iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Sen. Dianne Feinstein

GET UPDATES FROM Sen. Dianne Feinstein
 

Chemical Industry Lobbyists Block Measure to Protect Infants and Toddlers

Posted: 11/19/10 10:17 AM ET

One day our children will look back and wonder why we willingly risked our health by exposing ourselves to harmful chemicals like bisphenol A (BPA), a chemical used in thousands of consumer products. Unfortunately, chemical industry lobbyists wish to delay the inevitable for as long as possible. Just as the tobacco industry once told us it was safe to smoke cigarettes, the chemical industry is trying to tell us it's OK to ingest harmful chemicals. It's not OK.

For the past seven months, I worked to craft a compromise amendment for the Food Safety Modernization Act that would ban BPA from infant formula and baby bottles. And on Tuesday night, Senator Enzi and I reached an agreement on BPA. After a lot of hard work, we had a bipartisan agreement.

Bisphenol A (BPA), a man-made chemical, is used in thousands of consumer products from plastic, tin cans and CDs to receipt paper, shatter-resistant water bottles and baby bottles.

BPA is an endocrine disruptor, meaning that it can interfere with how hormones work in our bodies by changing their normal function. The evidence linking BPA to serious health problems is mounting. Over 200 studies link BPA exposure to breast and other cancers, reproductive disorders, cardiac disease, diabetes, early puberty and more.

I planned to introduce an amendment to the Food Safety Modernization Act that would ban the use of BPA in baby bottles and sippy cups. It was a simple baby step to begin combating this problem. Seven states and Canada have labeled BPA a toxic threat and have passed laws phasing out or banning BPA in specific products that would allow exposure of our most vulnerable population: infants and children.

Moms, dads, grandparents and other consumers and voters all over the country have written to me asking for BPA to be removed from their products. I worked hard negotiating an agreement. Yet every time we made a concession, the goal posts moved farther away.

The very same lobbying group that opposed legislation banning phthalates from children's toys made a last-minute push to scuttle the chances for a reasonable compromise, and Republicans bowed to pressure from the chemical industry. It is regretful that lobbyists for the American Chemistry Council, spending millions of dollars, lined up against a reasonable compromise. And it's maddening that BPA-laden baby bottles will remain on the shelves as a "safe" product.

I'm not going to give up, and neither should consumers. Just because chemical industry lobbyists blocked a vote on BPA doesn't mean you can't vote with your wallet every time you purchase a product. The chemical industry doesn't want you to know about companies that are already phasing out BPA or are searching for alternatives. But those companies are out there and deserve our support.

Sunoco, a company that makes BPA, has said it would refuse to sell the chemical without a guarantee that it would not be used in children's products. Eden Valley Organics now sells beans in BPA-free cans, and Wal-Mart and Toys "R" Us will no longer sell baby bottles containing the compound.

U.S. manufacturers that no longer use BPA in baby bottles include Playtex, Gerber, Evenflow, Avent America, Dr. Brown's, and Disney First Years. For adults, you'll be glad to know that Nalgene water bottles are BPA-free. For more information on how to find BPA-free products, visit EWG.org/Bisphenol-a-info.

We should not use our kids as guinea pigs by taking chances on a chemical that can seriously harm their immediate and long-term health. No chemical should be used in food products until it is proven to be safe. I will continue the fight to ban BPA-laden products by introducing new legislation next year.

I hope consumers continue to vote with their pocketbooks and support BPA-free products. Working together, we can make sure that -- one way or another -- these chemical companies are forced to do the right thing and take BPA out of baby products.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 235
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (7 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MeRainyday
Green Progressive for Equality
12:47 PM on 11/30/2010
We haven't found smoking gun yet. But my intuition has always told me that BPA somehow increase the risk or severity of autism.
11:41 AM on 11/29/2010
The industry approved food bill voted on today my well emanate you right to buy healthy ;locally grow produce. The blooger will vote yes. It is a shame
06:25 PM on 11/22/2010
Let's not forget how our kids are getting dangerous amounts of toxins which bypass normal body defenses:

VACCINES!!!

