News Stories Archive | Page 6 of 11 | Facts About BPA

Scholars of scientific hype in the modern age typically point their finger at the media, the internet and, above all, the gullibility of the science-illiterate general public. While these elements do clearly play their part, cancer epidemiologist Geoffrey Kabat is more interested in blaming a more unlikely enabler: scientists themselves.

Not that many years ago, many reusable food and beverage containers on the market worldwide were made from polycarbonate plastic.  Polycarbonate, which is made from bisphenol A (BPA), is an almost ideal material for these products since its clarity is comparable to glass, making it easy to see what’s inside, and it’s virtually shatter-proof – an important attribute for consumer products that could be dropped. For years though, BPA has attracted considerable attention from scientists, environmental activists and the media.  Now, as a result of that attention, few of these products are made from polycarbonate and a variety of alternative materials are used instead.

The topic of endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) has been popular lately with many “experts” weighing in with their opinions on everything from the basic definition of EDCs to what to do about them.  With scientific issues like this, the words attributed to Daniel Patrick Moynihan bear repeating:  “everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.” A recent example is an article in the online publication MedPage Today titled “EDCs: An Area of Growing Concern,” and subtitled “Expert: too little testing of BPA, phthalates.”  While the article focused on comments from an “expert,” it would have benefited immensely from some editorial fact-checking.

With the high level of attention to bisphenol A (BPA) over the years, it’s easy to get the impression that BPA is everywhere and we’re constantly being exposed to high and harmful levels in our daily lives.  You might even have seen BPA referred to as an “everywhere chemical.”   

Adding to the confusion, the media is notorious for attaching pictures of products that contain absolutely no BPA to articles about BPA.  Perhaps the most common examples are pictures of bottled water.  Single-serve bottles containing water, sports drinks or carbonated beverages are almost universally made from a plastic known as polyethylene terephthalate (PET), which has no connection to BPA at all.

Many of today’s consumer products are safer and more effective, thanks to bisphenol A (BPA). Every day we benefit from clear, shatter-resistant polycarbonate plastic and tough epoxy resins, both made from BPA.

From eyeglass lenses to bicycle helmets, and security shields to life-saving medical devices, polycarbonate makes our lives more livable. Almost invisibly, epoxy resin coatings protect metal surfaces from degradation and support food safety by protecting canned foods from contamination.

The Finnish Institute of Occupational Health and the National Institute for Health and Welfare recently released a report on exposure of hairdressers to several chemicals, one of which was bisphenol A (BPA). First for the bottom line: “According to the results, hairdressers in Finland are not exposed to…bisphenol A…any more than the rest of the population.”

Based on a recent and fascinating scientific report from Switzerland, you might start to hear demands to eliminate mild mustard from our diet. The Swiss Federal Food Safety and Veterinary Office (FSVO) recently reported that mild mustard contains the chemical bisphenol F (BPF). Remarkably, BPF is not a contaminant introduced from packaging or other sources, but apparently is produced from a component naturally present in mustard seeds when the seeds are processed to make mustard.

It is commonly perceived that natural chemicals are safe while manmade substances may be harmful.  These perceptions, however, if not supported by scientific evidence, can result in risk perception gaps that can cause us to worry more than warranted by the evidence.

Last week a flurry of news stories reported on a new study of bisphenol A (BPA) in canned foods led by a researcher at Stanford University. Based on an analysis of BPA levels in urine and self-reported canned food consumption, the researchers came to the conclusion that “[c]anned food[s] … were associated with higher levels of urinary BPA concentrations.” But the study missed the point: yes, we know BPA is present in trace amounts, but is it safe?

Prof. Sir Stephen O’Rahilly MD FRS FMedSci, Professor of Clinical Biochemistry and Medicine and Director of the Metabolic Research Laboratories, University of Cambridge, said: “The findings of this very small study are highly preliminary and should not influence public health policy. The hypothesis that BPA exposure during pregnancy predisposes to childhood obesity needs to be tested more rigorously in samples from considerably larger studies.”