Organic Baby Blog - News & Tips on Organic Parenting » BPA

FDA Warns of Infant Exposure to BPA

admin — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 03:21:48 +0000

The Food and Drug Administration is encouraging families to limit their children’s exposure to a chemical found in thousands of household products.

CBS News correspondent Kelly Wallace reports that, for years, concerned mothers, environmental groups and some scientists have been warning that Bisphenol A, commonly known as BPA, is unsafe, and can lead to cancers, diabetes and other diseases.

The Flipside of the BPA Concern

gabe — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 21:28:39 +0000

So over the last several months many people have been following the developing story on BPA. BPA or Bisphenol A has been a very hot button issue lately. And it is no secret that some of the big players who have relied on BPA over the years have conspired to try and clear the dubious chemicals name. There are many studies on both sides of the debate and the newest to come to the table is from the official Nalgene website. Here is a caption from their site: “Agencies and researchers worldwide have studied the safety of BPA and polycarbonate for approximately 50 years; including The Environmental Protection Agency and The Food and Drug Administration in the USA, The European Commission Scientific Committee on Food, The German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment and the Japan Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare. Findings of studies from these agencies indicate that food and beverage containers manufactured from polycarbonate do not pose a health risk to humans. Polycarbonate is used in a wide variety of consumer products including baby bottles, water bottles, dental sealants and the lining of most metal food and beverage containers and has been for over 45 years.

Furthermore, several scientific panels including the European Union’s Scientific Committee on Food, the National Toxicology Program and the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis have concluded that the weight of scientific evidence does not support the hypothesis that low doses of BPA adversely affects human health. None of the large studies conducted have substantiated the claims made by those performing some of the smaller studies frequently cited. Health Canada and the United States’ National Toxicology Program (NTP) are completing their investigations of the scientific data compiled to date. Both identify “some concern” (NTP, 2008) for “potential health risks” (Health Canada, 2008) relative to neural and behavioral effects in early stages of development, based upon several of the animal studies reported, but have concluded the data are too uncertain at this time to draw any conclusions as to possible effects in humans at early developmental stages. Each will release separate final reports later this year.”

What a strange situation parents are in right now. On the one hand there are scores of professionals warning us about the dangers of BPA. And on the flip side planted square against them are scores of professionals telling us it is safe for our children. As a father I can only tell you my opinion. That opinion is if the world seems undecided and the issue is the safety of my family I will err on the side of caution. It is easy to avoid products containing BPA. You can buy BPA free baby bottles, drink from glass instead of plastic, and just be aware of the resin codes in the plastics you do use. Sure it may be safe, but why even take the chance?

Insight into the Struggles of Big Business as they try to Protect BPA

gabe — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 18:47:39 +0000

On May 28 in an exclusive Washington DC social club representatives from the companies Coca-Cola, Alcoa, Crown, North American Metal Packaging Alliance, Inc.,
Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), American Chemistry Council, and
Del Monte met to discuss their strategy to protect the dangerous chemical BPA and through that a bit of the bottom line. We have had occasion to write about BPA before. It is hard not to be concerned about BPA’a effects on babies, children, and pregnant women. A tidal wave of consumer awareness fueled by many recent studies have led to legislative changes around the country regarding BPA. This private meeting is the backlash from the stir those changes created. I mean business is business but to me this sort of business is just shameful, here are the minutes to the meeting that were recently leaked and confirmed authentic. (I especially like the part about the “Holy Grail” young pregnant woman spokesperson):

Meeting Minutes

North American Metal Packaging Alliance, Inc.

May 28, 2009, 10:00 a.m. – 3:10 p.m. EDT
RE: BPA Joint Trade Association Meeting on Communications Strategy
Meeting Goal: Develop potential communication/media strategies around BPA

Discussion Topics: Consideration of available web-based
communication options, including targeted geographies, as well as
mainstream media response

Attending Companies: Coca-Cola, Alcoa, Crown, North American Metal
Packaging Alliance, Inc., Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA),
American Chemistry Council, Del Monte

Summary: Attendees discussed the need to be more proactive in
communications to media, legislators, and the general public to protect
industries that use BPA, prolong the life of BPA, put risks from
chemicals in proper prospective, and transcend the media and the
blogosphere. Attendees believe a balance of legislative and grassroots
outreach (to young mothers ages 21-35 and students) is imperative to
the stability of their industry; however, the association members
continue to struggle to initiate research and develop a clear-cut plan
to defend their industry. The committee will spend approximately
$500,000 to develop a survey on consumer BPA perceptions and messaging
and eventually content and outreach materials. Overall, the committee
seemed disorganized, and its members frustrated. Lack of direction from
the committee and these associations could continue to allow other
associations and environmental groups to push BPA out.

Other Points: Attendees suggested using fear tactics (e.g. “Do you
want to have access to baby food anymore?”) as well as giving control
back to consumers (e.g. you have a choice between the more expensive
product that is frozen or fresh or foods packaged in cans) as ways to
dissuade people from choosing BPA-free packaging. Attendees noted, in
the past, the different associations have had a reactive strategy with
the media, with very limited proactive outreach in reaching out to
journalists. The committee agrees they need to promote new, relevant
content to get the BPA perspective into the media mix. The committee
believes industry studies are tainted from the public perspective.

