Bisphenol A Dangers were Known before 2003

* Update - Jan. 22. This issue has been broadcast on CBC's Here & Now Monday & Tuesday. It is good to see it becoming more public knowledge. Evening news broadcasts could easily devote a section of their hour long formats to health news/consumer alerts or health education.

You really have to question all plastics, and can liners, or avoid them as much as possible. Check the number at the bottom of bottles and avoid # 7 bottles for sure!

Even five years ago, there were already 40 studies that polycarbonate plastics containing Bisphenol A (BHA) were dangerous. In 2003, it was known that exposure to low amounts of BHA caused genetic defects in mice. In fact, in a major study by Dr. Patricia Hunt & colleagues, mice drank from old baby bottles, that leached (BPA) into their systems. Damage occurred in the egg cells of female mice. Hunt explained, "so when the cells divide, their chromosomes don't line up...In humans, this results in spontaneous abortion, birth defects, or mental retardation."

Other experts were quoted in the same article mentioned above. Biologist Frederick S. von Saal has studied BPA for many years, and had this to add:

In a recent study, fetal umbilical blood shows higher BPA levels than we generated in mice. Human exposure levels are already high. The horrifying thing is that it looks as though these effects in the Hunt study happen at lower doses than what is actually found in human fetal blood - umbilical cord blood.

What about other plastic compounds? Another plastic compound called Antimony, used in PET bottles, has been and is being studied for its potential hazardous effects. How many others are unsafe, and are years aways from garnering the danger status of BPA?

There are food containers of every shape and size that millions use all their lives. Bisphenol A, and any other plastic compound may very well have contributed to a variety of health problems, including prostate enlargement and cancer, and breast cancer because it has been seeping into food and liquid.

The bottling industry has carried out their own studies, and guess what, they have not found any harmful effects from BPA, despite 90% of 150 independent studies which says otherwise. I guess that unless you want to be fired, industry sponsored research designs will have predictable outcomes.

Previous Bisphenol A posts

Parents Beware: Baby Bottles & Canned Baby Food Contain Toxic Ingredient - Bisphenol A

Plastic baby bottles and canned baby food contain a substance that is listed as toxic. It can leach out and be subsequently ingested by infants and any user of containers with that compound.

Here's a big reason to be aware of this:

Bisphenol A is used in polycarbonate baby bottles and the epoxy linings of cans, including those for almost all types of infant formula. Because BPA can mimic estrogen, many researchers suspect it is a factor in health trends linked to sex hormone imbalances, such as prostate and breast cancer. (see rest of Globe article below)

Bisphenol A (BPA) is a synthetic chemical compound used in a wide range of consumer products and is classed by the Government of Canada as a hormone disruptor. (see Bisphenol A Fact Sheet here)

Bisphenol A has been getting a lot of attention in the last year particularly because it's been linked with breast and prostate cancer. I posted last year when it made the news then. Recently an article appeared in the Globe, which I have saved (the online version at the Globe is only available if you purchase it).

Parents can reduce child exposure by avoiding food and beverage containers made of polycarbonate plastic (often identified by the number 7 in the recycling symbol) and by avoiding plastic-lined (white-coloured) canned foods.

Here's the whole article from this Globe & Mail site:

Bisphenol A most harmful to infants, study says

MARTIN MITTELSTAEDT

From Friday's Globe and Mail

January 11, 2008 at 3:58 AM EST

A new U.S. study on the plastic compound bisphenol A indicates that the chemical may be far more dangerous for young children than for adults.

The finding has been submitted to Health Canada for its current safety review of BPA, and bolsters the case for limiting bisphenol A exposure in infants, who lack the capacity that adults have to detoxify it.

Bisphenol A is used in polycarbonate baby bottles and the epoxy linings of cans, including those for almost all types of infant formula. Because BPA can mimic estrogen, many researchers suspect it is a factor in health trends linked to sex hormone imbalances, such as prostate and breast cancer.

In the new study, researchers found that neonatal mice exposed to trace amounts of bisphenol A, either orally or through injection, ended up with similar amounts of the chemical in their blood because they do not have high amounts of the liver enzyme that breaks it down into an inactive form.

Young rodents don't fully develop the capacity to make the enzyme until they are weaned, a trait they share with humans. By contrast, adult rodents fed BPA have been found to rapidly clear it from their bodies using the enzymes.

Similar experiments are not done on babies for ethical reasons, but given the similarity of biological processes among mammals, many scientists consider the results applicable to humans.

The research study is expected to be issued next week by the peer reviewed journal Reproductive Toxicology.

The finding is "extremely scary," said Dr. Frederick vom Saal, a professor in the biological sciences department of the University of Missouri, and a member of the team that conducted the study.

Dr. vom Saal is a leading authority on BPA, and he contended that formula and polycarbonate baby bottles expose children to worrisome amounts of the synthetic estrogen. "You are significantly dosing your baby with bisphenol A every day and every time the baby is consuming food," he said.

Health Canada said in a statement to The Globe and Mail yesterday that "it is too early for us to state whether we have a concern or not with infant formula or baby bottles which contain BPA."

But two major formula makers - Nestle Canada and Mead Johnson Nutritionals - dismissed the concerns.

"Health Canada, as well as other international authorities such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, have approved the use of BPA in food packaging," Nestle Canada said in an e-mail statement.

"The preponderance of valid scientific literature right now upholds the position that BPA and the levels found in the food chain of humans is absolutely safe," said Gail Wood, spokeswoman for Evansville, Ind., based Mead Johnson. She also discounted the significance for humans of research on mice.

Based on a preliminary risk assessment in 2006, Health Canada said that bisphenol A was a chemical for which it had a "predisposition to conclude toxic." It is expected to issue a formal evaluation by May.

The study also contradicts a major contention on the safety of bisphenol A advanced by chemical manufacturers. Many of the nearly 200 studies finding severe health effects from bisphenol A exposure have been done by injecting young or pregnant rodents with the chemical.

The American Chemistry Council, an Arlington, Va., trade group for major BPA manufacturers, has argued that injection study results aren't applicable to humans because people are thought to have most of their exposures from oral sources, such as food, subject to rapid metabolizing by liver enzymes. Delivering BPA by injection bypasses this detoxification process and may cause health effects that wouldn't occur by ingesting the chemical, according to the industry's view.

However, the new research indicates that both oral and injection approaches are equally valid for experiments during fetal and neonatal development.

Health Canada said it hasn't yet decided whether to accept or reject the industry's position on the dosing controversy.

The council did not respond to a request for comment on the new research.

Sending Out an S.O.S. - Message in a Bottle

In April this year, bisphenol A, a chemical used in plastic containers and in cans, got major media scrutiny, as it had been identified as a dangerous substance that is found in drinking bottles and many other children's and household containers. Bisphenol A has been linked to cancer and reproductive problems in animals. The Globe ran a story on it, but you can not access it without paying, so here is some key information from that article that is worth re-iterating:

Low amounts of bisphenol A have been suspected to be associated with:

• the early onset of puberty
  
• declining sperm counts
  
• and the huge increase in breast and prostate cancer

In April, it looked like this chemical would surely be in the news again, and affect the bottling and canning industry. Today, and several days ago, bisphenol A has indeed gotten more national attention. This is good news. The lead story on the Yahoo Canada home page is "Canadian retail chain pulls plastic water bottles".

Vancouver-based Mountain Equipment Co-op became the first major Canadian retailer to stop selling products that contain bisphenol A over fears the chemical can leach from plastic food and water containers.

"Inconclusive science and regulatory uncertainty presently surrounds bisphenol-A (BPA)," the company said in a statement.

Here are a couple of extra pieces of information of interest from the Yahoo site:

Besides hard-plastic water bottles, bisphenol A is also used in some baby bottles and the linings of some food cans, including most major brands of infant formula, according to a study co-released this week by Environmental Defence Canada and the Washington-based Environmental Working Group.

"We have study after study showing that this chemical is toxic,... and there are safe and available alternatives that are affordable, (ed. emphasis)" said Aaron Freeman, policy director of Environmental Defence Canada.

Another piece of promising news is the federal government's creation of a chemical substance web site. Harper's government appear to failing in the eyes of the world on its role in climate change. However, some credit to them, on what appears to be the right direction in protecting Canadians from harmful substances. From CTV on Saturday,

The government has pledged $300 million towards assessing 200 potentially harmful substances on the market, and regulate the most toxic within the next few years.

Here is a list of other potentially hazardous substances listed on the government chemical substance web site as Chemical Substances of Interest to Canadians.

Here's more on bisphenol A from the Gov. of Canada web site.

There is a number 1 - 7 system used on bottle bottoms to represent what kind of plastic is in it. Check the number at the bottom of bottles for information on what type of bottle you're using. Bisphenol A is a polycarbonate bottle, that is # 7 on the bottom of the bottle. Here's a link for more detailed information on what these numbers mean. No. 1 bottles should never be reused.

Pop drinks like Coke, add bisphenol A to the linings of cans to prolong shelf life. It helps make food and beverage companies extremely rich and is dangerous for people at the same time.

Hmm, there are messages in the bottles. See if you have unlucky 7. Bottoms up.

Food: What You Don't Know Will Hurt You

The following will make you reconsider using plastic containers and canned food, and products with high sodium levels. In recent days there are two significant news stories concerning this.

