This is the continuing story of BPA… As I researched this chemical, I was appalled to realize that we’ve known about its danger to humans and Mother Earth for decades! Yet, the U.S. continues to “debate” what should be done. Here is some of the recent history of BPA:
In 2008, it was reported by the Environmental Working Group that the chemical industry (BPA is part of this) is a $3 trillion-a-year global industry. So this is no easy “group” to stand up against. For more than a decade, scientists Frederick Vom Saal and Wade Welshons of the University of Missouri-Columbia, have “turned up the first hard evidence that miniscule amounts of BPA, an artificial sex hormone and integral component of a vast array of plastic products, caused irreversible changes in the prostates of fetal mice,” according to a September 2008 EWG article.
Their findings led to a ban on BPA-laden baby bottles in Canada and increasing support for a similar ban here in the U.S. We’ve had major retailers pull plastic products off their shelves (e.g., WalMart and Toys R Us) and consumers seeking glass baby bottles, as well as more scientific reports which raise more questions about the chemical’s dangers at the trace levels to which we are routinely exposed.
Back in early 1997, when Vom Saal and Welshons produced their research on low-dose BPA, it was risky for them to come out with evidence that challenged the chemical industry. Dow Chemical Company, a major BPA manufacturer, apparently sent a scientist to dispute what they were doing and even to threaten them against their continuing research. These two men did not give up and worked even more feverishly to dig deeper into the BPA story. And those trying to silence them attempted such maneuvers as banning them from research convocations.
The financial stakes for the chemical industry are hard to get our arms around. BPA-based manufactured goods include everything from cell phones and computers to epoxy coatings, and tooth sealants and fillings, making its value possibly incalculable. It’s inside our metal cans and pipes and even in medical devices which are meant to help us. Even though scientists have known since the 1930s that BPA mimics estrogen in the body, somehow this same chemical serves as an essential building block of hard, clear polycarbonate plastics and tough epoxy resins, which are everywhere in our modern world. Vom Saal states, “It’s probably the largest volume endocrine-disrupting chemical in commerce. This stuff is in everything.”
We’ve learned through more study what can happen with plastics made with BPA: they break down easily when heated, microwaved, washed with strong detergents or wrapped around acidic foods like tomatoes, and then trace amounts of the potent hormone leach into food from epoxy lacquer can linings, polycarbonate bottles and other plastic food packaging. In 1998, a reproductive scientist, Patricia Hunt, discovered quite by accident the dangers of BPA. When their resulting control data started going crazy, they searched their lab to find out what had contaminated their results. It turned out that the plastic cages and bottles had been cleaned with a caustic floor detergent and “unleashed enough BPA into the control animals’ food and water to scramble the chromosome alignment in their eggs,” according to the EWG article.
Hunt stated after seeing the results of this event, “Like most Americans, I thought my government protects me from this kind of stuff.” This incident convinced her that “we’re up against big industry, and they’re running pretty effective damage control.” She’s now been involved in BPA research for about a decade and has concluded that “exposure to low levels of BPA–levels that we think are in the realm of current human exposure–can profoundly affect both developing eggs and sperm.”
In 2006, Hunt joined Vom Saal, Welshons and 36 other international BPA experts at a conclave sponsored by the National Institutes of Environmental Health Sciences where the panel issued a “consensus statement.” As Vom Saal sums it up, “particularly for infants but also for adults, there is an extensive body of evidence from animals that should be taken as a very serious warning that human health is being placed at risk due to the current level of exposure of humans to BPA.”
The chemical industry continues to fight aggressively against more regulation. In early 2008, the industry spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to defeat a California legislative proposal to ban BPA in food packaging. They went so far as to send email to food banks stating that a BPA ban would mean the end of distributions of canned goods for the poor!
Yet, in 2008 more threats to humans were discovered. Last year, a Yale University medical school research team found that BPA causes the loss of connections between brain cells. “We observed a devastating effect on synapses in the monkey brain,” said Yale scientist Tibor Hajszan. “In humans, these losses could lead to memory and learning problems and depression.” The chemical industry’s response: they of course found the study flawed and no proof of BPA danger to the human brain. The Yale team leader said their experiment was meant “to more closely mimic the slow and continuous conditions under which humans would normally be exposed to BPA.” He also said the study was “more indicative than past research of how BPA may actually affect humans.” Their team hopes to conduct additional studies to advance our understanding of BPA effects on the brain.
On May 31st of this year, the Washington Post ran an article entitled, “Industry Lobbyists Devised Strategy To Protect Use of BPA.” Click here to read the article in its entirety. The bottom line: The BPA industry was caught plotting and planning to use the same kinds of tactics used previously to counter efforts again tobacco and asbestos–scare tactics and threats as well as public relations campaigns to make consumers doubt the growing body of evidence against BPA use. And who is their biggest target audience to convince that BPA is safe? The main consumers within households and those most concerned about the health and safety of their families–young mothers.
On June 4, 2009, EWG made a plea to their supporters to demand that both Coca-Cola and Del Monte stop using BPA in their food and beverage containers. Lobbyists for each of these companies were involved in the secret strategy meetings where the goal was to create a plan to defeat legislative initiatives at the state level to remove the toxic estrogen chemical from items designed for small children.
The struggle continues, but my hope is that we will see truth prevail. Current and future generations are being impacted by chemicals such as BPA. In the meantime, it’s imperative that we continue to learn all we can and make informed decisions for the health and well-being of ourselves and all those we love.
DID YOU KNOW…
*You can go to this link and read the internal meeting minutes of the food and chemical lobbyists who met in Washington, DC to save the toxic plastic chemical BPA. These minutes revealed a dangerous and unethical strategy to keep families eating and drinking from BPA-laden containers–despite the mounting scientific evidence that exposure to even extremely low levels of BPA can impact health, particularly during early infancy.
*The EWG put out a call to action of its supporters. They requested that we call this toll-free number to protest: Del Monte 1-800-543-3090. Here is a sample script of what to say when you call:
“Hello, My name is ______________. I’m shocked and disappointed in your unethical approach to business when it comes to BPA – placing profits ahead of my family’s health and resorting to fear tactics to mislead consumers about a clearly dangerous chemical. The BPA needs to go – NOW. Thank you.”
FOR TODAY…I will continue to educate myself on BPA. As I look at the research and findings, I will pay close attention to who is behind the data and whose interests are being served by their results. I will also buy-cott companies that are actively trying to keep BPA in our food and beverage containers.
