Thursday, August 21, 2008
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Some words from Green To Grow about BPA and the FDA
Dear Friends,
Just days before the California legislature will be considering passing a ban on the toxic chemical BPA in some children's products, the FDA has announced BPA is safe for human consumption. Although there are over 100 published reports by government scientists and independent research labs documenting the risks of BPA (particularly for infants and children), the FDA has relied solely on two chemical-industry funded studies that concluded BPA poses no risk to human health. At this point I would say it is entirely clear the FDA is more committed to protecting the interests of industry rather than ensuring the safety of the public.
It is important to note that the National Toxicology Program, an arm of National Institutes of Health, has produced studies that differ in their results from those that the FDA has chosen to accept. So what the FDA has chosen to do is ignore reports from within its own system in favor of those funded by special interests. A public meeting has been scheduled for September 16 to discuss issues arising from the preliminary report issued by the NIH, which expresses concern over the dangers of BPA, especially in relation to infants and children. One thing to keep in mind - and this is consistently misreported by the media - no one is saying that BPA is safe. Everyone acknowledges that it is a dangerous toxicant. The only argument is over the level required to inflict major and irreparable damage.
Please read the articles below to get a brief overview on this issue, particularly the Washington Post article titled "Studies on Chemical In Plastics Questioned: Congress Examines Role Of Industry in Regulation." This is essential reading. It is imperative that as representatives of Green to Grow you are able to answer questions such as: "But the FDA has declared BPA is safe; why should we carry a BPA-free alternative? Why should anyone care about this issue now?"
Last, two statistics for your consideration: More than 6 billion pounds of bisphenol A are produced in the U.S. each year by Dow Chemical, BASF, Bayer AG and other manufacturers. Studies indicate that 95% of us have detectable levels of BPA in our systems.
Thanks for your time and commitment to educating people about this issue. Clearly we can't rely on our government to do the right thing. It will be up to companies like Green to Grow, and those who support us, to keep the issue visible.
All the best,
Michael Ritterbrown
Shelley Aronoff
Green to Grow
Studies on Chemical In Plastics Questioned
Congress Examines Role Of Industry in Regulation
By Lyndsey Layton
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, April 27, 2008; A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/26/AR2008042602126_pf.html
FDA Decision Over BPA Meant to Influence California Lawmakers?
http://www.ewg.org/node/27022
Environmental Working Group News Release, August 15, 2008
EWG is a nonprofit research organization based in Washington, DC that uses the power of information to protect human health and the environment.
FDA Says Chemical Found in Plastic Bottles is Safe
Associated Press, Matthew Perrone, August 15, 2008
http://www.ewg.org/node/27023
Just days before the California legislature will be considering passing a ban on the toxic chemical BPA in some children's products, the FDA has announced BPA is safe for human consumption. Although there are over 100 published reports by government scientists and independent research labs documenting the risks of BPA (particularly for infants and children), the FDA has relied solely on two chemical-industry funded studies that concluded BPA poses no risk to human health. At this point I would say it is entirely clear the FDA is more committed to protecting the interests of industry rather than ensuring the safety of the public.
It is important to note that the National Toxicology Program, an arm of National Institutes of Health, has produced studies that differ in their results from those that the FDA has chosen to accept. So what the FDA has chosen to do is ignore reports from within its own system in favor of those funded by special interests. A public meeting has been scheduled for September 16 to discuss issues arising from the preliminary report issued by the NIH, which expresses concern over the dangers of BPA, especially in relation to infants and children. One thing to keep in mind - and this is consistently misreported by the media - no one is saying that BPA is safe. Everyone acknowledges that it is a dangerous toxicant. The only argument is over the level required to inflict major and irreparable damage.
Please read the articles below to get a brief overview on this issue, particularly the Washington Post article titled "Studies on Chemical In Plastics Questioned: Congress Examines Role Of Industry in Regulation." This is essential reading. It is imperative that as representatives of Green to Grow you are able to answer questions such as: "But the FDA has declared BPA is safe; why should we carry a BPA-free alternative? Why should anyone care about this issue now?"
Last, two statistics for your consideration: More than 6 billion pounds of bisphenol A are produced in the U.S. each year by Dow Chemical, BASF, Bayer AG and other manufacturers. Studies indicate that 95% of us have detectable levels of BPA in our systems.
Thanks for your time and commitment to educating people about this issue. Clearly we can't rely on our government to do the right thing. It will be up to companies like Green to Grow, and those who support us, to keep the issue visible.
All the best,
Michael Ritterbrown
Shelley Aronoff
Green to Grow
Studies on Chemical In Plastics Questioned
Congress Examines Role Of Industry in Regulation
By Lyndsey Layton
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, April 27, 2008; A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/26/AR2008042602126_pf.html
FDA Decision Over BPA Meant to Influence California Lawmakers?
http://www.ewg.org/node/27022
Environmental Working Group News Release, August 15, 2008
EWG is a nonprofit research organization based in Washington, DC that uses the power of information to protect human health and the environment.
FDA Says Chemical Found in Plastic Bottles is Safe
Associated Press, Matthew Perrone, August 15, 2008
http://www.ewg.org/node/27023
Friday, April 11, 2008
ABC NEWS - FEBRUARY 2008
Resources to Help Parents Navigate Potentially Dangerous Baby Products
A dozen of the leading environmental groups in the country have published the result of a study which says the vast majority of plastic baby bottles might pose a significant health risk because they contain bisphenol A (BPA), a chemical linked to obesity, cancer and other conditions in animal experiment.To read more go to ABC News
DAILY MAIL UK - JANUARY 2008
Warming baby's bottle could release 'gender-bending' chemicals
Parents who warm up baby bottles could be putting their child at risk of "gender-bending" chemicals, scientists warn.
A study has shown that the level of a pollutant which leaks from plastic bottles increases dramatically when they are filled with hot liquids.
Bisphenol A has been linked to fertility problems, diabetes, breast cancer, hyperactivity and early puberty in girls. Babies are thought to be particularly vulnerable to its effects.
To read more go to Daily Mail UK
NEWSWEEK - JANUARY 2008
The Baby Bottles Blues
Stefania Geraci is no green freak. Her 6-month-old son, Dylan Glantz, eats from plastic spoons and plays with plastic toys. But when it came to choosing a bottle for him, Geraci, an attorney from Port Washington, N.Y., proceeded with extra caution. "I had a general knowledge that plastic might not be so great for the environment or for his health," she says. She ended up buying plastic bottles that are free of the hormone-mimicking chemical Bisphenol A (BPA). More recently, she began using glass bottles. "If there's an alternative that might be safer, then you use the alternative," she says. "I liked the idea of a more natural product."To read the entire article go to Newsweek
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
