Print Friendly and PDF

FDA Rejects Monumental BPA Ban

Mike Barrett
by
March 31st, 2012
Updated 11/03/2012 at 12:13 am
Pin It

plasticbottles1 220x137 FDA Rejects Monumental BPA Ban

It was reported not too long ago that the Food and Drug Administration would make a decision on the banning of the endocrine-disrupting chemical bisphenol-A (BPA). Now, the agency has finally come to a decision, and unsurprisingly, it has decided that there is not enough scientific evidence supporting for the ban of BPA – that is to say, BPA will not be banned from use in food products, plastic packaging, and personal care products.

On Friday the agency made the decision due to lack of scientific evidence to justify the new restrictions, despite tons of evidence showcasing BPAs dangers. The FDA’s problem? Much of the research was performed using mice, and so they claimed that the findings don’t relate to humans.

“While evidence from some studies have raised questions as to whether BPA may be associated with a variety of health effects, there remain serious questions about these studies, particularly as they relate to humans,” the FDA says.

But it seems that many other nations and companies seem to disagree with the FDA, in that they have already taken action in banning or removing the chemical from use. Canada banned BPA from baby bottles in 2007, while the European Union, Turkey, and other countries banned BPA from baby bottled in 2008. What’s more, various companies such as Toys “R” Us and even Walmart claimed to have discontinued use of BPA in children’s items.

While the FDA continues to fall behind many nations in the ban due to ‘lack of scientific evidence’, it seems that the agency secretly doesn’t want the ban altogether. The recent decision made by the FDA was prompted only due to a lawsuit against it after they failed to respond to petition requesting the ban. It took the FDA more than 180 days to respond to the National Resources Defense Council’s petition, which is surpassing a deadline it must reach regarding response to petitions.

BPA has been shown to prompt hyperactivity and depression in young girls, while also being linked to breast cancer in more than 130 studiesInfertility and fertility defects are also caused by BPA exposure. The chemical is used so widely that it has been found in the urine of nearly 93 percent of Americans, with one study finding that eating canned soup can spike urinary bisphenol-A levels by 1,200 percent compared to fresh soup.

About Mike Barrett:
2.thumbnail FDA Rejects Monumental BPA Ban Google Plus Profile |Mike is the co-founder, editor, and researcher behind Natural Society. Studying the work of top natural health activists, and writing special reports for top 10 alternative health websites, Mike has written hundreds of articles and pages on how to obtain optimum wellness through natural health.

From around the web:

  • http://www.indiemind.tv Daniel

    One more time the FDA supports the use of dangerous chemicals in everyday use items. Just like AMALGAM FILLINGS I'm sure this is part of another "SPONSORED" decision. For more info about this lack of common sense and conflict of interests please watch the documentary "Mercury Undercover". http://www.mercuryundercover.com

  • Davep53

    H-m-m-m-m- April 1st.

    I hope Rita is gonna tell us her comment was a joke.

  • Mr OrgaNICK from the

    Ya.. you can stop eating all canned foods (except Eden Organic which doesn't line cans with BPA), and you can also switch from plastic #7 to glass or stainless steel… but.. the real BPA one that pisses me off is THERMAL RECEIPTS!

    Almost every grocery story, supermarket, shopping mall, food outlet has these toxic receipts! The workers hands are covered in the chemical.. currency is covered in the chemical.. and no one ever seems to talk about the worst BPA of all: THERMAL BPA RECEIPTS!!!!! WAKE UP! The receipt themselves are 75% pure BPA by weight!!!!!!! and yes, university studies have shown that BPA from receipts goes through the skin! Me and my sperm say no to BPA and no to your toxic receipts, America!

  • guest

    So is there really no reasonable alternative to using BPA, as in lining cans etc? I recall that Campbell Soups recently said they are eliminating it from all their products, and they also said it was not going to place any significant financial burden on them to do this. How are they able to do it, what is the alternative chemical they are using? If it really is a good alternative, then why is BPA being used at all?

  • david

    Facts are facts even if we are afraid to admit it. Here in France's plastic region you only need to ask in the local spring-water bottling factory and write down the petro chemical plastic granules that go into the bottle blowing plastic presses. Got a doubt Google it! I personally worked in the factories. BPA is used to make petro chemical plastics flexible and as yet haven't got anthing to replace it with. In case you are wondering I do have a diploma as a technician in the plastic industry. Petro-chemicals are DEATH. BON appetite!

  • Rita Atkins

    I'm sick of people writing articles about BPA and using photos of bottled water.

    Bottled Water DOES NOT contain BPA, only some of the large 15LT bottles have it, but none of the small portable sizes have it.

    So please use a photo of canned food or a reusable bottle or anything that has BPA in it.

    Thank You