Baby bottles, BPA plastics raise new red flags for health concerns

BPA is one of the world's leading industrial chemicals used in making one type of polycarbonate plastic and certain types of epoxy resins. Production of BPA has reached approximately 7 billion pounds per year, according to Frederick vom Saal, a University of Missouri biological sciences professor.

It's used in dental sealants and eyeglass lenses and in many plastic food containers, including baby bottles. Warming food in such containers helps release the chemical. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, BPA isn't found in softer, more flexible products, such as single-serving water bottles.

A new study Tuesday  in the Journal of the American Medical Association added to the debate over BPA's safety. Using a health survey of nearly 1,500 adults, researchers found that those exposed to higher amounts of BPA were more likely to report having heart disease and diabetes. Because of the possible public health implications, the results "deserve scientific follow-up," the study authors said.

Vom Saal, who wrote an editorial accompanying the JAMA study, called the study the largest of its kind to examine BPA's possible effects on human health and the first "suggesting links between BPA and some of the most significant and economically burdensome human diseases"  -- cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and liver-enzyme abnormalities.  But he also said more rigorous studies were needed.http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/300/11/1353 

 Past animal studies have linked it with breast, prostate and reproductive system problems and some cancers. In fact, another hand of the federal government -- the National Institutes of Health -- published such a study in its monthly journal, Environmental Health Perspectives, online last month.

University of Cincinnati published findings of  a lab study implicated BPA as a risk factor for metabolic syndrome, which left untreated can lead to diabetes, storke and heart disease.  Using fresh human fat tissues, the UC team found that BPA suppresses a key hormone, adiponectin, which is responsible for regulating insulin sensitivity in the body.

"People have serious concerns about the potential health effects of BPA. As the scientific evidence continues to mount against the chemical, it should be given serious attention to minimize future harm," said UC Nira Ben-Jonathan, a professor of cancer and cell biology who has studied BPA for more than 10 years.

Many scientists believe BPA can act like the hormone estrogen, associated with an increased risk for breast cancer. And some advocacy groups and parents have questioned whether its linked to increased rates of autism and hyperactive kids.

The American Chemistry Council, an industry trade group, said the JAMA study is flawed, has substantial limitations and doesn't prove anything. "Overall, due to inherent limitations in study design, this new study cannot support a conclusion that bisphenol A causes any disease," stated Steven G. Hentges, Ph.D. of the American Chemistry Council's Polycarbonate/BPA Global Group.  "The weight of scientific evidence continues to support the conclusion of governments worldwide that bisphenol A is not a significant health concern at the trace levels present in some consumer products."

But many companies aren't waiting for more evidence. This spring, REI pulled all Nalgene water bottles from its shelves, setting off a flash flood reaction from loyal Nalgene-toters. And this site about baby products lists BPA -free baby bottles. 

More than 90 percent of Americans have traces of BPA in their bodies, but the FDA says the levels of exposure are too low to pose a health risk, even for infants and children. The FDA has the power to limit use of BPA in food containers and medical devices but last month released its internal report concluding that BPA exposure is not enough to warrant action.

Others also called the new study too preliminary to offer proof that the chemical caused the health problems. It's possible participants who already had heart disease or diabetes were more likely to having BPA show up in their urine.

FDA officials said they are not dismissing such findings.  "We recognize the need to resolve the concerning questions that have been raised,"  Tarantino said. But the FDA is arguing that the studies with rats and mice it relied on for its assessment are more thorough than some of the human research that has raised doubts.

While the usual conclusion to a new study that shows possible harm is "more studies," Dr. Ana Soto of Tufts University said the government needs to act. Now.

"We shouldn't wait until further studies are done in order to act in protecting humans," she said.

As usual, our cautious neighbors to the north -- where government and health care are on the same money-saving page -- are taking the threat seriously. In April, Canada banned baby bottles containing BPA, citing 150 worldwide studies.

"We have immediately taken action on bisphenol A because we believe it is our responsibility to ensure families, Canadians and our environment are not exposed to a potentially harmful chemical," Tony Clement, Canada's minister of health, said in a statement. "Although our science tells us exposure levels to newborns and infants are below the levels that cause effects, it is better to be safe than sorry."