In its final report, the National Toxicology Program (NTP) identifies “some concern” for potential adverse effects stemming from exposure to BPA, a component of many epoxy resins and polycarbonate plastics.  Many baby bottles, plastic beverage bottles, and the coating that lines all canned foods are made with BPA.  The NTP reviewed an extensive body of scientific study involving animals and, citing a dearth of human studies from which to draw conclusions, reports the potential for adverse effects on developing children “cannot be dismissed,” according to NTP’s associate director, John Bucher, PhD.

Read full article here.

This comes at the same time as the National Institutes of Health says it has limited concern for BPA.

But then the Yale School of Medicine released it's findings of a study in which they gave monkeys the EPA's "safe" dose of BPA and found negative impacts ON memory and moods.

The bottom line is; Your children, your decision.

MARTIN MITTELSTAEDT

From Thursday's Globe and Mail

September 4, 2008 at 9:39 AM EDT

Exposure to bisphenol A, the hormonally active chemical used to make the linings of most tin cans and hard plastic bottles, may be able to alter brain function, impairing the ability to learn and remember, according to a new study by researchers from Canada and the United States.

The study, conducted on monkeys, whose brain development is similar to that of humans, raises the possibility that ailments such as depression, Alzheimer's disease and schizophrenia may be linked to the controversial chemical.

Almost all people living in industrialized societies are exposed to BPA as a result of trace amounts leaking from food and beverage containers.

The researchers, from the University of Guelph in Ontario and Yale University in Connecticut, found that low-level exposure to bisphenol A, or BPA, was able to block the formation of some types of synapses in the brain, the tissue that allows brain cells known as neurons to communicate with each other. The proper development of these synapses is considered crucial for remembering thoughts and experiences, and impairments in them are common in sufferers of depression and other brain-related ailments.

The study, to be published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, is a significant advance over previous rodent-based findings that BPA is able to impair synapses. That research was open to criticism that what happened in the brains of a mouse or a rat was of limited applicability to the more complex brains of humans.

"If bisphenol A at these kind of low doses is able to interfere with [monkey synapses] then there has to be concern that continuous exposure to bisphenol A is probably not a good thing," said Neil MacLusky, a biomedical science professor at the University of Guelph and one of the study authors.

The researchers were able to cause the harmful effects with a daily dose of 50 micrograms per kilogram of body weight - the human-exposure limit currently considered safe by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (A microgram is one millionth of a gram.) Although Health Canada's limit is half that of the EPA, Dr. MacLusky said standards in both countries are too lax and should be reduced.

EWG press release:

Sat Aug 30 09:16:18 2008 Pacific Time

Shady Chemical Industry Campaign Kills California Ban on BPA in Baby Bottles

SACRAMENTO, Calif., Aug. 30 (AScribe Newswire) -- Bowing to a deceptive, no-holds-barred campaign by the chemical industry, the California State Assembly has failed to approve a bill that would have made the state the first in the nation to remove the toxic endocrine disruptor BPA from baby bottles and children's drinking cups.

By a 35-30 vote on Friday, the last day of the two-year legislative session, Assembly members rejected Senate Bill 1713 by Sen. Carole Migden of San Francisco, which was sponsored by Environmental Working Group (EWG). Fifteen members of the Assembly were either absent or deliberately did not vote.

"California parents should be outraged at any politician in Sacramento who chose chemical industry profits over the health of Californians," said EWG President Ken Cook. "We're going to do everything we can to let their constituents know who stood up to protect infants and toddlers and who did the business of the chemical lobby."

The American Chemistry Council and other chemical lobby groups waged a campaign against SB 1713 that included deceptive direct mail, print and online ads, and phone calls claiming that the measure would affect all canned foods, whose containers are lined with a resin made from BPA. The industry also deployed an army of lobbyists, who bombarded legislators with claims that restrictions on BPA would increase the cost of food for low-income families and even deplete the shelves of community food banks.

In April the National Institutes of Health determined that BPA may pose risks to human development, raising concerns for early puberty, prostate problems, breast cancer, and behavioral impacts from early-life exposures. Pregnant women, infants and young children are most vulnerable to the harmful effects of BPA.

The Canadian government, earlier this year, announced plans to ban BPA from a number of consumer products, and the world's biggest retailer, Wal-Mart, as well as Toys-R-Us are among a growing list of companies taking action to remove products that contain BPA.

"Any chemical that may cause cancer, brain development problems and hormone disruption in animals shouldn't be an ingredient in a baby's bottle," said EWG Senior Analyst Renee Sharp. "The ability of the chemical lobby to flex its poilitical muscles to defeat a common-sense health measure is another reason we need to make sure chemicals are safe for kids before they're allowed on the market."