The committee doubts social media outlets, such as Facebook or
Twitter, will work for positive BPA outreach. The committee wants to
focus on quality instead of quantity in disseminating messages (e.g. a
young kid or pregnant mother providing a positive quote about BPA, a
testimonial from an outside expert, providing positive video, advice
from third party experts, and relevant messaging on the GMA website).
Members noted traditional media outreach has become too expensive (they
have already spent hundreds of thousands of dollars) and the media is
starting to ignore their side. The committee doubts obtaining a
scientific spokesperson is attainable. Their “holy grail” spokesperson
would be a “pregnant young mother who would be willing to speak around
the country about the benefits of BPA.”

Eventually, the committee concluded before deciding on the tactics
to spread their messages, they need to develop the messages. The
committees plan to fund a joint survey and message testing—what new
messages they need to sell—before implementing a website and creating
materials. Another task group will be implemented to finalize how to
develop messages and aggressively use electronic media to deliver those
messages.

Members noted the industry needs research on how perceptions of BPA
are translating into consumer behavior—Is it translating into most moms
not buying canned products or just a minority of moms? They hope to
form messages relevant to how people live their lives—What does not
having BPA mean to your daily lifestyle? Focusing on the impact of BPA
bans on minorities (Hispanic and African American) and poor is also
important. The members want to put the danger of BPA into perspective.

Legislatively, the committee is focusing on Connecticut and
California. Committee members are meeting with as many representatives
on the Health Committee as possible. The members are focusing on more
legislative battles and befriending people that are able to manipulate
the legislative process. They believe a grassroots and legislative
approach is favorable because the legislators worry about how the moms
will react. If the Connecticut bill goes through, the committee
believes it will be a good opportunity to talk about the negative
impact that ban will have on businesses and employment—How will it
affect the union workers? The committee wants to put a proposal
together for the right way to deal with legislative issues in each
state.

The committee discussed Prop 65 in California—requiring the Governor
to publish, at least annually, a list of chemicals known to the state
to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity. The committee will form a
coalition to write a submission about the benefits of using BPA by the
deadline for submissions on June 30, 2009. Members will also build up
their contact base in Sacramento. The committee does not want to win at
the legislative level and then not have anyone to buy the product.

The committee questioned whether or not trade associations should
challenge what is being said about BPA. Other trade associations for
plastics have begun writing letters in response to “lies” being told
about BPA. The committee proposed to be involved in the dialog and
comment electronically and directly back to reporters. Attendees noted
it does not matter what the next material is, there will be issues with
it, and the committee wants to work to make people feel more
comfortable with BPA and “BPA2” or whatever chemical comes next.

The committee suggested dividing the costs of the work and research
equally by the members. The members are guesstimating it will cost at
least $200,000 for the message testing and the survey and $500,000 for
the entire project. The committee is also looking for new members to
help with costs and outreach.

Should We Be Afraid of BPA?

gabe — Mon, 18 May 2009 18:00:03 +0000

In the wake of some nationally groundbreaking laws being passed to ban the sale of baby bottles and sippy cups containing the chemical BPA, many people are hitting Google to find out what the concern is all about. I wanted to quickly outline for you what BPA is and some of the concerns over it that have led such bodies as the country of Canada, the state of Minnesota, and now the city of Chicago to take steps toward the restriction of this chemical in products intended for use by babies.

BPA or Bisphenol A is a chemical used in the production of some plastics and has been suspected of being harmful to humans since the 1930’s. Over time it can leach into the contents of a plastic container, especially containers that have been exposed to heat or strong detergents such as in a microwave or dishwasher. Some studies have connected BPA to quite a few nasty things including but not limited to reproductive disorders, cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and even obesity. There is still a debate over whether or not BPS is actually harmful enough to humans to merit being labeled toxic. However, it should be noted that Walmart stopped selling food containers, water and baby bottles, sippy cups, and pacifiers containing bisphenol A in all of it’s Canadian stores and planned on phasing out the products in US stores during 2009. Earlier this year chemical giant Sunoco announced that it would be refusing to sell the chemical to any company planning on using it in the production of food and water containers for children younger than 3. A recent study of note comes for Harvard University and the CDC involving 77 Harvard students showed some startling results. The joint study showed the students as having a 70% increase in urinary levels of BPA after drinking cold liquid from plastic bottles made with BPA for one week.

If this information makes you want to steer clear of BPA here is how to identify it in plastics. Look for the small recycling looking symbol with the number in it on the bottom of the container. This is called the resin identification code and is used to show the family of plastics your container comes from. Types 3 and 7 are the two that may contain BPA. The other major source is canned foods that have a plastic lining.

It is scary that we use such risky chemicals in our day to do lives but extremely encouraging that these days such attention is brought to these issues as public awareness seems to be growing all the time.