The FDA Weighs In; BPA in Plastic Bottles is OK

The continuing saga of BPA

We have been following closely the recent developments in the story of a chemical compound called bisphenol A (BPA), a hardening agent found in many plastics. In an earlier entry I noted international confusion about what it is, why it might be a danger to health, how it was tested and some conclusions of that testing, whether valid or not. The story continues.

The federal government is wonderful to behold. Many people before me have observed that some government agencies have names so long and complicated that there must be precious little room on a page of stationery for a message.

On Tuesday, June10th, at a hearing held by [get this] the House Committee on Energy and Commerce's Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection, a panelist from the Food and Drug Administration, seeking to ease public concerns about the health hazards of BPA used in some plastic products, said that the agency has no reason to recommend that consumers stop using products containing BPA. Small amounts of bisphenol A can be released as plastics break down. Dr. Norris Alderson, the Food and Drug Administration's associate commissioner for science, said, however, that the level of exposure was safe. He further noted that some studies had reported higher release levels than projected by the agency, but many of those studies were conducted under unrealistic conditions.

A group of Democratic senators and consumer groups continues to be sufficiently concerned that they are calling for a ban of BPA in all children's products, including baby bottles and sippy cups.

The National Toxicology Program said in a recent draft report that there is "some concern" that bisphenol A can cause changes in behavior and the brain, as well as reduce survival and birth weight in fetuses. Those conclusions were drawn from animal studies and would be a stretch to equate to human behavior.

The bottom line becomes -- the FDA has approved the use of BPA in plastics. If you want to go with that, fine. But once again, if you don't want any BPA in any water bottles you might order from us, the you won't HAVE any BPA.

Information collected from the Wall Street Journal, June 11, written by Melanie Trottman; and from an Associated Press story published by the Arizona Republic

A quick note about USB "Flash Drives"

We are always doing our best to keep up with possible scams in our industry. We have just been advised of a new one involving Flash Drives or Thumb Drives or Memory Sticks or USB drives....

A new software has appeared in China which may be loaded onto the chip in a flash drive. When you plug in the flash drive and click "Get Info", it will indicate that the flash drive has a lot more memory than it actually does. A 64 MB chip may read 1 GB; a 128 MB chip may read 2 GB. This could lead to some really bent feelings between us and a client.

It is for this reason that we check with suppliers we TRUST before ordering any flash drives. It is one of these suppliers in Canada who brought this to our attention. This company is purchasing the software (for $80!) in order to try to find a way to defeat it. We do NOT buy direct from China; we buy through established importers who will stand behind what they offer.

This supplier also notes that this week has seen a DECREASE in pricing for the "real thing"; chips of 1,2, 4, 8, 16 GB. It seems that we have entered the "slow season" for chip manufacturers, so prices have moderated for the time being.

Once again, if you come across a deal that seems to good to be true, it probably is.

About Airshows, Dawn to Dusk and Beyond

Since this BLOG reflects my personal views, I want to address another area of my business. In addition to the prominence of Showline Promotional Products in the advertising specialties industry, I am a former radio/TV personality, a commercial voice-over artist, and since 1977, an airshow or flying show announcer.


Many years ago when I first entered the business of airshows, it was my eternal hero, Art Scholl, who restated the old showbiz maxim; "Leave 'em wanting more!" When I began announcing airshows, the overall running time (including a jet team if a show was fortunate enough to get one) was three to maybe three and a half hours. The gates would open at 9 or 10 AM, spectators would stream in and find a good place to watch, and many would walk around the grounds to look at civilian and military static displays. The show started at Noon or maybe 1 PM. When the show ended, folks left saying what a great show it had been. By 4:30 or 5 PM, the venue was clear.


About 12 or 15 years ago, shows began to run longer. A LOT longer. Gates would open at 9 AM, the first act flew at 9:15, and the finale landed around 4:30 PM. It seems that it was Air Force shows that did this first. I recall one Armed Forces Day weekend, a nationally-known act with a national sponsor got the call to fly at 9:15, and there was a great moaning and gnashing of teeth. He was essentially flying in front of no one. The next day, the F-15 tactical demo got the 0915 fly call. The pilot said that was fine, because he knew he could fly home and be in the pool by Noon. The point is that the early flights flew to very few people.


As for the acts who flew later, from altitude they could see people leaving as early as 1 PM, even a show featuring great talent. If there were a jet team (Blue Angels, Thunderbirds, Snowbirds, or a foreign team), I would ask families where they were going. Their answers were uniformly, "We have seen enough; we want to beat the traffic; we can watch from the car." They were just worn out, and usually the heat of the day had not yet arrived.


One of the reasons given for shows running longer was that the vendors -- purveyors of food and drink, wearables, videos, pins, posters, etc. -- wanted more time to sell their stuff. Actually, opening gates at 9 or 10 AM and not flying the show until Noon or 1 PM would still give vendors the same amount of time, but that reasoning has been ignored. A longer show is not a BETTER show; it is just a LONGER show.


Professional sports are an example of not making a form of entertainment a test of endurance. Barring overtime most pro sports are a three hour or less event. Before instant replay, NFL games were three hours. Including fights, NHL games ran two and a half hours. NBA games were two and a half hours; considering 48 minutes of game time, even that is a stretch. Baseball, one of the few team sports not played against a clock, used to run three hours or less. With two and a half minutes of commercials between half-innings vs one minute 20 years ago, games have become painfully longer. And now, with all the preening, posturing, stomping around the pitcher's mound or home plate, baseball's Commissioner Bud Selig has directly ordered officials and players to pick up the pace. 15 seconds between pitches, managers have to jog to and from the pitcher's mound. Less and less do we have to put up with the mind-numbing mass of dead air and the player who has to readjust his batting gloves after every pitch.


NASCAR is huge on television and in person. For the Vendors at the track, you will not hear NASCAR officials changing the Subway 500 to the Subway 550 so the vendors have time to sell more.


Those interminably long airshows are hard on all performers. The heat and humidity, the altitude of the field (and density altitude, if you are a pilot), the focus, the waiting around is not good for anyone, including the spectators. Through the years we have found most assuredly that fatigue can be a killer. For a 9 AM show start, we as performers are usually up at 5:30 AM, trying to dress and eat breakfast for a 7 AM brief. Announcers still have work to do after the brief, before they can go out to the stage and set up for the day. Whatever happened to the 9 AM performers briefing, report to station (airplane or stage) at 11, and fly the show beginning at Noon or 1 PM?


Sometimes we don't work in the best of weather. We'd all enjoy 75 degrees and a 5 knot breeze, but there is rain, wind, and on more than one occasion, snow. And the spectators have to be out in the same conditions.


I wonder when someone will get the message that a longer show is NOT really a better show. Of course the Air Force makes a show longer by putting ten or fifteen minutes between acts; THAT is real entertaining. But making a show longer by hiring more acts makes it more EXPEN$IVE! And having an act which flew at 9:30 AM fly again at 2 PM should answer the question, "Am I, as a show, treating these folks as professionals or as cattle?"


The escalating cost of fuel is forcing some shows to re-think their overall duration. To think that the loss of value of the dollar might actually be a blessing is foreign to my thinking. But maybe we will get back to a three hour show, and our spectators can get home in time for an evening meal, wanting to go to the next show. We will have left them wanting more.