According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Judge Raymond Cadei in Sacramento County superior Court removed Bisphenol-A (BPA) from the state’s list of reproductive toxins. In January, California EPA officials announced that they would put the chemical on the Prop 65 list of chemicals known to cause reproductive toxicity, and they did just that in mid April. Other items on the California Proposition 65 list include lead, asbestos, arsenic, and tobacco smoke.
The National Resources Defense Council states that decision was based on a 2008 report by the National Toxicology Program, which found clear evidence of harm at high doses. It didn’t take long for the American Chemistry Council to file a lawsuit to protest the change. That suit stated that “putting BPA on the list of harmful chemicals is circumventing the state’s scientific process by allowing administrative staff to override the decision of a scientific panel from 2009.” The Judge agreed with the plaintiffs.
The questions and controversy about the possible dangers of BPA are many. Recent research from the University of California San Diego School of Medicine found that a molecule formed when BPA breaks down inside the human body causes health problems. The National Toxicology Program at the Department of Health and Human Services says it has “some concern” about the health effects of BPA. But other scientists and researchers, some employed by the industry, say that the chemical is not dangerous and the body quickly eliminates it through urine.
Last year the FDA banned BAP from baby bottles and sippy cups, but that action was taken because the substance is no longer used by manufacturers. The FDA continues to study the chemical and denied a petition filed by the NRDC to ban the chemical in 2010. Governments around the world, including Canada, the EU, China, and South Africa, have banned Bisphenol-A from food containers.
