bpa

Shapattack

Chemical Industry Fights Ban on Bisphenol A

August 11, 2008 at 9:45AM By Dan Shapley | comment

A lobbying group on the payroll of the chemical industry is launching a public relations blitz aimed at derailing California's proposal to ban Bisphenol A in products designed for babies and children under the age of 3. California is among about 12 states to consider banning Bisphenol A, since the federal government has been slow to act on a growing list of concerns.

Independent research has uncovered worrying qualities to Bisphenol A; it mimics hormones, could affect normal development and reproduction and would have its most dramatic effects on young bodies undergoing rapid development. The list of potential effects is long and damning: breast and prostate cancer, obesity, diabetes, brain and liver damage.

In April, Canada became the first nation in the world to label Bisphenol A potentially hazardous. In the United States, top-level scientists at the National Toxicology Program have raised concerns. The Food and Drug Administration has appointed a panel to review the chemical's safety; until now, however, the FDA has favored hand-picked scientific reviews endorsed by the industry, rather than those peer reviewed by independent scientists. Wal-Mart and Toys R Us have pledged to phase out the sale of products containing Bisphenol A.

But the plastics industry stands to lose profits if the chemical, an ingredient in certain plastics and in the lining of canned goods, is banned. About 7 billion pounds of BPA are produced each year. That explains how the industry could spend $2.2 million in the first half of 2008 lobbying to protect its profits. ...

comment | permalink | print | email |

tags: children, health, canada, plastic, toxic, babies, bisphenol a, FDA, national toxicology program, bpa, american chemistry council, lobbying

Is the FDA Hiding Something?

June 7, 2008 at 6:52AM By Dan Shapley | comment

For years, independent scientists have been raising concerns about Bisphenol-A, a chemical commonly found in plastics, the lining of cans and other products so common in American commerce that it's virtually impossible to go a day without using one.

For years, the Food and Drug Administration, which regulates the use of these chemicals, stood by the plastics industry position that the chemical was safe, despite studies on laboratory animals that showed the chemical, also referred to as BPA, could disrupt the normal activity of hormones. So-called endocrine disruptors can have a range of effects on the body, because at minute levels they can disrupt the chemical messenging system that regulates the reproductive, developmental and other systems of the body.

For years, consumer advocates, environmentalists and a few concerned citizens have done all they can to tell the public that many products, including plastic baby bottles, might be harming their children, born and unborn.

Then in April, the National Toxicology Program in April became the first federal agency to raise concerns about the safety of the ubiquitous chemical, when it said there was "some concern" BPA might affect the neural and behavioral development of fetuses, infants and children at levels people are currently exposed to, and that the health implications could be wide-ranging, from damaging the prostate gland and the breasts, to possibly causing early-onset puberty in girls.

Late on Friday, the FDA announced that a subcommittee of its Science Board would review the safety of Bisphenol A and report back before the end of the year on its findings.

There are three reasons to think that there's less going on than the normal functioning of a bureaucracy though. ...

comment | permalink | print | email |