34.5)

1.81 (1.03)

1.71–1.92

 

1.78 (1.03)

1.72–1.93

 

 ≥ Once a week

407 (16.4)

1.37 (1.05)

1.25–1.51

 

1.36 (1.05)

1.23–1.49

 

426 (14.6)

1.86 (1.05)

1.70–2.03

 

1.80 (1.05)

1.64–1.97

 

Frozen food intake

 Rarely

1991 (80.0)

1.31 (1.02)

1.26–1.37

0.048

1.32 (1.02)

1.26–1.37

0.055c

2343 (80.4)

1.75 (1.02)

1.68–1.82

0.290

1.76 (1.02)

1.69–1.82

0.165

 < Once a week

334 (13.4)

1.37 (1.05)

1.23–1.52

 

1.35 (1.06)

1.13–1.53

 

406 (13.9)

1.85 (1.05)

1.69–2.02

 

1.77 (1.05)

1.61–1.95

 

 ≥ Once a week

163 (6.6)

1.57 (1.08)

1.35–1.82

 

1.53 (1.08)

1.33–1.82

 

165 (5.7)

1.86 (1.08)

1.62–2.14

 

1.81 (1.08)

1.57–2.10

 

Food container in refrigerator

 Glass or metal or porcelain ware

1096 (44.1)

1.34 (1.03)

1.26–1.42

0.483

1.33 (1.03)

1.26–1.42

0.159d

1338 (45.9)

1.49 (1.03)

1.41–1.56

0.060

1.49 (1.03)

1.41–1.57

0.036§

 Plastic ware

1283 (51.6)

1.32 (1.03)

1.25–1.39

 

1.32 (1.03)

1.25–1.39

 

1445 (49.6)

1.75 (1.02)

1.69–1.80

 

1.76 (1.02)

1.70–1.81

 

 Zip-top or plastic bag

109 (4.4)

1.48 (1.10)

1.23–1.78

 

1.48 (1.10)

1.23–1.78

 

131 (4.5)

1.82 (1.08)

1.52–2.11

 

1.81 (1.08)

1.50–2.10

 

GM geometric mean

SE Standard error

CI Confidence Interval

*Adjusted by age, alcohol, canned food intake, frozen food intake, and food container in refrigerator

Adjusted by age, alcohol, at-home drinking water, frozen food intake, and food container in refrigerator

Adjusted by age, alcohol, at-home drinking water, canned food intake, and food container in refrigerator

§Adjusted by age, alcohol, at-home drinking water, canned food intake, and frozen food intake

The logistic regression was conducted based on the top 75 percentile BPA concentration in Table 3. OR of participants consuming frozen food more than a week was significant in male at 1.48 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02–2.24) in Model 2. OR of participants drinking bottled water was significant in female at 1.45 (95% CI 1.06–2.17) in Model 2. But for canned food consumption and food container in refrigerator, ORs were not statistically significant.
Table 3

Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) relating dietary factors of high urinary concentration of bisphenol A (male: ≥ 2.37 μg/g creatinine, female: ≥3.15 μg/g creatinine) compared to low urinary concentration of bisphenol A

Category

Male

Female

Model 1a

Model 2b

Model 1a

Model 2b

At-home drinking water

 Filtered water

1

1

1

1

 Tap water or boiled water

1.09(0.84–1.42)

1.11(0.85–1.45)

0.91(0.72–1.15)

0.95(0.75–1.20)

 Bottled water

1.24(0.84–1.82)

1.23(0.83–1.81)

1.40(1.03–2.10)

1.45(1.06–2.17)

 Mineral or ground water

1.05(0.69–1.59)

1.04(0.68–1.59)

0.92(0.63–1.36)

0.96(0.65–1.43)

Canned food intake

 Rarely

1

1

1

1

  < Once a week

0.95(0.72–1.25)

0.94(0.67–1.32)

1.15(0.92–1.45)

1.11(0.87–1.42)

  ≥ Once a week

1.06(0.78–1.44)

1.00(0.68–1.48)

1.18(0.90–1.56)

1.17(0.85–1.60)

Frozen food intake

 Rarely

1

1

1

1

  < Once a week

1.10(0.78–1.58)

1.12(0.81–1.61)

1.05(0.69–1.61)

1.11(0.70–1.76)

  ≥ Once a week

1.42(0.98–2.12)

1.48(1.02–2.24)

1.18(0.73–1.91)

1.20(0.73–1.95)

Food container in refrigerator

 Glass or metal or porcelain ware

1

1

1

1

 Plastic ware

1.06(0.57–1.97)

1.10(0.61–2.01)

1.20(0.77–1.89)

1.15(0.73–1.81)

 Zip-top or plastic bag

1.06(0.57–1.96)

1.12(0.62–2.02)

1.22(0.75–2.01)

1.20(0.73–1.97)

aModel 1: crude model

bModel 2: age, BMI, sociodemographic status (education, marital status, and household income), individual factors (alcohol intake, exercise, and smoking), and dietary factors

Discussion

We analyzed the relationship between urinary BPA concentration and dietary factors using national survey data. The main finding of the present study is that high BPA concentration was associated with the use of bottled water in women and frozen food intake in men.

