|
US
regulator rethink on BPA Source of
Article: http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/News/2009/June/04060902.asp
The US Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is revisiting its stance that bisphenol A (BPA) is safe
at current exposure levels. The FDA's chief scientist, Jesse Goodman, will be
in charge of an effort to re-examine the controversial issue from a
scientific and policy position. Goodman will review
data and talk to experts inside and outside of the federal government as part
of the investigation, according to the FDA. The agency anticipates that the
review will be completed in 'weeks not months'. The FDA says it is
aware of concerns that BPA is an endocrine disruptor, and that there is
evidence of human exposure to the chemical through food packaging. The
chemical mimics oestrogen and is commonly found in baby bottles, children's
cups and formula cans. The FDA has been
conflicted about BPA for some time, changing its view on the adequacy of
safety margins for the chemical several times over the last year. The great void A lack of information
and unified advice from the agency on BPA over recent months has created
something of a vacuum. In that void, some US states and localities have
implemented restrictions independently. Some food packaging and baby bottle
makers have also removed BPA from their products. The news that the FDA
is reconsidering its stance on BPA came following a letter to the FDA's new
administrator, Peggy Hamburg, from two lawmakers on the House of
Representatives' influential Energy and Commerce Committee, requesting that
she promptly re-evaluate the chemical's safety. The congressmen - Democrats
Henry Waxman and Bart Stupak - also expressed concern that the previous FDA
leadership relied too heavily on private industry in forming its opinion that
BPA was safe. 'News of an industry
meeting last week to discuss ways to block restrictions on BPA suggest
industry has little interest in scientific facts or the public health,'
Stupak said in a 2 June statement. 'The FDA's reliance on industry studies in
determining BPA's safety must be re-evaluated in light of clear signs
industry is willing to mislead the American people on this public health
issue.' Industry influence That same day, Waxman
and Stupak sent a separate letter to the North American Packaging Alliance
(NAMPA), which represents the food and beverage packaging industry, regarding
media reports that the group may use 'fear tactics' in its public relations
strategy to counter efforts to regulate BPA. The lawmakers
asked NAMPA to submit all documents and names of participants involved
in BPA strategy meetings held over the past two months. The trade
group welcomed the congressional enquiry but nevertheless reacted
defensively. 'This review process
in the international realm has led to the conclusion, time and again, that
BPA does not pose a risk for human health at the existing levels in food and
beverage packaging applications,' the organisation responded in a 3 June
statement. 'The simple fact is there is no readily available, suitable
alternative to BPA-based can coatings that meets the essential safety and
performance requirements for the broadest spectrum of foods now packaged in
metal and glass containers.' The American Chemistry
Council (ACC), a trade association for US chemical companies, said it
welcomed the congressional pressure, saying it would lead to 'timely
decisions, based on science'. However, the group also emphasised that the
science around BPA had been extensively reviewed within the last year by the
European Union, European Food Safety Authority, German Federal Institute for
Risk Assessment, Danish Environmental Protection Agency, French Food Safety
Authority, Swiss Office for Public Health, and others. These entities have
'uniformly concluded that BPA is safe in food-contact products,' ACC says. Rebecca Trager, US correspondent for
Research Europe |
Copyright (C) All rights reserved under FoodHACCP.com
If you have any comments, please send your email to
info@foodhaccp.com
