Industry Should Find Alternatives to BPA

It’s time to move away from Bisphenol A (BPA), a chemical commonly used in plastic containers and — as Consumer Reports recently highlighted — canned food containers as well.

The latest buzz on BPA is that high levels of exposure were shown to cause erectile dysfunction and other sexual problems in men. The food industry, along with others who rely on BPA in their packaging, were quick to condemn the study, but their argument basically amounts to “only at extremely high doses; consumers are fine.” Okay, so do we know what the cut-off point is? Do we know how much exposure is too much exposure? Do we even know how much exposure we’re getting? No? Then um…

I’m not saying we should ban BPA tomorrow (though some are calling for that). I understand that such a move would be expensive and create difficulties for the food industry. But it’s time to start looking for alternatives and phasing out this chemical that we obviously don’t completely understand.

I’m also creeped out by the circumstances behind a study supposedly proving that BPA is safe. Apparently it was already known that a particular type of rat — unlike other rats — was unaffected by BPA — yet this rat was the one chosen for use in this study. When high levels of BPA had no adverse effect on these rats, researchers concluded that BPA must be safe even at high levels. If that’s the best research industry can come up with to defend itself, I remain skeptical.

It’s true: BPA might not be that harmful for humans. We don’t have incontrovertible proof that it’s dangerous at the levels of exposure that most of us get — even kids, who are thought to be most vulnerable to the chemical. But why risk it? When we’re dealing with chemicals that wind up in our foods, isn’t it a no-brainer that companies should want to look for alternatives they know for sure are safe?

Related Posts on BNET Food:
Bisphenol A Back in Spotlight