Hot on HuffPost Parents:
Zoe Armstrong: Five Ways to Fake a Break and Avoid Parenting Burnout
How To Help Victims Of The Tornado
FDA takes on BPA
Filed under: Health & Safety: Babies, Nutrition: Health, Development/Milestones: Babies, In The News, Going Green

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.
Your<span>Voice</span>
Ask Us Anything About Parenting
Recently Asked
- 01/16/2013 Order Sua Sponte to/for: Entered 2 day's before initial scheduling conference
- HICKMAN, DERIAN DOUGLAS PLAINTIFF PRO SE & INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE Defendant Service: Summons Issued Method: Service Issued
- Is it legal to claim relation to a person ? ( OR DOES IT HAVE TO BE FOR MONATERY GAIN) TO BE ILLEGAL ?











ReaderComments (Page 1 of 1)
5-16-2008 @ 9:42AM
Jamie said...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
5-16-2008 @ 9:58AM
Lisa said...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
5-16-2008 @ 11:00AM
Mel said...Amen, Lisa, amen. So much effing hysteria.
5-16-2008 @ 11:34AM
ninainindia said...I completely agree with you!
5-16-2008 @ 7:03PM
queenoqueens said...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
5-16-2008 @ 11:05AM
Kate Schooley said...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
5-16-2008 @ 11:20AM
Mel said...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.
5-16-2008 @ 11:55AM
Tom said..."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
5-16-2008 @ 3:14PM
Jenn said...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
5-17-2008 @ 7:34AM
Derek said...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