More on bisphenol A: uh oh
September 7, 2008
Apparently, the National Toxicology Program has just reviewed the data on bisphenol A, the chemical that leaches from hard plastic water bottles. Here is the NTP report. The NTP says it is a little - not a lot - worried about it on the basis of limited and inconclusive studies. The NTP used to be more worried about it, as expressed by its Board of Scientific Counselors on June 11. This finding, of course, contradicts the FDA’s more optimistic assessment. According to the Washington Post, a recent study done at Yale finds the chemical to cause problems in the brains of monkeys. The chemical industry says bisphenol A is harmless. Consumer Reports (October 2008, p. 15) says its “tests of a limited number of baby bottles detected only trace amounts of BPA that are below levels likely to post a risk for infants.” But then it recommends baby bottles made BPA-free plastic. This confusing situation elicited a New York Times editorial urging caution: “When in doubt, especially when it comes to children, err on the side of caution.” I agree. While the scientists are fighting this one out, it seems best to practice avoidance.
The FDA is holding a hearing on bisphenol A on September 16. Should be interesting.
[…] Cinematical wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerpt Apparently, the National Toxicology Program has just reviewed the data on bisphenol A, the chemical that leaches from hard plastic water bottles. The NTP says it is a little - not a lot - worried about it on the basis of limited and inconclusive studies. This finding, of course, contradicts the FDA’s more optimistic assessment. According to the Washington Post, a recent study done at Yale finds the chemical to cause problems in the brains of monkeys. The chemical industry says bisphenol A i […]
Pingback by Chemical Engineering » Blog Archive » More on bisphenol A: uh oh — September 7, 2008 @ 2:07 pm
Might be another reason to breast feed when possible.
Comment by Sheila — September 7, 2008 @ 6:59 pm
This reminds me of a lovely little book called “Cradle to Cradle,” whose authors ask why our products can get away with being just “less bad.” Why should “levels of toxic chemicals too low to cause harm” be the standard? Shouldn’t the assumption be that our products will be entirely harmless? Any deviations from complete harmlessness need to be justified.
Lest this sound absurd: are there any reasons not to use *glass* containers?
Comment by Steve Laniel — September 7, 2008 @ 10:16 pm