Legislation introduced earlier this year in the House and Senate - the Kid-Safe Chemicals Act (http://www.ewg.org/kidsafe) - would force the chemical industry to first prove their products are safe before allowed to be used in consumer products.

This week, the National Toxicity Program (NTP) - a research program within the National Institutes of Health - announced that it had finalized its report on the potential health risks of BPA. The report notes that "some concern" remains with respect to BPA's affect on the brain, prostate gland and behavior in fetuses, infants and children.

"We are expressing this level of concern because we see developmental changes occurring in some animal studies at BPA exposure levels similar to those experienced by humans," Bucher said.

Bisphenol-A was first synthesized in the nineteenth century, and was considered in the 1930s for possible use as a synthetic form of estrogen.  Bisphenol-A is known to be a xenoestrogen.  A xenoestrogen is either a natural or synthetic substance that has the same biological effect as estrogen in the human body. In other words, a xenoestrogen is an estrogen mimicking compound.  Specifically, bisphenol-A is an estrogen receptor agonist, which means it can activate estrogen receptors in the body, causing physiological effects similar to estrogen.  For that reason, bisphenol-A is classified as an endocrine system disruptor. The effects of endocrine system disruptors cannot be confined to just one part of the endocrine system. Endocrine system disruptors affect the entire endocrine system and subsequently the whole body.

Here's one article discussing the latest controversy - http://www.webmd.com/news/20080903/bisphenol-a-some-concerns-remain .  Again, it is the public who needs to be protected from the FDA, which claims bisphenol-A does not pose a significant health risk.  Do not take the FDA's word for it.  Do your own research.

Wikipedia has an entry for bisphenol-A, found here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisphenol_A  .  Scrolling down to the section entitled "Health Effects" will give a more realistic picture of the dangers of bisphenol-A.  Simply entering the term bisphenol-A into any search engine will retrieve many articles documenting its toxicity.

For every controversy regarding any toxin, two opposing positions can always be found.  One position is that the substance is known to be toxic and therefore can cause harm to the body.  This position is substantiated by biochemists, professors, and other independent researchers.  The other position maintains that the toxin is safe.  This is the position that is used to calm the public, and is often voiced by those having a vested financial interest involving that toxin in one way or another, or governmental organizations, such as the FDA.  It is not hard to see who is on either side of the argument.

The toxicity of bisphenol-A, and the associated dangers are discussed in the book Why Am I Sick? And What To Do About It , available on Amazon today.   Here's an excerpt from the chapter on environmental toxins - http://rue309.com/toxins.html  .  Just what other toxins are lurking in the environment causing other detrimental health problems?   Don't wait years for the next controversy to hit the news.  Order the book today, and find out now! 

Bisphenol-A List

Sudah banyak orang yang memberi peringatan, rumor, gosip bahkan artikel majalah tentang bahaya plastik.Tetapi tetap saja hanya segelintir orang yang menggubris, peduli atau sampai meneliti lebih lanjut.

Plastik adalah salah satu bahan yang dapat kita temui dihampir setiap barang.Mulai dari botol minum, TV, kulkas, pipa pralon, plastik laminating, gigi palsu, compact disk (CD), kutex (pembersih kuku), mobil, mesin, alat-alat militer hingga pestisida.Oleh karena itu kita bisa hampir dipastikan pernah menggunakan dan memiliki barang-barang yang mengandung Bisphenol-A. Salah satu barang yang memakai plastik dan mengandung Bisphenol A adalah industri makanan dan minuman sebagai tempat penyimpan makanan, plastik penutup makanan, botol air mineral, dan botol bayi walaupun sekarang sudah ada botol bayi dan penyimpan makanan yang tidak mengandung Bisphenol-A sehingga aman untuk dipakai makan.Satu test membuktikan 95% orang pernah memakai barang mengandung Bisphenol-A.

Plastik dipakai karena ringan, tidak mudah pecah, dan murah. Akan  tetapi plastik juga beresiko terhadap lingkungan dan kesehatan keluarga kita.Oleh karena itu kita harus mengerti plastik-plastik yang aman untuk kita pakai.

Apakah arti dari simbol-simbol yang kita temui pada berbagai produk plastik?

1-       PETE#1.

PETE atau PET (polyethylene terephthalate) biasa dipakai untuk botol plastik yang jernih/transparan/tembus pandang seperti botol air  mineral, botol jus, dan hampir semua botol minuman lainnya. Botol-botol dengan bahan #1 dan #2 direkomendasikan hanya untuk sekali pakai.Jangan pakai untuk air hangat apalagi panas.Buang botol yang sudah lama atau terlihat baret-baret.

2-      HDPE#2.

HDPE (high density polyethylene) biasa dipakai untuk botol susu yang berwarna putih susu.Sama seperti #1 PET, #2 juga direkomendasikan hanya untuk sekali pemakaian.

