|
News & Analysis | REG•WATCH Blog | Press Room
Thursday, September 04, 2008
Plastics Chemical May Pose Risk, Studies Show
Evidence continues to mount linking exposure to a common plastics additive with developmental problems. Two recent studies of the chemical, bisphenol-A, indicate it may pose a danger to humans.
According to today's Washington Post, researchers at Yale Medical School exposed monkeys to bisphenol-A and "found that the chemical interfered with brain cell connections vital to memory, learning and mood." The researchers exposed the monkeys to levels of bisphenol-A "deemed safe for humans by the Environmental Protection Agency."
Yesterday, the National Toxicology Program, part of the Department of Health and Human Services, released its final report on the health effects of bisphenol-A. The report's findings are similar to those in the draft report NTP released in April.
According to the report, "The NTP has some concern for effects on the brain, behavior, and prostate gland in fetuses, infants, and children at current human exposures
to bisphenol A."
"Some concern" is a designation that falls in the middle of a qualitative scale which the NTP uses. Other options include "serious concern" and "concern" for riskier substances, and "minimal concern" and "negligible concern" for less risky substances.
So the book on bisphenol-A and its human health effects is far from closed. More from the Post article:
"There remains considerable uncertainty whether the changes seen in the animal studies are directly applicable to humans, and whether they would result in clear adverse health effects," John R. Bucher, associate director of the National Toxicology Program, said in a statement. "But we have concluded that the possibility that BPA may affect human development cannot be dismissed."
But federal officials should not continue to use uncertainty as a pretext for not regulating bisphenol-A. Federal health and safety agencies should make efforts to provide the public with at least a modicum of protection while the scientific picture becomes more complete.
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) echoed that sentiment in a statement yesterday: "Clearly more research is needed, but in the meantime, we should err on the side of caution and keep this chemical out of children's products."
Congress may have to act, as the Bush administration has refused to. The Food and Drug Administration continues to insist bisphenol-A is safe at current exposure levels. The Consumer Product Safety Commission has remained mum on the issue, even though some retailers have pulled from their shelves products containing bisphenol-A. (Either or both could claim regulatory jurisdiction, because bisphenol-A can leach from the lining of cans into food and is common in a variety of children's products monitored by CPSC, including baby bottles.)
Congress should take advantage of the precedent it set in July when it banned phthalates, another type of plastics chemical, pending further study. The safety-first approach embodied in the phthalate ban would protect public health in the interim without condemning the substances to an eternal regulatory graveyard. The interim ban shifts the burden of proof onto phthalate manufacturers and users. If the safety of phthalates is proven, they're back on the market.
That's a revolutionary concept for policymakers, who usually wait until a definitive health risk is proven before pulling a substance from the market. This often allows harmful substances to cause health effects in people before preventative measures can be taken.
Congress should consider a similar approach with bisphenol-A, recognizing uncertainty exists but taking proactive steps to protect the public.
Posted by Matt Madia
|