Just when you thought it was safe..........

[Guest guest]

As I was sitting at my computer, while drinking from a water bottle, I came

across this unsettling news item, about a chemical in water bottles. I have

saved the entire 69 page study they are talking about, but I have no way to post

a link to it. If anyone wants it, just email me josephsalowitz@... and I

will send it to you, as an attachment to my reply email. Is NOTHING safe?

Joe

.................................................................................\

..........................

April 16, 2008

Canada Likely to Label Plastic Ingredient ‘Toxic’ By IAN AUSTEN

OTTAWA — The Canadian government is said to be ready to declare as toxic a

chemical widely used in plastics for baby bottles, beverage and food containers

as well as linings in food cans.

A person with knowledge of the government’s chemical review program spoke on

the condition he not be named because of a confidentiality agreement. He said

the staff work to list the compound, called bisphenol-a, or B.P.A., as a toxic

chemical was complete and was recently endorsed by a panel of outside

scientists.

A public announcement by Health Canada may come as early as Wednesday but

could be delayed until the end of May. Canada would be the first country to make

a health finding against B.P.A., which has been shown to disrupt the hormonal

systems of animals. The department’s decision was first reported in The Globe

and Mail, a Toronto newspaper, on Tuesday.

Also on Tuesday, a draft report from the United States Department of Health

and Human Services’ National Toxicology Program endorsed a scientific panel’s

finding that there was “some concern” about neural and behavioral changes in

humans who consume B.P.A.

B.P.A. is widely used to make polycarbonate plastics, which are rigid and

transparent like glass but very unlikely to shatter. Polycarbonates have many

uses that pose no risk, like the cases of some iPod models. Because animal tests

have shown that even small amounts of the chemical may cause changes in the

body, however, researchers have focused on food- and drink-related applications

of B.P.A., like the popular Nalgene brand beverage bottles.

“If the government issues a finding of toxic, no parent in their right mind

will be using products made with this chemical,” said Rick , the executive

director of Environmental Defence, a Canadian group that has been campaigning

against B.P.A. “We will be arguing strongly for a ban on the use of this

chemical in food and beverage containers.”

The public and industry will have 60 days to comment on the designation once

it is released, setting into motion a two-year process that could lead to a

partial or complete ban on food-related uses of plastics made using B.P.A.

Alastair Sinclair, a spokesman for Health Canada, said, “When the minister has

an announcement to make, he will make it.” Mr. Sinclair declined to answer any

questions.

A spokeswoman for the Canadian Plastics Industry Association referred a

request for comment to the American Chemistry Council in Arlington, Va. The

council did not respond to interview requests.

Some scientists question the significance to humans of studies indicating that

even very small amounts of B.P.A. can induce changes in animals. There is also

some dispute about how much of the chemical is released by plastics.

Jack Bend, a professor of pathology at the University of Western Ontario in

London and one of the Canadian government’s outside scientific advisers,

declined to comment on what action Health Canada would take. But he said he was

concerned about the widespread use of B.P.A.

“The first thing is that it’s an endocrine disrupter, there’s no question

about that,” Professor Bend said, referring to the chemical’s impact on the

hormonal system. “Should people that are exposed to these low levels of this

chemical be outrageously concerned? I’d err on the side of not creating panic.

We simply don’t know. But we should find out.”

Professor Bend added that the impact of B.P.A. on the development of human

fetuses was worrisome. It may prove to cause damage in much the same way as

early exposure to mercury, he said.

But Warren G. , director of the center for reproductive care and

reproductive biology at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, is more

skeptical.

“In my experience working with bisphenol-a, it’s a relatively benign

chemical,” said Professor , who once headed the reproductive toxicology

group at Health Canada. “There’s room here for a lot more research.”

He added that substances could be declared toxic under Canada’s chemical

management system if they had the potential for adverse effects in animals but

not humans.

“If I was a fish and there was bisphenol-a in the water, I’d be concerned,” he

said. “If I was a fetus and my mother was using a plastic water bottle, I

wouldn’t be bothered.”

While the Canadian plastics association referred a reporter to Professor

, he said that he had no ties to it or the chemical industry.

The draft report released in the United States is effectively a call for

further research on the chemical.

D. Shelby, the director of the toxicology program’s center for the

evaluation of risks to human reproduction, said he wanted to see further

confirmation that the test results could be repeated and more data about the

long-term consequences of exposure to the chemical.

But he said that research strongly suggested that polycarbonate food and

beverage containers and food cans were the main source of human exposure to

B.P.A. When asked if people should stop using them, Dr. Shelby replied: “That

becomes kind of a personal choice. These are certainly two things people can get

around.”

In a statement, the American Chemistry Council said the draft report “affirms

that there are no serious or high-level concerns for adverse effects of

bisphenol-a on human reproduction and development.”