3-      V#3.

V atau PVC (polyvinyl chloride) adalah plastik yang paling sulit didaur ulang.Plastik ini bisa ditemukan pada plastik pembungkus (cling wrap), dan botol-botol.Kandungan dari PVC yaitu DEHA yang terdapat pada plastik pembungkus dapat bocor dan masuk ke makanan berminyak bila dipanaskan.PVC berpotensi berbahaya untuk ginjal, hati dan berat badan.

4-      LDPE#4.

LDPE (low density polyethylene) biasa dipakai untuk tempat makanan dan botol-botol yang lembek. Barang-barang dengan kode #4 dapat didaur ulang dan baik untuk barang-barang yang memerlukan fleksibilitas tetapi kuat.Barang dengan #4 bisa dibilang tidak dapat dihancurkan tapi tetap baik untuk tempat makanan.

5-      PP#5.

PP (polypropylene) adalah pilihan terbaik untuk bahan plastik terutama untuk yang berhubungan dengan makanan dan minuman seperti tempat menyimpan makanan, botol minum dan terpenting botol minum untuk bayi.Karakteristik adalah biasa botol transparan yang tidak jernih atau berawan. Cari simbol ini bila membeli barang berbahan plastik.

6-      PS#6.

PS (polystyrene) biasa dipakai sebagai bahan tempat makan styrofoam, tempat minum sekali pakai, dll.Bahan Polystyrene bisa membocorkan bahan styrine kedalam makanan ketika makanan tersebut bersentuhan.Bahan Styrine berbahaya untuk otak dan sistem syaraf.Selain tempat makanan, styrine juga bisa didapatkan dari asap rokok, asap kendaraan dan bahan konstruksi gedung.Bahan ini harus dihindari dan banyak negara bagian di Amerika sudah melarang pemakaian tempat makanan berbahan styrofoam termasuk negara China.

7-      Other#7.

Other (biasanya polycarbonate) bisa didapatkan ditempat makanan dan minuman seperti botol minum olahraga.Polycarbonate bisa mengeluarkan bahan utamanya yaitu Bisphenol-A ke dalam makanan dan minuman yang berpotensi merusak sistem hormon.Hindari bahan plastik Polycarbonate.

Masih banyak sekali barang plastik yang tidak mencantumkan simbol-simbol ini, terutama barang plastik buatan lokal di Indonesia.Oleh karena itu, kalau anda ragu lebih baik tidak membeli.Kalaupun barang bersimbol lebih mahal, harga tersebut lebih berharga dibandingkan kesehatan keluarga kita.

Pada akhirnya, hindari penggunaan plastik apapun di Microwave.Gunakan bahan keramik, gelas atau pyrex sebagai gantinya.

Hindari juga membuang sampah plastik terutama yang mengandung Bisphenol-A sembarangan karena bahan tersebutpun bisa mencemari air tanah yang pada akhirnya bisa mencemari air minum banyak orang.

“They concluded that current human exposure to the chemical, which is used in many polycarbonate plastics and epoxy resins, is of “some concern” for effects on development of the prostate gland and brain and for behavioral effects in fetuses, infants and children.”

This is no surprise to those of us who have been looking at the independent research, rather than relying on biased-industry research.

“As to how consumers should use this information, Michael Shelby, director of the program's Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction said in a press release, ‘Unfortunately, it is very difficult to offer advice on how the public should respond to this information. More research is clearly needed to understand exactly how these findings relate to human health and development, but at this point we can’t dismiss the possibility that the effects we’re seeing in animals may occur in humans.  If parents are concerned, they can make the personal choice to reduce exposures of their infants and children to BPA.’”

The report also expressed minimal concern for BPA accelerating puberty in females and negligible concern that pregnant women exposed to BPA can result in fetal or neonatal mortality, birth defects or reduced birth weight and growth in their offspring. There is also negligible concern that BPA causes reproductive effects in non-occupationally exposed adults and minimal concern for those adults exposed to higher levels at their job.

And what does the dear FDA think about this?

“’We are pleased to see the finalization of the NTP report,’ said Frank Torti, the Principal Deputy Commissioner and chief scientist at the FDA. ‘The FDA will consider this final report in our role as a regulatory agency and joins NTP in the call for additional research in this important area.’”

In other words – just a bunch of hogwash. The FDA continues, time and time again, to protect the industries, not the American public. I have pretty much decided that if the FDA has approved something and declares it “safe,” then avoid it. I try to look at the EU and other agencies who actually care about the health and well-being of its citizens. Any faith I have had in the FDA is lost.

