By Rob Stuart-Vail/Columnist
Wed May 21, 2008, 11:27 AM EDT


Lincoln - Earlier this month, I reported on bisphenol-A, (aka BPA) — a chemical involved in the production of baby bottles and food and formula cans.

Lab tests have shown there is a possibility of BPA altering human development, according to a report from the National Toxicology Program, which is part of the NIH (National Institute of Health). The concern is mainly for the fetus, and for infants.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., filed a bill (S.2928) on April 29 to ban BPA in children’s products. It’s called the BPA-Free Kids Act of 2008, and it treats “as a banned hazardous substance under the Federal Hazardous Substances Act, any consumer product that contains a detectable amount of BPA, and that is designed for or intended for use by, or care of, a child seven years of age or younger.”

Couldn’t be plainer, I thought. Our neighbor to the north reviewed 150 worldwide studies on BPA: Canada became the first country to take a definitive position on the health risks of BPA, officially declaring it toxic to humans. The Canadian government is taking steps to ban the importation and sale of baby bottles made with the BPA polycarbonate.

So when I saw the headline in a dozen newspapers one morning this week, “FDA defends safety of baby bottle chemical,” I was surprised. The story, written by Will Dunham for Reuters News Agency, began with this sentence, “The U.S. Food and Drug Administration yesterday said that it sees no reason to tell consumers to stop using products such as baby bottles made with a controversial chemical found in many plastic items.”

I don’t know about the FDA: in the last few years there have been just too many scandals, too much indecision, lack of awareness of problems and what looks like pandering to the pharmaceutical and manufacturing companies. Maybe I’m a bit paranoid about it because of reading all these news stories about tainted food, improperly tested or un-tested products, and toxic chemicals that don’t belong in our homes or work places.

The Reuters story went on to say that some senators faulted the FDA and the Consumer Product Safety Commission for failing to protect U.S. consumers from BPA as well as phthalates, a class of chemicals used to improve flexibility in plastics. The Senate in March passed legislation that would impose a nationwide ban on phthalates in children's toys and products.

"The FDA could hardly be doing less," Democratic Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts told Norris Alderson, FDA’s associate commissioner for science.

Schumer said the FDA was "looking the other way" on safety concerns about BPA.

"Parents always err on the side of caution when it comes to their kids' health. We think that the law should do the same," he added.

If you’re a senior, you may not be involved with babies and bottles, but then again, a lot of us have children and grandchildren, and these BPA issues may affect them. Some retailers are “phasing out,” or “planning to stop selling” items made with BPA. The “triangle,” if there is one on the bottom of the bottle, may have the number 7 in it. I’d suggest we watch carefully, ask questions, and start searching online for “non-BPA baby bottles.” Lots of stores sell them.



x