.jpg)
FDA takes on BPA
Categories: Health & Safety, Eating & Nutrition, Development, In The News, Environment
The Federal Drug Administration has officially made a statement concerning their slant on BPA, the chemical found in much plastic and a lot of baby bottles. BPA, full name bisphenol A has been under fire for some time as being dangerous to young children.
The FDA on Wednesday said it saw no reason for consumers to stop purchasing baby bottles containing BPA, contending that there is a large body of evidence supporting the fact that products containing the chemical are safe. Although multiple studies have shown side effects in animals exposed to the chemical, the FDA cites two studies where no reason to use caution with regard to products containing the chemical. Both studies cited by the FDA were industry-funded.
Consumer groups and politicians alike have accused the FDA of failing to take action on this and other safety issues, contending they bend to industry interests. Polycarbonate plastic, what keeps plastic bottles shatter-resistant, is made of BPA. People consume the chemical along with liquid, water or food inside containers containing BPA.
Recent Posts
- Reviews: What's New This Week (11/06/2009)
- Jim Carrey's "A Christmas Carol" Creepy in a Good Way (11/06/2009)
- Twitter Follow Friday on ParentDish! (11/06/2009)
- Babies Pick Up Mothers' Accents In The Womb (11/06/2009)
- Recall: Adventure Playsets (11/06/2009)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Jamie 5-16-2008 @ 9:42AM
The FDA also doesn't think sugar is bad, but that doesn't mean I want my kid to have it, say, 8 times a day!
Reply
Lisa 5-16-2008 @ 9:58AM
BPA and phthalates are just the latest thing that people like to be panicked by. Just like global warming. Or wait, I think it's global cooling now.
Reply
Mel 5-16-2008 @ 11:00AM
Amen, Lisa, amen. So much effing hysteria.
ninainindia 5-16-2008 @ 11:34AM
I completely agree with you!
queenoqueens 5-16-2008 @ 7:03PM
What I love is people that have no scientific background, and no way to assess the validity of these studies and yet they're so darn certain about what the truth is
Kate Schooley 5-16-2008 @ 11:05AM
Stick your head in the sand if it makes you feel better, but here in Canda, products containing BPA have been pulled off the shelves and the government is issuing a federal ban on the use of BPA. That's what happens when the government is not in bed with the plastics industry...
Reply
Mel 5-16-2008 @ 11:20AM
Perhaps Kaite, although I'd personally say that's what happens when government is in bed with *everyone.* I happen to like the government staying the eff out of my bed. If the gubbmint leaves me the hell alone, they can be in bed with whomever they choose.
Now, as for the other portion of your comment. Your logic seems to be as follows: "Be skeptical if you want, but Canada has outlawed it so it *must* be bad." No.
Tom 5-16-2008 @ 11:55AM
"Both studies cited by the FDA were industry-funded."
So?? Are they inaccurate? Is the science unsound? Lacking any proof to the contrary (and your post lacks proof to the contrary) this is just an ad hominem attack and sloppy posting. And "Consumer groups and politicians alike have accused the FDA of failing to take action on this and other safety issues" Doesn't qualify as a repudiation of the FDA decision.
If you think the FDA is shilling for industry, review the science they used and prove that BPA is dangerous. Otherwise you're just fueling alarmism.
Reply
Jenn 5-16-2008 @ 3:14PM
Canada examined the exact same studies that the FDA did and got the same results -- and chose to act based on those. The US agencies chose not to act.
Since the US agencies have a history of not acting to protect the consumer (but rather to protect big business, particularly the petroleum and related industries), I think I will follow the lead of Canada and the EU.
Even if not for BPA, reducing use of plastics, and thus use of petroleum, is not a bad thing, so I will continue to vote with my dollars by purchasing non-plastic, sustainable products.
Reply
Derek 5-17-2008 @ 7:34AM
Allright... let me get this straight... BPA is harmful to my child because its toxic.. ok... true enough.
But of course the studies that state this were tested on animals and they injected pure amounts of BPA into the bloodstream of said animals.
So... conclusion... If I liquify my baby's bottle and inject it into his bloodstream I have a good chance of giving him cancer.
Well while I may harm my baby by giving him a plastic bottle... I prob risk his life just as much by taking him for car rides... giving him solid foods (chokeing hazard!)... using the microwave... turning on the TV... walking under a powerline... haveing a gun in the house... sharp corners on furniture.. toys from China... Oye... gotta close my eyes for three seconds to catch my breath, WAIT! he could very easily hurt/maim/kill himself in those three seconds...
Reply