Tuesday, January 19, 2010

FDA reverses decision and NOW warns about chemical in plastic

Be the first to read about natural health issues on Heather's Natural Health. Join myFacebook page or follow me on Twitter.
I've been telling you about a controversial chemical, called BPA or bisphenol A, found in many food and baby products including some formula cans, plastic drinking bottles, canned food and other food packaging.

Click here to see how to reduce your exposure.

Consumer Reports and other consumer health advocacy groups have been calling on the government to remove it from food and baby products, but the FDA continues to say more research is needed.
The FDA has issued a new warning to reduce your exposure.
As your health advocate, I like to share these stories with you so you can decide what is best for your family.
Years ago, I started taking a few easy steps to lower my exposure to this chemical because it mimics estrogen.

Click here to see the simple ways I've lowered my exposure.

I included this Associated Press story that summarizes the FDA's new warning:
The Food and Drug Administration has reversed its position on the safety of Bisphenol A, a chemical found in plastic bottles, soda cans, food containers and thousands of consumer goods, saying it now has concerns about health risks.
Growing scientific evidence has linked the chemical to a range of problems, from cancer to sexual dysfunction to heart disease. Federal officials said they are particularly concerned about BPA's effect on the development of fetuses, infants and young children.

"We have some concern, which leads us to recommend reasonable steps the public can take to reduce exposure to BPA," said Joshua Sharfstein, FDA's deputy commissioner. 
They include discarding scratched baby bottles and infant feeding cups and not putting very hot liquid into bottles containing BPA while preparing them for a child.
Regulators stopped short of banning the compound or even requiring manufacturers to label products containing BPA, saying that more studies need to be conducted before they would issue a ban.
 FDA officials also said they were hamstrung from dealing quickly with BPA and other additives by an outdated regulatory framework.
Sharfstein said the agency is conducting "targeted" studies of BPA, part of a two-year, $30 million effort by the administration to answer key questions about the chemical that will help determine what action, if any, is necessary to protect public health. The Obama administration pledged to take a "fresh look" at the chemical.
BPA, used to harden plastics, is so prevalent that more than 90 percent of the U.S. population has traces of it in its urine, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Researchers have found that BPA leaches from containers into food and beverages, even at cold temperatures.
The FDA had long maintained that BPA is safe, relying largely on two studies funded by the chemical industry. The agency was faulted by its own panel of independent science advisers in 2008, who said its position on BPA was scientifically flawed because it ignored more than 100 published studies by government scientists and university laboratories that raised health concerns about BPA. Recent data found health effects even at low doses of BPA-lower than the levels considered safe by the FDA.
The chemical industry, which produces more than 6 billion tons of BPA annually has been fighting restrictions on its use.
In a statement, the American Chemical Council said: "Plastics made with BPA contribute safety and convenience to our daily lives because of their durability, clarity and shatter-resistance. Can liners and food-storage containers made with BPA are essential components to helping protect the safety of packaged foods."
Bisphenol A was discovered to be a synthetic estrogen in the 1930s. By the 1950s, chemists found BPA could be used to make polycarbonate plastics, giving them a "shatter-proof" quality, and the uses for the chemical exploded.
But over the past decade, consumers have placed increasing pressure on manufacturers and retailers to migrate away from BPA. In 2008, Babies R Us and other major retailers told suppliers they would no longer stock baby bottles made with BPA. Last year, the six largest manufacturers of baby bottles announced they would voluntarily stop selling bottles made with bisphenol A to U.S. consumers.
But BPA remains in the epoxy linings of most canned goods, including baby formula. Research has shown that it leaches from the linings into liquid formula but not powered formula.
Environmental groups, public health advocates and consumer organizations applauded the FDA for recognizing concern about BPA, but some said the agency didn't go far enough.
"It's really a shame after all of the studies out there, that they didn't do anything to protect the public health," said Urvashi Rangan, director of technical policy at Consumers Union. "How many pieces of evidence do we need before we have enough to act?"
Canada declared BPA a toxin and banned it from baby bottles in 2008. Similar restrictions have taken root in Chicago, Minnesota, Connecticut and Suffolk County in New York. In Congress, Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., and Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., have filed a bill that would block BPA from all food and drink packaging.
As it awaits additional research results, the FDA plans to change the way it classifies BPA so that it can exercise tighter controls over the chemical, Sharfstein said. Currently, BPA is approved as a "food additive", which means manufacturers are not required to tell the government which products contain BPA and in what amounts. The agency wants to reclassify it as a "food contact material," which would require greater disclosure from manufacturers and would allow the FDA to take fast action if it determined that the material posed a health risk.