US: Flaws in the case against BPA
Posted: June 30th, 2009 - 11:03pm
Source: The New York Times
The claims about the dangers of the chemical bisphenol-A, or BPA , get a skeptical look in a report by a nonpartisan, nonprofit group, STATS.
The chemical is in hard, clear plastic bottles and the liners of canned goods. There are claims that it has estrogen-like effects that might accelerate puberty, cause neurological damage, interfere with chemotherapy and increase the risk for heart disease, diabetes and cancer. Last year, the Food and Drug Administration’s expert panel admonished the agency for assuring consumers the chemical was safe.
STATS has a different view:
Missing in this debate is that it’s not just ‘industry groups’ that think BPA shouldn’t be banned — or just industry-sponsored studies that say it’s safe. Scientist, regulators, politicians in Europe, Australia, and Japan have all rejected the evidence that the chemical is harmful as methodologically flawed, badly conducted, or irrelevant — with some warning that banning it could actually endanger the public. Now that the National Institutes of Health has acknowledged that it funded a lot of poorly-designed research on BPA — the very research that is touted as evidence that the chemical is deadly — it’s time to ask whether America has been spun by clever marketing rather than clever science.