Huh. I just read this blog entry from BlogHer about BPA in Sigg water bottles. Depressing. Yep – it seems that any of their uber-cool “eco” (and very expensive, I might add) water bottles that were produced before August 2008 have been leaching BPA. Apparently, they never claimed to be “BPA free” but they always said that BPA didn’t leach into the water. Come to find out, they weren’t being truthful. Not only that, they somewhat sneakily replaced the liner they were using in August of 2008 with one that really is BPA free – trying to fly under the radar.

So here’s the scoop – if you have a Sigg water bottle from before August 2008, you might want to consider using it as a vase instead. To get more details on the difference between the two liners – the old “bad” one and the new, BPA- and phthalate-free one – check out the BlogHer blog posting for pictures that show the difference between the two liners so you can see which one you have.

To be safe, always choose an unlined stainless steel bottle, a water bottle that states it is 100% BPA-free or even an HDPE #2 plastic bottle (not ideal, but not bad). And don’t forget, try to avoid the individual bottles of water (like Dasani, Poland Springs etc) if at all possible. Save those for times when you are in a bind and don’t have access to a refillable bottle. (see related post on how bottled water sales have declined – yea!!)

The Green Blog in the Boston Globe posted on Monday that the Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal “is investigating whether industry officials are using ‘fear tactics, political manipulation, and misleading marketing’ to fight regulation of the chemical, which is used in hundreds of everyday products, from baby bottles to canned food.” Connecticut is a leader in the fight against BPA, having recently passed a ban on the use of BPA in plastics used by children and babies.

A couple of weeks back, I posted about the meeting of corporate minds when industry leaders met to determine a PR campaign that suggests that BPA is not as dangerous as it really is. Blumenthal wrote a letter to the companies that were involved – including DelMonte and Coca Cola – asking for details about the meeting and the notes that have been circulating.

I hope other states, including Massachusetts, follow Connecticut’s lead and start banning the use of BPAs.

In an email from the Environmental Working Group (www.ewg.org), they revealed some disturbing minutes from a recent industry meeting where big brands were working together to set a communication/media strategy to defend the “benefits” of BPA.

Take a look at this selection of the minutes from the EWG site. The companies represented include: Coca Cola, Del Monte and the North American Metal Packaging Alliance. They say things like -

• “Overall, the committee seemed disorganized, and its members frustrated. Lack of direction from the committee and these associations could continue to allow other associations and environmental groups to push BPA out. “

• “Attendees suggested using fear tactics (e.g. “Do you want to have access to baby food anymore?”) as well as giving control back to consumers (e.g. you have a choice between the more expensive product that is frozen or fresh or foods packaged in cans) as ways to dissuade people from choosing BPA-free packaging.”
• “The committee wants to focus on quality instead of quantity in disseminating messages (e.g. a young kid or pregnant mother providing a positive quote about BPA, a testimonial from an outside expert, providing positive video, advice from third party experts, and relevant messaging on the GMA website).”

Pretty icky, right? So after they have time to do some research to fine-tune the exact message, you will start to see more “positive” spins on BPA. But don’t be fooled – there’s not much good you can get from BPA. It’s just bad.

How much more proof do we need to show conclusively that Bisphenol A is a major concern and needs to be banned? A new study was just released by the Journal of Environmental Health Perspectives. The study was conducted by members of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (part of the Centers for Disease Control), Harvard School of Public Health and Harvard Medical School (although the study clearly notes that the results “do not necessarily represent the views of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”)

This study tested the BPA levels in the urine of 77 people after a week of consuming most of their cold beverages in polycarbonate bottles. For those of you who are not familiar with polycarbonate, it is the plastic that is typically labeled with #7 – such as Nalgene bottles and the big plastic bottles used for water coolers.

The bad news? The results showed that BPA levels rose 66% after just one week of drinking from the bottles. They state that “regular consumption of cold beverages from polycarbonate bottles is associated with substantial increase in urinary BPA concentrations irrespective of exposure to BPA from other sources.” Yipes.

So definitely throw out your polycarbonate bottles if you haven’t already. Use glass or stainless steel (watch for plastic liners too that can leach BPA) – or even #2 sports bottles if you have to use plastic.

In a recent report by Environmental Health Perspectives, there is new evidence that bisphenol-A (BPA) is found in infants’ blood at 11x the levels that it is found in adults. BPA is “a high-protein industrial chemical that has been used for decades to make polycarbonate plastics and epoxy linings for food cans. In recent years, concerns have been raised about the chemical’s ability to mimic estrogen and to cause developmental problems and precancerous growths in laboratory animals.”

