In the News
Legislation to Ban BPA in Children's Product Would Require Testing by Plastic Suppliers
Nov 24, 2009
Senator Charles E. Schumer (D-NY) introduced legislation on November 16, 2009 that would ban bisphenol-A (BPA) in food and beverage containers marketed to children three and under and require testing by resin suppliers. This a not the first BPA-ban introduced by Schumer; previously he introduced the "BPA-Free Kids Act of 2008" (April 29, 2008) and the "BPA-Free Kids Act of 2009" (March 31, 2009). However, the most recent legislation mandates testing and certifications by plastics and container manufacturers, which was not included in his previous bills. When Schumer unveiled the new legislation—also titled the BPA-Free Kids Act—at the Westside YMCA in Gates, NY, he said it would be part of an agriculture bill scheduled for debate early next year, according to the Democrat Chronicle.com.
The BPA-Free Kids Act introduced on November 16 requires suppliers of plastic resins sold for use in the manufacture of children's food and beverage containers to test the plastic resin and certify that it is
BPA-free. Manufacturers of the containers would also be required to test the plastic resin. This test data would be submitted to the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which would then audit it. The bill would also mandate criminal and/or civil penalties under the Federal Hazardous Substances Act for any violation, including the testing, certification, and labeling requirements. Schumer said, in a press release, that this bill is only a first step and that he is also supporting legislation, introduced by Senator Dianne Feinstein, to permanently ban BPA from all food and beverage containers.
While introducing the legislation, Schumer referred to a recent Consumer Reports study that found BPA in a number of canned foods, including soups, juice, tuna, and green beans. Based on the study, the Consumers Union (CU), which publishes Consumer Reports, recommended eliminating BPA from all materials that come in contact with food. This recommendation was made despite the fact that two of the foods tested were in cans with BPA-free linings: Vital Choice Albacore Tuna and Eden Baked Beans. Later, CU suggested on its blog that BPA in canned foods can come from sources other than the packaging. CU stated:
The fact that the Eden Baked Beans we tested still had any measurable amounts of BPA—even though our tests confirmed the cans did not have epoxy-based linings—suggests that food can have multiple sources of exposure.
BPA is now one of the highest-volume chemicals in the world, with more than 100 tons released into the atmosphere per year. Various studies have found BPA in dust and water samples from around the world.
Many Critical of Consumer Reports' BPA Study
Not everyone agrees with CU's conclusions. Statistical Assessment Service (STATS), a nonprofit group based at George Mason University, stated, "Consumer Reports have come out with a purported investigation into the chemical Bisphenol A that shows scant familiarity with any of the risk assessments of the chemical," in its report, "Consumer Reports BPA study filled with factual errors".
Another person to disagree with CU's conclusions is Dr. Wolfgang Dekant, Professor of Toxicology at the University of Würzburg. In an e-mail to STATS, Dekant said that there is no need for people to stop eating food from cans. He added that Consumer Reports' account of the scientific research on BPA was "highly biased." Consumer Reports refuses to release details of how its BPA study was done or the name of the outside lab it used, according to STATS. Yet, it is vital to understand what analytical methods the magazine used to test the cans so that they can be verified, Dekant points out. (More on Dekant's comments can be found here.)
EPA Study Finds No Effects From Low Dose BPA
A few days before Consumer Reports published its BPA study, the peer-reviewed journal, Toxicological Sciences, published the results of a major Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) study that found low-dose exposures to BPA had no effect on reproductive functions and sexual behaviors in rodents. In the study, "In Utero and Lactational Exposure to Bisphenol A, in contrast to Ethinyl Estradiol, Does not Alter Sexually Dimorphic Behavior, Puberty, Fertility and Anatomy of Female LE Rats," EPA's Bryce C. Ryan and other researchers fed BPA to female rats during pregnancy and lactation, and then studied the female offspring for effects on behavior and reproductive function. No effects from exposure to BPA were found.
Commenting on the EPA study, Steven G. Hentges, American Chemical Council, said "These areas of scientific interest were identified as needing further research in a 2008 report on BPA from the National Toxicology Program. This EPA-funded, well-conducted study is a significant development in better understanding the safety of BPA. Sound scientific review must be the foundation of decisions concerning the government's current and future regulatory process, as chemical management reform is considered."
After publication of the EPA study, Consumer Reports was quick to defend its position. CU's Urvashi Rangan, Ph.D, suggested in a blog entry on the organizations' website that the authors of the EPA study did not find effects from BPA because they "used a specific type of rat (Long-Evans) that has been previously shown to be insensitive or unresponsive to low-dose exposures to BPA and even typical birth-control dosages of synthetic estrogen, which was used as a control in the experiment." However, others disagree.
STATS asked Dr. Earl Gray, one of the EPA study's authors, to respond to Rangan's comment on the strain of rats used. Gray said via e-mail that the ‘insensitive rat" argument has been used for almost a decade to try to dismiss several well done rat studies that obtained negative results. He added, "It demonstrates a lack of understanding about the basic biology of the cellular and molecular basis for tissue-specific responses in different strains of rats published in the last several years in journals like Endocrinology…. It also demonstrates a lack a familiarity with the literature on the effects of estrogens in the Long Evans rat, which has been widely used for decades to study estrogen action, specifically during the period of sexual differentiation." STATS pointed out on its website that Dr. Earl Gray is EPA's Senior Reproductive Toxicologist and has authored or co-authored over 50 papers for peer-reviewed scientific publications.