Related Articles
BPA free bottles, sippy cups and more
BPA and phthalate free pacifiers
BPA and phthalate free teethers and rattles
Lead and PVC free lunch boxes
Avent introduces BPA free bottle
BPA in canned food
How to avoid BPA
BPA in infant formula

Chemicals that leach from plastic containers into food include suspected carcinogens or endocrine disrupters, which have been linked to reproductive system harm. Plastic used for containers can be identified by their recycling codes, as listed in this article.

Please read the entire article at Care 2 Make a Difference

As far as I know there are not any BPA-free Avent or MAM pacifiers. The bulky part that sits on the baby's mouth contains BPA, not the nipple. Silicone and latex nipples on bottles, sippy cups and pacifiers do not contain BPA. 

And since phthalates will be found in teethers, bath toys and rubber duckies for the next 6 months, I am working on lists for those too, so check back for more lists!

BPA & Phthalate Free Pacifiers

Evenflo: Mimi Soft Touch, Mimi Premium, Mimi Neo One-Piece, Vizion, Fuzion, and Illuzion
Gerber: NUK Original, NUK Classic, NUK Nautical
Gumdrop Silicon Pacifiers
Happy Baby Soothers
Natursutten Natural Rubber Paci
Playtex: Playtex “Binky” (one piece silicone pacifier), Binky Most Like Mother Latex Pacifier, Binky Most Like Mother Silicone Pacifier, Binky Angled Pacifier, Ortho-Pro Pacifier  
The First Years: Soothies Silicone, Teething Pacifier,  Safe Comfort, Ultra Kip
Vice Versa Binky w/ Case

Please check back for more lists, coming soon!

Related Articles
BPA free Sippy cups, Bottles and more!
President Signs Bill to ban lead, phthalates
Cloth baby wipes showdown
Most sunscreens do not work

"But environmental groups were quick to criticize the agency's conclusions, which they said relied on industry-funded studies.

"It's ironic FDA would choose to ignore dozens of studies funded by (the National Institutes of Health) — this country's best scientists — and instead rely on flawed studies from industry," said Pete Myers, chief scientist for Environmental Health Sciences.

Myers said the agency disregarded recent studies of bisphenol's effects included in the National Toxicology Program's April draft report.

That group's review of animal studies suggested low doses of bisphenol can cause changes in behavior and the brain, and that it may reduce survival and birth weight in fetuses.”

California is moving to ban BPA along with 11 other states (I live in a non-progressive state, so I am sure mine is not one of these 10). The March of Dimes has also reported an increase in the number of babies born with low birth weight over the past several years. Low birth weight is a side effect of BPA exposure.

Additionally, the American Chemistry Counsel has launched an ad campaign (a misleading one at that might I ad) trying to convince consumers that BPA is safe. They will apparently stop at nothing to convince us this crap is safe.

Just to fuel more suspicion of the FDA’s credibility is they announced late Friday they would form a subcommittee to do their own study on BPA. What, why now? I thought it was “safe?” What is the FDA hiding? That is just odd.

So as parents, we have to protect our children by continuing to buy products that are BPA-free.  And thankfully retails like Wal-Mart and Target, and the manufactures themselves are taking the imitative to remove BPA from their products. So that makes the search a little easier. Of course breastfeeding mama’s should avoid other places where BPA lurches, such as canned foods and polycarbonate water bottles since BPA can be passed through breast milk. And formula fed infants are more at risk since most formula cans are lined with BPA, so be sure to choose a powdered which will have lesser amounts of BPA, ready-to-feed liquid formula has the most BPA.

The president just signed a bill to ban phthalates and lead from products targeted to children under 12. BPA should also be added to this list. For now, I can only believe the independent researching which cites the harmful effects of BPA. You can’t trust the biased industry research or the FDA who relies solely on the industry research. But the independents have no reason to be anything but straight and honest. They have nothing to lose or gain, so for now, that’s the best we’ve got to go on. And the independent research shows BPA is not safe.

Related Articles
BPA free sippy cups, bottles and more!

Whole Foods realizes there was a system breakdown and it taking means to ensure this will not happen again. Read the NY Times article.

This is troubling. I expect more out of Whole Foods. Their private label 365 brand canned food is lined with BPA, their 365 brand body care line contains dioxanes (a carcinogen) and they do not mention this on their packaging and have no plans to make a change. On the latter, they are involved in a law suit in California, where its required to have proper package labeling for products containing dioxanes.    

So disappointing, Whole Foods. I am seriously rethinking my loyalty now. I want to be able to go to a store where I do not have to worry about pesticides, dioxanes, e-coli, etc. Even now, I still need to research and read product labels before picking anything up off the shelves no matter where I shop. I did feel safer with WF's produce and meat, but that system has an obvious breakdown. Sure no one is perfect, but WF has certainly had it's fair share of negatives in the very recent past. I hope they clean up their act and live up to consumer expectations.

Last I had heard, Avent had no plans to make a BPA-free version of their popular bottle. I am glad to see they had a change of heart.