Due to the fact that infants are unable to process the chemical in their system as efficiently as adults, compounded by the fact that infants are exposed to the chemical through plastic bottles and formula from plastic-lined cans, infants are more likely to have more of the chemical in their bodies. We’re talking infants here – 3 months old. We’re talking ELEVEN TIMES the level of adults in these tiny bodies.

At what point is the FDA going to step in and do what should be done – what has been done in Canada and many other countries? This chemical MUST be banned! Forget the lobbying from the plastics industry and the chemical companies. We are only going to see the effects of this more and more in upcoming years. Something needs to be done.

A report was released last night (Tuesday night) from advisors to the FDA that had re-examined all of the data regarding the potential harm from BPA. For those of you who aren’t aware, BPA stands for Bisphenol-A – a “synthetic estrogen” chemical used in the manufacture of plastics, most commonly those with the recycling #7.

The advisors, who were initially believed to be too closely tied to the plastics industry, gave environmental groups a pleasant surprise by concurring that there is inherent danger with the chemical and that the exposure to humans (particularly infants) poses significant concern. The particular concern is with infants as they are exposed at notably high levels during their first few months which can impact development and also future risk of diabetes, obesity and cancer.

The way we are exposed to BPA is when the chemical leeches into liquids that are stored in that plastic – either #7 plastic bottles or cans lined with plastic (infant formula, canned fruits and vegetables etc). The longer the liquid is in contact with the plastic – the worse it is.

I saw a segment this morning on the Early Show (click here for the report) – the doctor and the journalist came right out and said clearly – DO NOT drink or eat from #7 plastic. That was the first time I had heard it so strongly – it’s usually “try to avoid.”

So here’s the most frustrating part, this report was requested after another report in September had linked BPA to developmental delays, diabetes, cancer, heart disease and early onset puberty. The report had clearly stated the dangers, however the FDA came out and maintained their position that BPA is safe in the levels it is currently used. This was despite the fact that well-respected scientists were claiming that the chemical can alter cell activity at extremely low levels – and we are exposed to 10 to 100 times those levels. (read this report from USA Today)

So in comes this panel of advisors – OK’d by the FDA – to give their thorough and final assessment. As if we need one? And lo and behold they are in agreement – BPA is a threat to human health. So you would THINK that the FDA would cry “uncle” and give in. Really. But it doesn’t look like it. Despite the fact that countries like Canada have already banned BPA, our FDA is going to take it’s own sweet time in making a decision. And don’t hold your breath that it will be the right decision. The plastics industry is big and strong. Human health doesn’t hold a torch to the powers of plastics lobbyists. Lesson learned? You CANNOT trust that the FDA will keep your health as its number 1 (or even #2, #5 or #10) priority. You have to stay informed and listen to the real experts – the ones without any agenda.

The experts are clearly saying: DON’T USE #7 PLASTIC – check all of your sports bottles (YES – that means your Nalgene has to go), your baby bottles etc. It also means the big water cooler bottles at your office or in your home (like Poland Spring). Avoid canned goods with plastic linings (ugh – that one is hard!) And stay informed.

As you may have started to hear in the news, there’s a lot of talk about BPA – a chemical that can leach into our food products through can liners and #7 plastics. For all of us who fed our children in plastic bottles and sippy cups, this news is pretty disturbing.

Taken from the EWG blog:
In April of 2008, the National Toxicology Program raised concerns that exposure to BPA during pregnancy and childhood could impact the developing breast and prostate, hasten puberty, and affect behavior in American children. UGGHHHHHHH.

So now you’re probably saying, “I give up”, right? What more can I do? It seems like everything I eat, drink, put on my skin etc. has dangers! Well, actually yes – kinda. But my theory is – do what you can. Reduce risk and exposure where you can. I’m not suggesting that people stop eating canned food entirely or don’t ever drink out of a bottle made from #7 plastic (which, mind you INCLUDES the big 5 gallon jugs of Poland Springs or whatever brand of water used at water coolers in offices all over the country!). But – don’t do it if you don’t have to. I now walk down the hall at my consulting job to get the filtered water, passing by the Poland Springs cooler. I threw out our Nalgene water bottles and went back to the (cheaper!) #2 plastic, squeeze-type sports bottles. Both of those are pretty easy changes – and make me feel a little better.

Now, if I had infants that needed bottles? That might be more challenging. But as I’ve read recently, the glass bottles are not nearly as scary as you might think. One person said in the 2 years she used them, it only broke once – when it fell onto a ceramic floor.

Anyway – for more great information, I found the Boston Globe had a Q&A article about BPA this week and there’s also the link to their actual phone call Q&A, and there’s also the EWG blog cheatsheet and other links from there. I also noticed that there was a Boston Globe article today that stated that John Kerry and 5 other senators are pushing for legislation to ban BPA from children’s products. I’ll have to keep tabs on that one!