Proposed bans on BPA picking up steam

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American



On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


At least seven states are considering banning bisphenol A (BPA), a chemical found in baby bottles and other plastic products that U.S. federal regulators have said is safe but has been banned in Canada because of links to health problems including heart disease and diabetes.

Lawmakers in California, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan and Minnesota have proposed restrictions on BPA, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports – part of a periodic series of stories the newspaper is running on the chemical also found in the lining of cans.

The proposed state measures would ban BPA in baby bottles, baby formula cans, cups and other products for kids, according to the newspaper. The House and Senate are also considering bills, introduced by Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), that would slap a federal ban on use of BPA in all food and drink containers.

BPA mimics the female hormone estrogen, and has been found to promote tumor growth and decreased sperm count in rats. It has also been linked to heart disease, diabetes and liver failure, and has been found to linger in the human body, showing up in the blood of 93 percent of 1,469 Americans over age 6 who were tested for it in a Centers for Disease Control (CDC) survey.

A law banning the use of BPA in so-called sippy cups and baby bottles took effect earlier this month in Suffolk County, N.Y., making that Long Island community the first in the U.S. to take such a step. Chicago is considering a similar measure.  In addition, six U.S. companies recently agreed to stop making baby bottles with BPA, which is used produce plastic.

The Canadian law bars BPA from being used in baby bottles and other infant products. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has said BPA is safe, though another U.S. agency, the National Toxicology Program, said in a September report that it has “some concern” about its effects on developing fetuses, infants and children. An international consortium of scientists that was recently assembled to review the science on BPA for the German UmweltBundesAmt (that country's equivalent of the Environmental Protection Agency) determined that the research FDA used in its safety assessment was flawed because it failed to consider the chemical's effects on behavior and prostate development, according to a copy of the group's conclusions provided to ScientificAmerican.com. The Journal-Sentinel, which obtained draft copies of the statement and interviewed scientists in the group, first reported on the document Saturday.

Image © iStockohoto/Melker Wickman

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe