FDA to Finally Reconsider Safety of BPA

Last year, FDA disappointed us by insisting that there was no cause for concern about the presence of the chemical bisphenol A in food and beverage containers. An expert panel charged with evaluating the FDAâs draft assessment strongly criticized the agency for its severely limited exposure assessment and the criteria it used to assess BPA studies. Then, Suzanne Rust and Meg Kissinger of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (whoâve won multiple awards for their coverage of BPA and other chemicals) reported that FDAâs report âwas written largely by the plastics industry and others with a financial stake in the controversial chemical

Yesterday, the agency finally announced that itâs reviewing new studies about BPA and will let us know by the end of November whether itâs safe to use the chemical in food and beverage containers. Meg Kissinger has the story, and you can check out the Journal Sentinelâs âChemical Falloutâ series for more background.

More like this

In a first-of-its-kind study, a researcher has estimated that the health-related economic savings of removing bisphenol A from our food supply is a whopping $1.74 billion annually. And that’s a conservative estimate.
The health concerns about bisphenol-A (BPA), a component of hard polycarbonate plastic, has been extended once again (see here,
Manufacturers who market their products as “BPA-free” aren’t just sending consumers a message about chemical composition. The underlying message is about safety — as in, this product is safe or least more safe than products that do contain BPA.
A lot of our coverage of bisphenol A, the endocrine-disrupting chemical present in a host of plastic products, has focused on the FDAâs outdated stance.

Liz,
We have been wrong before.
We may be wrong on this one.
All organic chemicals sound scary to me.
Our FDA is not the only global source of scrutiny on BPA.
Are we after safety or vindication?
Sometimes I wonder.