It was confirmed that BPA can leach out of plastic beverage bottles, and exposure to BPA increased when these beverages were consumed [1]. Adult group drinking bottled water showed significantly higher urinary BPA concentrations compared to those who did not drink bottled water, and a study found that urinary BPA concentrations were higher for drinking bottled water than boiled tap water, and drinking water using polycarbonate bottle than ceramic cup [11, 16]. In an intervention study, the concentration was 1.2 μg/g creatinine when measured after not using the bottle for a week and the concentration increased by around 69% to 2.0 μg/g creatinine after using the bottle for a week [17]. These studies are believed to have something in common with the outcome of the present study showing the highest OR in female group drinking bottled water. In the case of men, the group drinking bottled water did not show a statistical significance in the outcome as it is assumed that men drink less amount of water at home due to their higher labor force participation rate in comparison to women [18].

Frozen food intake and BPA exposure can be associated with packaging material for frozen food, cooking method and food container. Plastic wraps used in food packaging can cause BPA migration, and urinary BPA concentrations decreased when consumption of plastic packaged food were limited for 3 days compared to when on a general diet [19, 20]. It can be presumed through these studies that the use of plastic packaging for most frozen foods is one of the causes of increased BPA exposure. Also, BPA migration can occur from plastic containers used for microwave oven, and BPA exposure could increase when using vinyl wrapping in a microwave oven to defrost frozen food [21, 22]. The present study shows that the geometrical mean of urinary BPA levels was significant in female group using zip-top or plastic bags as refrigerator storage containers(p = 0.036). Therefore, use of these containers for frozen food storage can also increase BPA exposure as a result of frozen food consumption.

In many studies, BPA was detected in commercial canned foods [23, 24]. And the results of the analysis carried out on BPA concentration in Korean canned food showed that the average concentration was highest for coffee at 45.51 mg/kg, followed by tuna, meat, fruit, tea, and vegetable [25]. Also, the amount of BPA detected in canned food was over 100 times more than BPA found in non-canned food or food packaged in glass, plastic paper and laminate paperboard, while a study calculating the dietary intake of BPA in urine for a day confirmed that intake of BPA mostly came from canned food [7, 26]. Although not statistically significant in the present study, these studies explained that urinary BPA concentrations tend to rise as the number of canned food consumption increased. In the Stage 1 survey of KoNEHS, the GM of the urinary BPA concentration of total study participants was 0.884 μg/g creatinine and 1.48 μg/g creatinine in the Stage 2 survey. The increased consumption rate of canned food from 42.9% to 48.7% was suggested as one of contributing factors causing the Stage 2 survey results to be higher compared to that of Stage 1 survey results. In a Japanese study conducted on university students, urinary BPA level for frequent drinking of tea or beverages can was significantly high in 1992. However, such tendency was not observed in 1999 on the basis that majority of beverage companies changed to can coatings which did not contain BPA in 1997 [23]. Therefore, to reduce BPA exposure, the use of an alternate product which hardly releases BPA may be effective.

Although the present study analyzed the level of BPA exposure from food container in refrigerator, there was no statistical significance in OR. The reason for that is that BPA is included in polycarbonate plastic or polyvinyl chloride plastic used in food storage products, and that migration levels of BPA from containers vary for foods with different pH [1, 24]. Furthermore, according to a Korean study researching the validity of the survey on containers used mostly for food storage, the exact agreement of survey responses was only around 72%, and although the KoNEHS survey question used for the present study chose only one type of container, there is the possibility that each household may be using many types of storage containers simultaneously [27].

In the study of temporal trends in BPA exposure conducted in NHANES (2003–2012), female, daily smoker, and low household income group showed a significantly higher concentration [28]. Similar to this study, the present study showed a significant difference of urinary BPA concentration in gender, age, household income, and smoking in total participants.