You can purchase the BPA-free Avent bottle on Amazon.com

Many people have asked me, upon hearing my plans, "What? Why would you do that? We don't need librarians any more. We have Google!"

I then promptly pull out my eyebrows and fling them at the offender.

Yes, we live in the information age. Any damn fool can get onto the internet, and a wealth of information is available at their fingertips. Who needs librarians to open the door for you? You can walk in yourself now!

There is an inherent problem with this. Just like you can't believe everything you see on TV, you can't believe everything you read online. If you're a brand-new inductee to the Internet, you might not realize that. If you have an agenda or a prejudice about a given topic, you might put on blinders. There is a lot of trash on the Internets (LIKE THIS BLOG, FOR INSTANCE! See? Solid proof).

When information can spread like wildfire across the Internet, misinformation is common. You can tell people to only use .org, .edu, or .gov for trustworthy resources, but often, they only hear what they want to hear. Many people never hear the message about .org, .edu, and .gov. I wish I could walk around with a sign on my forehead that says, ".ORG, .EDU, .GOV, OR DIE!" But then everyone would know that I'm a nutjob.

Case in point: Autism and vaccines. Countless studies have been performed over the years that show that there is no discernible link between childhood vaccinations and autism. Autism appears at the same time that vaccinations are given. So does potty training. Do cotton underpants cause autism? Doubtful. Correlation does not equal causation. Or, just because two things are related does not mean that one causes the other.

For instance, violent crime increases in the summer. So do ice cream sales. Does ice cream cause crime? No. Heat inspires people to eat ice cream, and it also can flare tempers that can result in violent crime.

Do vaccines cause autism? No. They simply happen to occur at the same time. Even when thimerosal, the preservative that was blamed was removed from all vaccines, the rate of autism diagnosis continued to rise. In fact, the rate of autism is the same for children who are vaccinated and children who are not. Where is the evidence that vaccines cause autism?

However, websites abound that claim this. There have been hearings in Congress about this. There are organizations and groups that are still spreading this information, and they look real. They are lying to you. If this misinformation were to catch hold, no children would be vaccinated. Suddenly, we would have measles, mumps, chicken pox, rubella, meningitis, HPV and hepatitis running rampant. How is that a good thing? Of course autism is an awful diagnosis. But children dying of preventable diseases in droves is worse.

Case in point: BPA! What is BPA? Bisphenol-A. It is a polymer found in plastics stamped '7'. It is extremely common. It has been found that rats who are given high doses of BPA are at an elevated risk of developing cancer. The amount that they consume is generally around 10x the amount that humans are exposed to.

So, our illustrious Congress make a fuss about it, and every plastic and polymer maker (including the polymer maker that Bear for whom Bear does polymer research) is scrambling to pull BPA out of its products, and find a replacement.

Why? Because an extremely large quantity of something caused potential harm to rats? The dose is the poison. Water is large quantities can kill you. Remember the woman who died after drinking a lot of water to win a Wii for her kids? Too much food can kill you- look at all the obese people who are slowly dying of diabetes, heart disease, and related problems. Should we ban food and water? Bear needs to take insulin every day in order to live. Should he give himself a whole bottle of insulin, just in case? No, he would definitely die then. He needs a very precise amount.

The amount of BPA that leeches from baby bottles in dishwashers is a miniscule fraction of the amount given to the rats. Millions, perhaps billions, of children (INCLUDING ALL OF US GROWNUPS WHO ARE HERE AND HEALTHY) were fed using BPA bottles. Where is the evidence that the small amount we may consume is harmful?

This hysteria is unnecessary. So is the hysteria over vaccines and autism. Scientific research has shown over and over that these things are not a problem. The risk of danger from banning vaccines is far greater than the risk of danger from banning BPA, but they are still evidence of a greater problem: misinformation on the Internet. This hysteria wouldn't reach this point if we didn't have the Internet. We shouldn't ban the Internet: what would I do at work? However, librarians are trained information seekers. The purpose, the raison d'etre, of librarianship is to enable the user to access information that is reliable and authoritative. The Internet does not do that. Google does not do that. It simply opens the door.

So, don't tell me that librarians aren't necessary. Somebody has to help you figure out why it's ok to vaccinate your kids and let them touch BPA plastic. We're good for your blood pressure!

So, here: if you don't believe me, check out these RELIABLE, AUTHORITATIVE sources:

http://www.bisphenol-a.org/

http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/pubs/autism/mmr/

Unfortunately, I found a .org website that sits on the fence about vaccines and autism. I will not link to it, because I refuse to spread the misinformation. Officially, they do not come out and say that autism and vaccines are linked, but if you touch them with a feather, they will fall off the fence on that side. They also provide no evidence, no links, and no authority. Always trust a site that links to its sources, or provides appropriate citations. Never trust a site that merely presents its point of view with no evidence to back it up.

