Human development, in large part, is controlled by the endocrine system. Glands and organs such as the thyroid, pituitary, and ovaries initiate and regulate a variety of developmental milestones by secreting specific hormones during different stages throughout life. If any of these crucial chemicals are in the wrong place at the wrong time, profound physical deformations can occur.
Enter Bisphenol A (BPA). BPA is a chemical that makes plastics stronger and more sanitary, but may also disrupt normal endocrine functioning. The ubiquitous compound is in food and drink packaging, water bottles, baby bottles, Tupperware containers…even inside the lining of most canned foods. BPA leaches into much of what we eat and drink, and at any given moment about 90% of Americans have detectable levels in their urine. So the obvious question is “Is this stuff dangerous?”
The short answer ‘Maybe’.
Last night the American Chemical Society teamed up with the AAAS and Georgetown’s Science in the Public Interest program to explore where we are in the current BPA debate. This highly informative event was moderated by John Hamilton from NPR’s science desk. Mr. Hamilton astutely pointed out what a politically charged issue this is, and identified the need for BPA effects to be considered differently for small and large doses.
Sarah Vogel from the Johnson Family Foundation wrote her PhD Dissertation on the history of the political and scientific debates about bisphenol A, and contributed insightful perspective. Specifically Dr. Vogel highlighted how in a number of physiological scenarios BPA mimics the effects of estrogen, and as biomonitoring technology advances so does the prevalence of where we identify BPA.
Christopher Borgert, a researcher from the University of Florida served as a panelist as well and reminded the audience that no matter how political an issue may become, good science requires objectivity. Too many researchers in the BPA arena, perhaps similar to climate change, may have already decided how they stand on the issue, and that can produce scientific data that is empirically questionable.
Finally, Mark Duvall, an attorney at Beveridge & Diamond discussed the need for BPA to be considered in upcoming food safety legislation. Mr. Duvall outlined how an “effect” and an “adverse effect” are very different things, and explained that the ‘Precautionary Principle’ by no means is based on causality.
No matter how skilled the moderator and speakers may have been, the safety of BPA, or lack thereof, is not an issue that is going to be solved in one evening. For a press release about the most recent BPA study check
here.
On Monday November 15th there will be a panel discussion followed by a Q&A on Climate and Energy Policy in the New Congress at the AAAS. Hope to see you there.
Add Comment
Subscribe to Comments
I was bummed I couldn't attend so thanks for the update.
Log In 