The limitations of this study are as follows. Firstly, the impact of dietary factors outside the home on BPA concentration could not be determined as only dietary factors were included in the analysis. Secondly, a more detailed content analysis on the dietary factors, such as the effect of amount of daily water intake, types of canned food and frozen food, and storage period, and type of food stored in the food containers for refrigerator could not be performed. To resolve this problem, an in-depth analysis needs to be carried out by adding detailed questionnaire later on based on the study performed abroad on exposure factors. Thirdly, only the data on BPA concentration measured in random spot urine was analyzed in this study. The sampling method needs improvement, such as multiple sampling or 24-h urine collection because of BPA’s short half-life and variation in a day, and an analysis needs to be performed not only on urine samples but also on blood samples [3, 29].

Despite these limitations, this study explored BPA exposure levels of Korean adults using the KoNEHS representing the Korean general population and found out the association between urinary BPA and dietary factors.

Conclusions

BPA levels were high in female using bottled water and in male consuming frozen food. According the result of the present study, bottled water and frozen food need to be avoided to reduce BPA levels. Further research should be needed to investigate detailed dietary factors associated with BPA concentration.

Abbreviations

ANCOVA: 

Analysis of covariance

ANOVA: 

Analysis of variance

BMI: 

Body Mass Index

BPA: 

Bisphenol A

CI: 

Confidence Interval

IRB: 

Institutional Review Board

KoNEHS: 

Korean National Environmental Health Survey

MDL: 

Method Detection Limit

NHANE: 

National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey

OR: 

Odds Ratio

QC: 

Quality Control

UPLC-MS: 

Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatography - Mass Spectrometry

Declarations

Acknowledgements

There is no conflict of interest or financial support to declare.

Funding

Not applicable.

Availability of data and materials

The data of the KoNEHS is opened to the public, therefore, any researcher can be obtained after request from the website http://meta.narastat.kr/metasvc/svc/SvcMetaDcDtaPopup.do?confmNo=106027&inputYear=2012.

Authors’ contributions

J-SP designed this study and made a draft of this manuscript. SK, MP and YK were analyzed the data. HL, HC did technical support. SL did critical revision of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study used the open data of the Second Korean National Environmental Health Survey (KoNEHS), 2012–2014, Ministry of Environment, National Institute of Environmental Research. All study participants of the KoNEHS agreed to participate the survey and signed an informed consent. This study was judged exempt from ethics approval by institutional review board (IRB) of Kyung Hee University Hospital. (KHUH 2017–03-049).

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Kyung Hee University Hospital
(2)
Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, School of Medicine Kyung Hee University