There are more where that came from, but both of those cover all the necessary info.

On the whole, plastics have been getting bad publicity lately.  Much of the bad press, however, is related to research – including that done by the Environmental Protection Agency (www.epa.gov) and other health groups.  While personally, I believe there are certain types of plastics we should try to avoid to protect our health and the health of the planet, it is also important to know that plastics are a huge part of where we are today – making up a large percentage of medical devices, appliances, automotives, industry materials and electrics (including your cell phone that some say may raise the risk of cancer, autism or other conditions…of course, that is a whole other issue).  It may be a “catch 22”, though, since we benefit from them but also may be harmed by them.  You see, plastics can release chemicals into the environment during their production and also often their use and degradation (i.e. in landfills or in the repeated re-use of water bottles).  The implications on human health, including whether these chemicals increase the risk for cancer or childhood illnesses, however, are not fully known.

Take some calm in the fact that we can take many steps when it comes to the foods and beverages we consume and how to store them safely.  Listed below are some steps you can take to better the earth and your health.  If you choose to use plastics safely, you can lower your exposure to harmful chemicals such as BPA (Bisphenol A) and phthalate - both of which may disrupt human hormones when they leach out of plastics and into foods and beverages.  Even though a June 2008 European report is now revising their stance on BPA and feels it may not be a risk to human health, other reports point otherwise.  The conservative approach is to avoid it.

• Look at the bottom of plastic containers for the recycling symbol (a triangle made of chasing arrows).  The number inside that symbol indicates the type of plastic used.  Avoid plastics with the numbers 3, 6 and 7.  Safer plastics include numbers 1, 2, 4 and 5.
• Avoid refilling disposable water or beverage bottles, such as the water sold in cases at the grocery store.  In fact, try not to buy them at all, since they create a lot of waste.  Americans throw out more than 30 million water bottles per day!  Although most of these bottles are made of safer plastics, they can still degrade and release chemicals into the water you drink – especially after repeated use or if they get hot (say, sitting in your hot car or in hot storage).
• Instead of buying disposable water bottles, buy a thermos-style water bottle to refill on your own.  Safer brands include Thermos, Kleen Kanteen, Sigg, Thinksport and New Wave.
• Limit the use of plastic cling wrap.  If you do use it, try not to let it touch the food – and definitely do not put it in the microwave or let it sit on top of hot food.  Some companies are developing newer types of cling wrap with less harmful ingredients – so, this may certainly help the industry!
• Choose fresh or frozen produce when you can, to avoid exposure to BPA, which can leach out of canned food/drink linings and into the food/drink.  Do not worry about eating canned foods or drinks some of the time.  The effect is likely more harmful if these foods are eaten in large quantities. 
• Store food in glass, stainless steel, porcelain or ceramic containers.  If you choose to continue using plastic containers, avoid filling them with hot foods/beverages and try to wash them by hand, rather than in the dishwasher.
• Choose baby bottles made of glass or BPA-free materials.  Most companies are choosing to remove BPA from baby bottles in the near future.  Safe brands include Born Free, Sassy MAM, Medela, Think Baby Bottles, Adiri, Green to Go, Evenflo, Momo, Dr Brown’s glass bottles, Wee-go and the Playtex Drop-in Liners (the liners and nipples are BPA-free, but the bottles are not yet).  Other brands may be available, too.  Playtex should be all BPA-free by the end of the year.

While we can worry that all the materials around us may harm our health in some way (especially if taken in high doses), it is important to take small steps.  Do the things realistic for your lifestyle to reduce your risks for exposure to potentially harmful chemicals. And, remember, it is likely that small amounts of these chemicals may indeed have no effect on human health.  High exposure in adults or any exposure to fetuses, infants and children may be the biggest health threat. 

See the post below, written in August 2007, and added to the site today to give you further information.

Here are some more links you may find helpful:

http://healthychild.org/blog/comments/more_news_on_bpa_and_regulatory_failure/

http://www.factsonplastic.com/

http://healthychild.org/

http://www.plasticsinfo.org

Plastics play a huge role in our daily lives – especially when you think about food and drink packaging and storage.  We use plastic wraps, disposable plastic containers, condiment bottles, you name it.  Many of us microwave foods in plastic containers and drink beverages like water and soda from plastic bottles on a daily basis.  Pet food is often stored in plastic tubs and babies drink from plastic bottles.  Metal cans (i.e. for canned vegetables) are lined in plastic.  Plastics are everywhere. 

Of recent interest is the concern over plastic baby bottles.  In 1999, Consumer Reports issued concerns that a chemical, known as bisphenol A (BPA) could leach from baby bottles.  The FDA (Food and Drug Administration) and plastics industry tried to calm consumers and said consumers need not worry and that there was no health risk from plastic baby bottles.