When will our politicians stand up for even their own kids?
07:58 PM on 11/22/2010
Yawn.
11:43 PM on 11/22/2010
I have no respect for people like yourself. Your the type of person who could literally get lost in a forest and I don't think anyone would care.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Arjala
09:05 AM on 11/22/2010
Fight against the Supreme Corut's ruling on Citizens United, or this is only the beginning.
10:18 PM on 11/21/2010
Lobbyists cannot block a bill. They have no votes. Sounds more like Republicans blocked the bill by being spineless and/or corrupt and caving in to pressure from lobbyists.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Turtlenews
10:04 PM on 11/21/2010
Stop buying plastic containers with BPA to start
photo
You Are My Density
Independent--it's just ONE country.
09:30 PM on 11/21/2010
If more mothers would breastfeed their babies, they wouldn't have those exposures and they'd have the benefits of the exact proteins and sugars that are perfect for a baby's development. I still marvel when I see someone bottle-feeding. They'd actually trust corporations to make their baby's food? What?

And it's the same with baby food. They don't need that either. Give them regular food when they're old enough to handle it, like banana after 6 months and other soft foods that adults would eat and keep on nursing. Why use baby food? It's a lot cheaper, too.

We've commercialized everything in this country, even how we feed our babies. And now this with the chemicals in the bottles. Great.
07:59 PM on 11/22/2010
Do you marvel at the site of women who are unable to breastfeed?
photo
You Are My Density
Independent--it's just ONE country.
09:34 PM on 11/22/2010
Actually yes, because the percentage of women who are physically unable to breastfeed (barring surgery to remove a breast or something equally extreme) is incredibly small. If it weren't, the human race would have died out millions of years ago since there were no other options back then. Breastfeeding problems are almost always due to mismanagement; in other words, the mother has no support and doesn't know what to do because no one around her knows what to do either and can't help her, often giving her a lot of misinformation that can destroy the nursing relationship. In tribal societies, no one has trouble breastfeeding because they grow up seeing it done and hearing it talked about so by the time women become mothers they both have the confidence to succeed and the support of other experienced mothers to help them. They also have a great help from family and friends where everyone pitches in to perform other duties so the new mother can concentrate on establishing successful nursing. It's important since that's the baby's only source of nourishment and it must nurse to grow into childhood.

Determined mothers have nursed adopted babies. You would be amazed at what determination and knowledge of proper positioning and management can do to enable successful breastfeeding. La Leche League is a breastfeeding support group that can take the place of the tribal mothers we don't have in this society and can help almost anyone to be successful.
05:44 PM on 11/21/2010
Here's a good one. BPA is sued in composite dental fillings and all the associated products that go along with them .
So, if your dentist talked you into taking out the dangerous mercury containing fillings and replacing them with composites, you can thank him/her every time you swallow.
As Del Close once said, "life's not without it's hazards man"
photo
You Are My Density
Independent--it's just ONE country.
09:22 PM on 11/21/2010
The amount of BPA in a dental filling, however, has to be incredibly tiny, doesn't it? Would it really have much of a health effect on anyone? Does any of it actually escape from what it is part of and get into the body? Life is not without its hazards, that's true, but this particular instance doesn't seem like one of them.
02:46 AM on 11/22/2010
Are dentists giving newborns dental fillings? The point is that babies are being exposed to this chemical that has the potential to damage their reproductive organs, and that's a little different than getting dental fillings.
03:08 PM on 11/21/2010
Banning BPA from children's products is a good start, and I applaud your work on that front. But BPA shouldn't be used in any food container or lining - it's harmful to humans, period.