References

  1. Chapin RE, Adams J, Boekelheide K, Gray LE Jr, Hayward SW, Lees PS, et al. NTP-CERHR expert panel report on the reproductive and developmental toxicity of bisphenol a. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol. 2008;83(3):157–395.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Geens T, Aerts D, Berthot C, Bourguignon JP, Goeyens L, Lecomte P, et al. A review of dietary and non-dietary exposure to bisphenol-a. Food Chem Toxicol. 2012;50(10):3725–40.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Vandenberg LN, Chahoud I, Heindel JJ, Padmanabhan V, Paumgartten FJ, Schoenfelder G. Urinary, circulating, and tissue biomonitoring studies indicate widespread exposure to bisphenol a. Environ Health Perspect. 2010;118(8):1055–70.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Geens T, Goeyens L, Kannan K, Neels H, Covaci A. Levels of bisphenol-a in thermal paper receipts from Belgium and estimation of human exposure. Sci Total Environ. 2012;435-436:30–3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Tsai WT. Human health risk on environmental exposure to Bisphenol-a: a review. J Environ Sci Health C Environ Carcinog Ecotoxicol Rev. 2006;24(2):225–55.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Erler C, Novak J. Bisphenol a exposure: human risk and health policy. J Pediatr Nurs. 2010;25(5):400–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Huang RP, Liu ZH, Yuan SF, Yin H, Dang Z, Wu PX. Worldwide human daily intakes of bisphenol a (BPA) estimated from global urinary concentration data (2000-2016) and its risk analysis. Environ Pollut. 2017;230:143–52.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Zhang Z, Alomirah H, Cho HS, Li YF, Liao C, Minh TB, et al. Urinary bisphenol a concentrations and their implications for human exposure in several Asian countries. Environ Sci Technol. 2011;45(16):7044–50.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Wilson NK, Chuang JC, Morgan MK, Lordo RA, Sheldon LS. An observational study of the potential exposures of preschool children to pentachlorophenol, bisphenol-a, and nonylphenol at home and daycare. Environ Res. 2007;103(1):9–20.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Harley KG, Aguilar Schall R, Chevrier J, Tyler K, Aguirre H, Bradman A, et al. Prenatal and postnatal bisphenol a exposure and body mass index in childhood in the CHAMACOS cohort. Environ Health Perspect. 2013;121(04):514–20.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Engel LS, Buckley JP, Yang G, Liao LM, Satagopan J, Calafat AM, et al. Predictors and variability of repeat measurements of urinary phenols and parabens in a cohort of shanghai women and men. Environ Health Perspect. 2014;122(7):733–40.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Lakind JS, Naiman DQ. Daily intake of bisphenol a and potential sources of exposure: 2005-2006 National Health and nutrition examination survey. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 2011;21(3):272–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Geens T, Bruckers L, Covaci A, Schoeters G, Fierens T. Sioen 6, et al. determinants of bisphenol a and phthalate metabolites in urine of Flemish adolescents. Environ Res. 2014;134:110–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. He Y, Miao M, Herrinton LJ, Wu C, Yuan W, Zhou Z, Li DK. Bisphenol a levels in blood and urine in a Chinese population and the personal factors affecting the levels. Environ Res. 2009;109(5):629–33.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Kim SJ, Baek YY, Kwon YM, Choi WH, You SD, Chio KH. Ultra performance liquid chromatography? mass spectrometry analysis of urinary bisphenol A metabolite. In Book Analysis manual of environmental noxious materials: 2nd Korean National Environmental Health Survey. Incheon: Korean national institute of environmental research; 2015. p.54–67.Google Scholar
  16. Li X, Ying GG, Zhao JL, Chen ZF, Lai HJ, Su HC. 4-Nonylphenol, bisphenol-a and triclosan levels in human urine of children and students in China, and the effects of drinking these bottled materials on the levels. Environ Int. 2013;52:81–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Carwile JL, Luu HT, Bassett LS, Driscoll DA, Yuan C, Chang JY, et al. Polycarbonate bottle use and urinary bisphenol a concentrations. Environ Health Perspect. 2009;117(9):1368–72.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Cooke FL. Women's participation in employment in Asia: a comparative analysis of China, India, Japan and South Korea. International Journal of Human Resource. 2010;21:2249–70.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Rudel RA, Gray JM, Engel CL, Rawsthorne TW, Dodson RE, Ackerman JM, et al. Food packaging and bisphenol a and bis(2-ethyhexyl) phthalate exposure: findings from a dietary intervention. Environ Health Perspect. 2011;119(7):914–20.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  20. López-Cervantes J, Paseiro-Losada P. Determination of bisphenol a in, and its migration from, PVC stretch film used for food packaging. Food Addit Contam. 2003;20(6):596–606.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Yang M, Kim SY, Lee SM, Chang SS, Kawamoto T, Jang JY, et al. Biological monitoring of bisphenol a in a Korean population. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol. 2003;44(4):546–51.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Nerín C, Fernández C, Domeño C, Salafranca J. Determination of potential migrants in polycarbonate containers used for microwave ovens by high-performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet and fluorescence detection. J Agric Food Chem. 2003;51(19):5647–53.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Matsumoto A, Kunugita N, Kitagawa K, Isse T, Oyama T, Foureman GL, et al. Bisphenol a levels in human urine. Environ Health Perspect. 2003;111(1):101–104.Google Scholar
  24. Schecter A, Malik N, Haffner D, Smith S, Harris TR, Paepke O, et al. Bisphenol a (BPA) in U.S. food. Environ Sci Technol. 2010;44(24):9425–30.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Lim DS, Kwack SJ, Kim KB, Kim HS, Lee BM. Risk assessment of bisphenol a migrated from canned foods in Korea. J Toxicol Environ Health A. 2009;72(21–22):1327–35.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Lorber M, Schecter A, Paepke O, Shropshire W, Christensen K, Birnbaum L. Exposure assessment of adult intake of bisphenol a (BPA) with emphasis on canned food dietary exposures. Environ Int. 2015;77:55–62.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Kim HM, Choi SK, Shin SA, Lee KY, Shin S, Lee JW, et al. Validation study of a dietary questionnaire for assessing exposure to food-borne hazards. Korean J Nutr. 2011;44(2):171–80.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  28. LaKind JS, Naiman DQ. Temporal trends in bisphenol a exposure in the United States from 2003-2012 and factors associated with BPA exposure: spot samples and urine dilution complicate data interpretation. Environ Res. 2015;142:84–95.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Calafat AM, Ye X, Wong LY, Reidy JA, Needham LL. Exposure of the U.S. population to bisphenol a and 4-tertiary-octylphenol: 2003-2004. Environ Health Perspect. 2008;116(1):39–44.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© The Author(s). 2017

Advertisement