However, this year, a panel of experts from the NIH (National Institutes of Health) and EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) published a statement in the journal, Reproductive Toxicology, that BPA is a chemical that raises “high concern” for children.  The chemical itself has been shown to increase the risk of cancer and reproductive damage in laboratory animals.  The FDA is currently re-investigating the issue.

This of course has sent many moms in a craze to find BPA-free baby bottles.  Now, many baby and parenting sources are recommending switching to BPA-free bottles, which can more easily be identified by their opaque color.  BPA bottles are clear.  According to the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention), BPA was found in the bodies of 95% of Americans tested.  A recent news report stated that the highest concern for BPA exposure is to fetuses and newborns.

If you feel overwhelmed by the latest health concerns over plastics, you are not alone.  There are plenty of groups out there telling you to avoid certain products and only choose certain others.

To make it more simple, try to follow these tips about plastic safety:

• Avoid using plastic wrap or plastic containers in the microwave, since they may release unsafe chemicals when heated
• Only refill disposable water bottles a few times before recycling, to avoid breakdown products from leaching into your water
• Avoid using #3, #6 and #7 baby bottles and sippy cups (look at the bottom of the bottle for the number designation)
• Choose safer plastics for food storage (#1, #2, #4 and #5) or use glass, lead-free ceramic or stainless steel
• Try not to put very hot products into plastic containers
• Toss any worn or scratched plastic containers
• Purchase toys from natural materials and pay attention to recall lists.  The recent scares about lead-tainted paint found on children’s toys has increased toy safety concerns
• Use paper shopping bags, rather than plastic.  Better bet – bring your own canvas shopping bags to reduce waste!

We cannot avoid all the “potential” health concerns in our world.  However, we can educate ourselves, be wary of product recalls, choose natural and minimally processed foods and containers and have regular medical check ups.  As more and more is known about potential health hazards, more and more companies will offer alternative, safer products.  If you see a product for sale that is marketed as being a safe alternative, figure out whether it is all hype or worth the expense.  And, don’t forget – balance is key.  You cannot win every battle nor avoid every hazardous exposure.  All you can do is your best.  Reading this article and gaining more knowledge is a great place to start.

Julie Whittington is a Registered Dietitian in the Lake Norman area.  Reach her at juliewhittingtonrd@yahoo.com. 
 

Something as transparent an industry hit piece as this certainly got my curiosity aroused. So, I went to BPAfacts.org and clicked on the "BPA Facts" button hiding at the bottom of the screen. This opened a document in a separate window entitled "The FACTS about Bisphenol A (BPA)". I won't elaborate on what was said, other than to say that many assertions were made about government investigations and studies that all concluded that BPA is safe for consumers, even fetuses and newborns. (Wow, that certainly raises a red flag, doesn't it?) One other small thing: At the very bottom, in small print is a footer line: "A Project of the American Chemistry Council".

OK, now we're getting somewhere. According to Wikipedia, the American Chemistry Council is the former Chemical Manufacturers' Association, and is

"... in charge of improving the public image of the chemical industry. The trade group represents US Chemical Companies as well as the plastics and chlorine industries, formerly known as the American Plastics Council, the Center for the Polyurethanes Industry and the Chlorine Chemisty Council."

It doesn't take much to speculate what is going on. Someone is concerned that BPA, manufactured by our friends in the chemical industry, may be harmful, especially to fetuses and infants. Given the way the world works, this is probably based on new studies that weren't available in the past. Now, state legislators are proposing to restrict usage based on these new studies and the chemical industry, ever more watchful of its profits than public health, is engaging in scare tactics to protect its business. Of course, they wouldn't be so transparent as to send out a mailer saying who they are and that their profits are at stake. So, they send out an anonymous hit piece filled with scare tactics and no real information.

This is, of course, not a new issue. For several years stories have been arising about the possible harmful effects of BPA and plasticizers used in the manufacturer of plastics. In particular, evidence is starting to appear that they damage the development of endocrine systems in young children. The surprise here is that legislators, who are usually sensitive to corporate interests, apparently are concerned enough to actually propose legislation to restrict BPA use.

For more information, go to Wikipedia's article on Bisphenol A. There you will find a much more neutral assessment of BPA and its possible risks. As for me, I expect to be contacting the local legislator and urge him to vote yes on the bill.

One of the other changes I made, about 7 months ago, was a switch from plastic dishes for the kids to non-toxic, lead free enamel ware. Oh, now I can't remember the name, oh yeah Golden Rabbit enamelware for children. I love them, and particularly because they have a vintage look to them. 

