LISTSERV - LACTNET Archives - COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 23:09:53 -0600 (MDT)
From: Dirk Grunwald <[log in to unmask]>
Message-Id: <[log in to unmask]>
To: Kate Hallberg <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: fyi - estrogen from baby bottles
Reply-to: [log in to unmask]
Organization: University of Colorado
Office: 7-10 ECOT (303) 492-0452
Content-Length: 5433


        WASHINGTON, May 12 (UPI) -- A dozen consumer and health groups are
warning parents that clear plastic baby bottles leach a potentially
harmful chemical into a baby's formula, a claim the plastics industry
quickly dismissed as a scare tactic lacking scientific basis.
        Led by the National Environmental Trust, the groups asked the Food
and Drug Administration and baby bottle manufacturers today to remove
from the polycarbonate plastic a synthetic chemical, bisphenol-A, that
acts like an estrogen in the body.
        They want manufacturers to place warning labels on bottles and they
called for additional study on the leaching of BPA at lower temperatures
and the chemical's impact on children.
        They said research by Dr. Frederick vom Saal of the University of
Missouri shows BPA has an endocrine disrupter effect and causes changes
in the reproductive systems of mice, turtles and other test animals but
there is no link to humans and there is no evidence of any harm the
changes may have caused in the test animals.
        ``In the absence of information, as a parent myself, I just want to
be cautious,'' vom Saal said at today's the briefing.
        He added his research on 100 mice showed BPA caused a decline in
sperm production, a decrease in the size of the seminal vesicle and a
tendency for the prostate to enlarge. He said he found while BPA cleared
the system of adult mice, it ``hangs around in the fetus'' of pregnant
mice, raising questions about the impact of prolonged exposure.
        ``Where children are concerned, we don't subject them to risks we
don't understand,'' said Philip Clapp, NET president. ``We have no way
of knowing the subtle ways that an artificial hormone-like substance,
like bisphenol-A, can interfere with the development.''
        Among those groups joining NET in petitioning the FDA are the
Children's Defense Fund, Children's Health Environment Coalition,
Consumer Federation of America, National Council of Catholic Women,
Physicians for Social Responsibility and the U.S. Public Interest
Research Group.
        BPA has been around since the 1930s and gained a prominent place in
the plastics industry in the 1950s, when plastics became all the rage.
Plastic baby bottles that contain BPA make up about 90 percent of the
baby bottle market.
        While there is agreement on both sides that BPA leaks into formula or
milk in the bottle when it's heated at high temperatures, vom Saal said
more study is needed on the human impact and on early evidence that
suggests leaching occurs at low heating.
        ``It's been very frustrating'' vom Saal said of efforts to get the
plastics industry to pay attention to the BPA issue. But he added,
``because it's been around for decades and controls the market'' it is
difficult to get changes made.
        ``There is absolutely no evidence of adverse affects in humans,''
said Susan Moore, of the American Plastics Council. ``The FDA is quite
comfortable with 40 years of research.''
        Clapp said the FDA has not moved to restrict BPA because its
regulatory approach lags behind the emerging science on the effects
chemicals have on the endocrine system.
        Dr. John Heinze, an environmental and health scientist for the
American Plastics Council, said they tried with 200 mice to replicate
vom Saal's studies but were unsuccessful. He said their research showed
leaching but found no effects from it.
        ``No more research needs to be done,'' Heinze said. ``What we have
here is a scientific anomaly.''
        Dr. Michael Goodman, a board-certified pediatrician in Washington and
a researcher, said he has never found any evidence that BPA is harmful
to children.
        ``There is no human data that even suggests that,'' Goodman said.
        Moore called NET's action and vom Saal's support of it ``creating a
scare to create a demand for more research'' and alleged that vom Saal
regularly promotes his research publicly in an effort to gain notoriety
and additional funding.
        ``It's the scare of the week,'' Moore said.
        The NET also noted the May issue of Consumer Reports also warns
parents of the potential risk of a problem with leaching.
        Dr. Edward Groth, the biologist who led the Consumer Reports testing,
said its testing of six brands of baby bottles found leaching at varying
levels but the report clearly stated it did not know whether the risk
was significant. The American Plastics Council and Avent America, a
manufacturer, have questioned the Consumer Reports story and the APC has
asked for a retraction.
        ``We're not going to retract,'' Groth told United Press
International. ``We have no idea what is a safe level of exposure or if
there is any risk associated with exposure. We believe many parents
would rather play it safe.''
        Clapp said parents have alternatives to the clear polycarbonate
bottles. There are manufacturers that make colored, cloudy plastic
bottles that do not contain BPA and glass bottles also are free of the
chemical. He recommends throwing out any bottles that are visibly worn
or scratched.
        In a new study by Dr. Koji Arizono from the Prefectural University of
Kumamoto and the Univeristy of Nagasaki, researchers were able to show
that worn, scratched bottles leached up to twice as much BPA as new
bottles. Arizono's report confirmed leaching at high temperatures but
also found leaching at temperatures as low as 60 degrees Celsius (140F).