Information on a chemical called bisphenol A has the potential to turn the plastics and canning industry upside down.

Evidence shows that bisphenol A, a dangerous chemical used in plastics and cans, leaches into our bodies and has been linked to breast and prostate cancers, among other ailments.

For years, we've also heard about salt being associated with high blood pressure, and now there is more scientific information about unhealthy high levels of sodium in food already. But you can reduce the amounts by reading the labels. You can avoid products that have more than 20% of the daily recommended allowable amount of sodium.

Over the weekend the Globe had an extensive piece on the controversy surrounding bisphenol A. Here is a summary of key pieces of information taken from that article:

Part I - Bisphenol A
This is a toxin in plastics and cans that leaches into food or liquid and is ingested by practically all of us. Scientists and environmentalists contend that bisphenol A is one of the scariest manufactured substances in use.

Here are some medical problems that low amounts of bisphenol A have been suspected to be associated with: the early onset of puberty, declining sperm counts, and the huge increase in breast and prostate cancer, among other ailments.

Bisphenol A is used to make the resins that line most tin cans, dental sealants, car parts, microwaveable plastics, sports helmets and CDs. Government scientists classified bisphenol A as "inherently toxic."

Dr. Patricia Hunt, a Washington State University geneticist, said she would "love to see it banned from the face of the earth." She began ditching her bisphenol-A-containing products after discovering that mere traces of the chemical were able to scramble the eggs of her lab mice. In humans, similar damage would lead to miscarriages and birth defects, such as Down syndrome. "I thought, 'Oh my God,' I'm going to throw out every piece of plastic in my kitchen."

About 90 per cent of studies by independent researchers over the past decade, numbering about 150, have found adverse effects, ranging from enlarged prostates to abnormal breast tissue growth.

Not too surprisingly researchers for companies that use bisphenol A in their products failed to find evidence of adverse effects. A further assessment will take place next month and thus put more pressure on companies to prove that it is not harmful.

Bisphenol A has been used in increasing amounts since the 1950s in food and beverage containers because it doesn't impart a plastic-like taste, although traces leach out. Plastics that use it are often identified by an industry triangle symbol and the number seven.
...
You will probably hear much more about this toxin in the months and years ahead. This story has the potential to be as huge as the cancer causing nicotine in tobacco, or the health risks of trans fats in food.

More than one scientist involved in testing this chemical have given up using canned food and plastics. Manufacturers of plastics and cans are certainly threatened by this and may be forced to radically change how they produce their products. Isn't it so coincidental that their research finds no harmful relationship between bisphenol A and health while about 90% of independent and academic research over the last decade have found harmful effects?

Imagine, scientific researchers being paid to withhold important information from the public, surprise surprise (think nicotine and trans fats). Hopefully if and when this news item broadens, people will question what other suspicious ingredients are in food that have the potential to harm us. There are currently 200 substances that Environment Canada and Health Canada has determined to be possibly dangerous and in need of thorough safety assessments.

Related Links
On the Trail of Water Bottle Toxins

New Findings Make the Case for Bisphenol A Ban

Part II - Salt
Many of the food products we eat already have a high level of salt in them, more than the daily recommended allowance. According to Statistic Canada people consume far too much salt. The maximum upper level allowable doze for people 14 and older is 2,300 mg a day. However, the average for all Canadians was 3,092 mg of sodium a day -- one-third more than the maximum.

When you exceed the recommended levels of salt you risk problems associated with hypertension (high blood pressure). If you went from high levels of sodium and drop down to the recommended levels, research shows that you should be able to drop your blood pressure possibly a 15 to 20 per cent reduction of your risk of stroke.

Kevin Willis of the Canadian Stroke Network warned that even if you were to reduce your own use of salt and cut out salty snacks, that wouldn't necessarily get the levels down to normal. This is because salt is added to so many of the food products we consume.

He suggested avoiding food products that provide more than 20 per cent of the daily value of recommended sodium. A good example of this is packaged shaved turkey or ham. I will be cutting out this for my sandwiches as it has 22% of the daily recommended level of sodium.

These are only two substances that are making a splash in the news right now, but how many other substances are in everyday foods that are harmful or potentially detrimental to our health? It causes one to think, "Has there been a cover up of key information by plastics and can manufacturers?" or "Should nutrition charts and packaging be more detailed, or provide warnings about the risks of digesting certain levels of salt or other components of food products?"

As was suggested by Kevin Willis, the food industry and government should work together to get the level of sodium down in foods "an across-the-board cut in sodium in our food supply".

That would make sense and reduce peoples' risk of problems of hypertension. Question what's in your food, your plastic containers and cans of food because it could be causing you serious health problems.