The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) suffered some verbal abuse today from a highly critical report which complained that the agency ignored scientific evidence and used flawed methods when it determined that bisphenol A (BPA), a chemical widely used to harden the plastic in baby bottles and the popular Nalgene bottles, is not harmful.
The panel of scientists from government and academia who composed the report wrote that the FDA did not take into consideration studies that have likened BPA to prostate cancer, diabetes, and other health problems in animals. The report went on to criticize the FDA for not using enough infant formula samples to execute a proper analysis, and for not adequately accounting for variations among those samples.
The FDA’s evaluation of BPA “creates a false sense of security” and
“overlooks a wide range of potentially serious findings,” the report stated.
The panel also found that the chemical could pose a risk to
children at levels at least 10 times lower than the amount the agency
says is safe. Disturbingly, many of the studies that the panel of experts said the FDA ignored were
reviewed by the National Toxicology Program, which reported in
September that it had “some concern” that BPA can affect brain and
behavioral development in infants and small children.
But this is not the first time the FDA has taken a hit from the
scientific community. The regulatory body frequently hears allegations
from critics of the FDA that the agency relies too heavily on
industry-funded studies.
Fortunately, the expert science panel that drafted the report isn't simply a group of overprotective parents, they are part of the FDA's outside science board - experts who advise the FDA on complex issues. The full science board,
scheduled to meet and hear the panel's presentations Friday, can endorse the subcommittee's report or
write its own.
In response to the report, the FDA issued a statement reiterating that the present consensus among international regulatory agencies is that current levels of exposure to BPA through food packaging do not pose an immediate health risk to the general population, including infants and babies.
"The committee gave us valuable guidance on how we can improve our
assessment using the current data. But they did not say in any way that
I can find that there is an immediate health risk," Norris Alderson, FDA associate commissioner for
science told Reuters.
But the Canadians aren't buying it, and have already banned the use of BPA in baby bottles based upon their own reviews out of an abundance of caution.
With or without a government ban, consumers are already driving the marketplace. Retailers have already begun selling BPA-free baby bottles in response to consumer concerns and the trade group that represents BPA manufacturers said its members would promptly phase out the use of BPA in baby bottles and infant formula packaging if the FDA asked it to do so.
Related Stories:
[+] Feeling depressed? No worries! Government approves first magnet device for the treatment of depression
[+] FDA seeking to label condoms less effective in protecting against STDs
[+] FDA decision to approve sale of cloned animals incites debate
[+] FDA to monitor market performance of drugs
[+] FDA: Saving the world, one inhaler at a time...
[+] FDA to open offices in China
[+] FDA Regulates Chi-chi-chia Pet Seeds as 'Food'
[+] Government Salute: Food and Drug Administration