I also went to the added expense months ago to purchasing some Sigg sports Bottles for Olivia and Jackson. We used them for quite a while, and I was sending one to school with Olivia everyday. However, they've since been lost and one even got left out in the curb and was subsequently squished under someone's tire. They were cool while they lasted, I haven't seen them for sale locally, but I haven't really looked either.  

The AFC Panel, in its final session, took into account both the previous and the most recent information and data available on the way that BPA and related substances are handled in the human body. The Panel concluded that the exposure of the human foetus to BPA would be negligible because the mother rapidly metabolises and eliminates BPA from her body. The scientists also concluded that newborns are similarly able to metabolise and eliminate BPA at doses below 1 milligram per kilogram of body weight per day. This implies that newborns could effectively clear BPA at levels far in excess of the TDI of 0.05 mg/kg bw set by the Panel and therefore its 2006 risk assessment remains valid."

Despite hundreds of news reports on the alleged risks of BPA in the United States and Canada,  few media outlets reported this latest research and comment by the European Union, even though its scientists dismissed concerns in the U.S. and Canada over the safety of the chemical as being based on poor science:

"EFSA took note of the U.S. National Toxicology Program's draft brief on BPA and of the Canadian government's recent Draft Screening Assessment on BPA, which took into account findings from the low-dose studies, notably with respect to neurodevelopmental toxicity, though both pointed out that these studies were limited in rigour, consistency and biological plausibility.

EFSA also took into account the recent report published by one of the institutes of the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre ^_[2] which concluded that due to the low confidence in the reliability of the developmental neurotoxicity studies and the lack of consistency in the results of behavioural testing, no conclusions can be drawn from these studies. This opinion is very similar to that of EFSA in 2006."

The U.S. and Canadian media also largely ignored the 2006 risk assessment when reporting on the risks of BPA, even though the report explained in detail the scientific reasons for rejecting the studies that claimed there was a risk.

The good news is that Bisphenol-A is likely not the health risk that we once thought. 

The bad news is that I bought all new BPA-Free bottles and sippie cups.

Oh well.  One of the benefits of trusting the scientific process is that I can take measured precautions to alarming science-based health warnings  (such as the cell phone scare of 08), and I still have the opportunity to stay flexible and change my mind when those risky products are given the "all clear".   I stand by my advice for families to avoid unnecessary and potentially toxic products that are in the process of being vetted by scientists; certainly, when there are options that objectively pose fewer hypothetical health risks.

The European Food Safety Authority has issued a statement that the plastic ingredient Bisphenol-A is safe for humans after all.  (Glad it's the Europeans, or nobody would believe it.)  The reason for the drastic change in opinion?  It turns out that new information proves that humans (even newborns) are much better able to metabolize BPA than rats , which means that instead of it junking up our hormones, we fire it all out in a stream of warm urine.  I knew those kidneys were good for something!

Something tells me that this news is going to take a while to filter out to the population, and even when it does, few will believe it.  Granted, this does not completely end the debate on BPA, but it does swing the evidence strongly in favor of it's safety.  I'm glad that we have one less toxin to panic about.

And, hey, anything that will make some fussy little ones eat right?

I was so excited that maybe Bento boxes could be offered in Tiny Tapir - after all, packing food from home is a great way to save money as well as to save the environment (no need for disposable packaging if one has packed from home, versus the Styrofoam boxes, throwaway chopsticks and disposable cups and plastic bags - can anyone tell me what the heck is the point of those tiny pink plastic bags that can only fit 1 box in it? Isn't it the same as just carrying the box in your hand instead of putting it in the bag also?).

However, Bento boxes are made out of cheap plastic. I still haven't managed to find a bento box or bento accessories that are made out of plastics not containing Bisphenol-A.

Bisphenol-A is found in most plastics - also, in all Tupperware brand plastics. Which really disappointed me because I wanted to stock their Go-Flex range (a box that folds flat).

As the Salon article states, "accumulating scientific research indicates the chemical may be adversely affecting women's ability to have children and children's reproductive health. Recent studies link bisphenol A to obesity, breast and prostate cancer, and neurological disorders."

Eek.

Let me just highlight - adversely affecting ... children's reproductive health. Also linked to obesity and cancer

Not to be alarmist, but seriously, I would rather force my kid to eat plain old boiled round eggs rather than a cute Hello Kitty or Melody shaped egg that was put (while still hot) in a plastic container with Bisphenol-A in it. Talk about perfect conditions for leaching chemicals into food.

Hello, Aren't I cute? But really I am Evil Kitty, here to make you FAT *evil kitty laughter*

Bisphenol-A products don't need to be boiled in order to leach - some leaching will happen even without extreme temperatures, which is why a lot of overseas mothers are refusing even to allow babies to use bottles, pacifiers or any product with Bisphenol-A in it.

Anyone have any links to Bento boxes and Bento accessories that are BPA free?

(I realize I'm being a total party pooper with this post...)