Kathleen Killoy

April 6, 2007

The chemical Bisphenol-A (BPA) has been garnering much attention in recent weeks. The chemical is used to make lightweight clear plastics and resins and is primarily used as adhesives and coatings of everyday products. BPA is typically found in items like clear plastic bottles, food containers, food can linings, dishes, baby bottles, and children's toys.

Studies have shown that BPA is an endocrine disrupting chemical that generally acts as an estrogen mimic. Endocrine disrupting chemicals are also harmful to adults, even in low doses, suspected of contributing to higher breast and prostate cancer rates, insulin resistance, obesity, neurological damage, and impaired fertility.

BPA exposure is of particular concern in children and developing fetuses. Introducing an estrogen mimic during critical during critical development sends the wrong hormonal messages and throws of normal development. Once these genetic changes occur in utero they are irreversible and with the individual for life. Animal studies indicate that adult mice exposed to BPA while in the womb are more likely to develop breast cancer. Along with predisposition to cancers, impaired fertility and insulin resistance BPA has recently been in the news because researches have now determined that fetal exposure also leads to obesity in adulthood.

Recently the Environmental Working Group conducted a study showing the largest amounts of BPA leaching into food from many name brand can linings. Recent studies are also highlighting the amount of BPA that leaches from the top five brands of plastic baby bottles on the market. Over 140 government-sponsored studies link BPA to adverse health effects, yet, not surprisingly, no industry-sponsored studies provide any evidence of BPA's harmful effects.

Health advocates speculate that the group responsible for studying the effects of BPA has a pro-industry bias. For nearly a decade, the Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction, established within the National Institutes of Health (NIH), has been responsible for assessing the dangers that chemicals pose to reproductive health. Much of the agency's work is conducted by the private consulting company Sciences International. Newspapers have reported that Sciences International has close ties to the chemical industry, including manufacturers of BPA.

Additionally, scholars have heavily scrutinized a recent draft report of a BPA study by Sciences International. Fred vom Saal, a scientist at the University of Missouri-Columbia who conducts NIH-funded BPA research, has stated that the draft report made critical mistakes and downplayed the risks of the plastics chemical.

The high-profile academic debate over the BPA safety will stay as long as the recent media attention continues. Hopefully the attention will also get consumers think about materials that leach BPA into food and beverages. Already companies are labeling their products as BPA-free to encourage consumers to buy foods with safer packaging. Until the NIH changes its relationship with the chemical industry, consumers will have to seek alternative scientific studies to educate and protect themselves, their children, and their unborn.

For more information:

Environmental Working Group, Part 1: A Survey of Bisphenol A in U.S. Canned Foods, Bisphenol A: Toxic Plastics Chemical in Canned Food (Mar. 5, 2007), http://www.ewg.org/reports/bisphenola/execsumm.php.

Elizabeth Grossman, Chemicals May Play Role in Rise in Obesity, Wash. Post, Mar. 12, 2007, at A06, available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/11/AR2007031100918.html.

Marla Cone, Chemical agency ties under review, L.A. Times, Mar. 7, 2007, http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-chemicals7mar07,1,3179467.story?ctrack=2&cset=true.

Tina Hesman Saey, Government panel will examine safety of plastic chemical, St. Louis Today, Mar. 5, 2007, http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/sciencemedicine/story/B0650EC0CEF08246862572950012A655?OpenDocument.