BPA-Free? Not Exactly

The Bisphenol A story just gets bigger and bigger. Today, the Associated Press reported that the American Chemistry Council has asked federal regulators to phase out rules which allow BPA in baby bottles and sippy cups. Sounds good, right? But this request may "head off tougher laws that would ban the chemical from other types of packaging," according to the AP.

Not so good.

And last week, Chemical & Engineering News reported on a recent study that found people absorb BPA through their skin through coated paper products like cash register receipts. The study, conducted by New York state public health laboratory Wadsworth Center, tested 83 receipts from seven U.S. cities and found BPA in all of them -- even ones labeled "BPA-free."

Why is keeping up with BPA news so important to us at Healthy Child Healthy World? California Watch, founded by the Center for Investigative Reporting, published a pretty comprehensive answer last week when they reported a study released in the journal Molecular Endocrinology that found BPA may cause changes in breast tissue, predisposing animals to breast cancer.

Add that to a study recently reported by Environmental Health News, which showed gene alterations in newborn male rats exposed to BPA that had lasting affects on reproductive hormones when they reached adulthood. The takeaway? Yet another piece added to a growing pie of research that links the chemical to reproductive problems in animals -- including humans.

The frightening thing is when you connect the dots to another study reported by Environmental Health News last week, which found that when pregnant rats are exposed to BPA, levels of the substance are higher in the fetus than the mother.

So why isn't the FDA banning BPA -- along with food colorants and other chemicals that scientists are increasingly reporting aren't safe for people, let alone kids? The Atlantic Monthly just published an interesting summary of the answer, which comes down to two things: science and politics.

The Atlantic Monthly article also echoed what Healthy Child Healthy World has been saying for years: In the absence of legislation, parents have to do their own homework to protect their families.

And we have to take our concerns directly to manufacturers to let them know what we want. We're still collecting signatures on our petition to tell Campbell's soup that BPA in their cans is not "M'm, Mm Good."

Petitions like these got BPA out of baby bottles and sippy cups. Let's work together to get it out of our world.

 

Comments

[HerrMonk]

03:57 PM on 10/17/2011

"So why isn't the FDA banning BPA -- along with food colorants and other chemicals that scientists are increasingly reporting aren't safe for people, let alone kids?"

Because we don't need a nanny to tell us what we can eat and drink, or eat and drink out of.

The FDA should publish/require warning labels, full ingredient/metrial discosure, and make their findings available to the public.

If I want to suck murcury from a BPA-laden baby-bottle, that's my buisness.

[Ozark Homesteader]

07:51 PM on 10/15/2011

Petitions are great, but how about a Constitutional amendment to return corporations to their rightful place, not as citizens. Then we could have lasting lobbying and campaign finance reform--and get BPA and the equally dangerous liners that are replacing it our of all of our food.

[crom14]

11:22 AM on 10/15/2011

Eden canned foods are BPA free and the food is Organic and delicious!

[crom14]

11:21 AM on 10/15/2011

I really worry about my cat. I have yet to find BPA free cat food.

[Tsalco]

02:11 AM on 10/15/2011

Don't forget about the BPA and BPA like materials in dental fillings.

If the BPA and other substances leech from plastics, we need to look at all the plastics that we come in contact with, such as eyeglasses, to see if they are a problem.

[Kevin Chung Lin]

05:25 PM on 10/14/2011

the only canned food I get is usually seafood like sardines and anchovies....not much else...maybe tomato paste occasionally...

[drdookie]

02:48 PM on 10/12/2011

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/18/business/global/18iht-rbog-plastic-18.html

[Oginikwe]

12:50 AM on 10/13/2011

Thank you very much for that link. :)

Glass--everyone should go back to glass and stay away from plastics. Plastics are bad for us and for the environment.

[ttmedusa]

11:48 AM on 10/12/2011

Since I have worked in the industry , I will withold the company name, I can only say that BPA is not the only concerns the people should have. Safety is the first and foremost thing I was taught by the company, quality ran second but then the upper level workers didn't seem to care much about quality until the USDA was walking about. Just don't get a cut, a bump, a bruise or any injury and you had nothing to worry about. One person ( USDA ) can't see everything all the time and since he comes only once during a shift, you figure out the rest. Maybe they overlook some things because they knew we were on a schedule, I dunno. Just keep up the fight but not sure it's a fight that can be won. Not when, in over a year, I saw a quality issue being broken everyday and not once in that year was anyone reprimanded for it, to the best of my knowledge the practice still continues.

[MCTSilverlakeCA]

10:26 AM on 10/12/2011

Why not? because BPA is a cheap material- (unsafe or not) and ensures the profits of manufacturers go into their pockets (or investors pockets or Golden handshakes for its continually coming -or- going out Executives and CEO's) instead of into complying with those dratted "EPA" rules that the Republican Party and it's Big Industry backers don't like and are trying to overturn.

[drdookie]

12:12 PM on 10/11/2011

What about the fact that BPA-free substitute plastics still leach chemicals as bad as or worse than BPA???

[abbienormal]

08:27 AM on 10/12/2011

Cite?

[Ozark Homesteader]

08:11 PM on 10/15/2011

Not a citation but an indication that scientists are trying to keep it from happening:
http://advancinggreenchemistry.org/?p=1717