This is why we have governmental institutions like the FDA - I don't have the resources to research potentially hazardous chemicals and check if they're in my household products. Without agencies like the FDA, companies don't even provide that information on the labeling. Placing the responsibility on individuals to police their own food and product supply (which is what conservatives do when they cry foul over the "nanny state") is nonsensical.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:13 PM on 11/21/2010
Agree. Sadly, the free market anarchists have purchased our government so the government is no longer by and for the people but by and for the corporations; so we the people get toxic toys, dead Gulf of Mexico, deadly chemicals in our baby food. The FDA is not representing best interests of the people. It represents the best interests of its corporate owners. Even the Supreme Court is now in the hands of the corporate super rich and alas, the corporations and those who own them are interested only in profit.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lance Manling
12:21 PM on 11/22/2010
How is it harmful? If it is so harmful, wouldn't you think FDA would have banned it?
03:02 PM on 11/21/2010
I object to your article. You said a lobbying group stopped the bill. But that is not true. Republicans named X,Y, and Z stopped it. Your article should say Mr. X, Mr. Y, and Mr. Z want to hurt babies. Unless you use the rhetoric of the right you have a handicap.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JPETERB
08:34 PM on 11/21/2010
Yes, very sadly, accurate actionable and comprehensive facts are no longer permitted in the "news" the corporate owned media prepares for the 'consumption' of the voting and non-voting American and Western public. The press is neither free nor liberal. That repeated concept of the American media is a basic part of the same deception. Control the facts, timing and words used in the "news" and the corporate elite can control any public conversation and any outcome of that conversation in Congress. I have not watched network or cable "news" since the late-seventies, and it has only gotten more pathologic since then.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lance Manling
12:22 PM on 11/22/2010
She blames the "lobbyist" because she doesn't have enough backers for her nutty bill. Environmentalist always blame the corporations or lobbyist when things don't go their way.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
motoGpifupleez
watching with amusement
02:24 PM on 11/21/2010
The true result of the TeaBag philosophy:

Who needs GubMint regulations?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Nalini Chilkov
02:20 PM on 11/21/2010
This is truly a societal crime. Exposure to chemicals such as BPA are definitively linked to cancers. Infants and young children are particularly vulnerable to such exposures. The Presdents Council on Cancer published a report in 2010 documenting the links between cancer and the environment. When will we able to regulate industry effectively and stop poisoning our children?
Only by regulating toxic chemicals will we be able to reduce the incidence of man ycancers. Breast Cancer for one is linked to chemical exposures. http://huff.to/9fbBxW
01:56 PM on 11/21/2010
Hooray for the Republicans, they have been consistently against helping children for over a century. They ,made them work in coal mines, they shot them in Boulder Colorado when they dared top strike, they want to stop the health care bill so they will never have to pay any taxes when they make more than a million dollars. Republicans own America and they are destroying it one child at a time.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
J David Auner
01:49 PM on 11/21/2010
After 70 years of research showing carcinogenic effects, bisphenol A will be one of the worst remembered legacies of Reagan's reign. "It is clear plastic so it can't possibly hurt you." was the decision from the oval office. No scientific evidence for 40 years was considered at that time. Toady regulators from 1985 to the present will also share the blame for contaminating bays, oceans and ground water with plastic molecules. Drug companies even thought DES was safer than Bisphenol A around 1950. What is most dangerous about the oceans' garbage patches is the floating Bisphenol A.

What to do now is important for survival of developed species. We are talking about our biosphere's survival. Banning all production of polycarbonate is the only ethical, moral or economic decision. Tomorrow is too late. Sen. Reid should haul our public servants into session which would continue 24 hours a day until at least our country stops poisoning the world.
Distilling the oceans will be the only way to get this crud out of our food chain (also everything else in the ocean.) Landfills will need to be mined for these disaster molecules to prevent further groundwater contamination. Recycling this dangerous material is unethical. Even 99.9 percent recycle efficiencies guarantees unacceptable poisoning of our water.
We need to get to work and lead the world in something besides weapons. Your child's liver cancer, his fertility and his food supply will depend on what we do now.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:23 PM on 11/21/2010
How do lobbyists prevent anything from being passed?

They don't get to vote on it in Congress, do they?
03:14 PM on 11/21/2010
How do lobbyists prevent anything from being passed?

By threatening to pull money or support from a party, offer money or support to vote against bills, or threatening to support a rival candidate in upcoming elections.