This will be IT for BPA (for a while)

I have spared you my rantings about bisphenol A (BPA), a chemical which occurs during the production of plastics. The principal concern has been with any minute TRACES of BPA which may be found in drinking bottles, especially in baby formula bottles. We all agree that anything which might endanger the health of an infant should be taken extremely seriously.

Since last I posted about this, there have been myriad opinions published on both sides of the BPA argument. Some are monographs from governments (plural) favoring both sides of the discussion, and some are from "private" or "independent" research groups, again favoring both sides of the discussion. In each case the published papers use terms like "we believe" and "consensus." To use the idea of BELIEF in this case stretches reality. A "belief" indicates an act of faith not necessarily based upon hard fact. And CONSENSUS means that a majority of involved parties voted one way or the other over the smaller voting group. "Consensus" is not science; it is sort of intellectual bullying. "More of us think X is true than people in your group, which thinks X is NOT true. So we win. Ha Ha."

I am still drinking out of BPA and non-BPA bottles. I agree that, as the FDA has stated, BPA in the tiny concentrations which may show up in drinking bottles is not dangerous to people who are not infants. HOWEVER if anyone wants bottles which are guaranteed BPA-free, we have bottle suppliers who guarantee no BPA. We can produce them either way. Your call.

Thanks for putting up with this. FKS

The "BPA Story" Never Ends

We... our entire promotional products industry... have been watching and waiting for any new developments in the bisphenol A story, argument, war, whatever since some national governments summarily banned the plastic additive from drinking water bottles, baby bottles, ANYTHING to do with food. It has been an up and down fight, and rather than joining the fray, many plastic bottle manufacturers have simply gone with the flow and offered BPA-free bottles.

What this means is there are fewer polycarbonate bottles on the market. PolyCarb bottles are the hard, clear bottles which many people prefer because you can see what's in them.

The third week of August 2008, our Food and Drug Administration released a "draft assessment" stating the BPA DOES NOT pose a health hazard when used in food containers.

A part of these findings are based upon the methodology used in the original product testing. It was noted that one of the tests involved heating a liquid in the bottle to an extremely high temperature, then testing the liquids in the containers for signs of evil chemicals. I don't know about you, but I usually lose or break a water bottle before I have a chance to wash it 500 times, and I am certainly not going to drink a hot liquid from it. Personally I viewed the original findings as based upon an unrealistic premise.

The FDA's draft continues, saying that exposure to the small amounts of BPA which may migrate from containers into the food they hold are not dangerous to infants or adults.

Bisphenol A is used in the production of the plastics, but it is not a part of the final product. BPA residue is washed away with normal dish washing. Any traces which are left are not harmful.

Interesting how we can be in the middle of the fight, yet we are simultaneously on the sidelines. Our preferred bottles are polycarbonates. We will continue to use them. But we also continue to offer bottles which are guaranteed by the manufacturers to be BPA-free. Most are not nearly as attractive or are twice the cost or more of the polycarb bottles. An alternative is bottles with stainless steel linings, but that, too, drives the cost up.

We believe that the BPA "scare" was a knee-jerk reaction to something which someone heard at a party. I am not being facetious; buzzwords make great press. Like: emissions from a cellphone antenna will turn your brain to mush. My favorite is hearing a terrifying misuse of the term "stall" when applied to anything aviation-related. But I digress.

We continue to watch the BPA story, and it is, indeed, never-ending.

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

What in heck is BPA, and is it in my Water Bottle?

Plastic Water Bottles: ARE THEY SAFE?

We are becoming buried in emails, articles, and mailings with reference to the safety of the chemical "Bisphenol A" (BPA) which may or may not be resident in products we offer. First and foremost, our concern is with our clients' health and well-being; if a client orders water bottles, we will ASK if they want BPA-free plastic bottles. If a client specifies "No BPA," SHOWLINE will specify in our purchase orders to the manufacturers that the plastics will NOT contain any BPA. We are not making a judgment on the safety of plastics containing BPA; we will simply specify that it will not be an ingredient in a particular order of plastic containers.

---

Plastic bottles have a recycling stamp and usually a resin code on the bottom, either within or next to the triangular recycling symbol. These codes are numbered 1 through 7. We were told at an industry trade show that, as a rule of thumb, products with the resin codes 1 [Polyethylene Terephthalate or PET], 2 [High Density Polyethylene or HDPE], 4 [Low Density Polyethylene or LDPE] and 5 [Polypropylene or PP] were free of BPA, and that products showing resin codes 3 [Polyvinyl Chloride or PVC], 6 [Polystyrene or PS] and 7 [OTHER, which may be a combination of several resins] may NOT be free of BPA.

I Googled many files from the American Chemistry Council. One entitled "Plastic Packaging Resins" lists the seven resin codes and descriptions, properties, applications and products made with recycle content for each. Nowhere is BPA mentioned. http://www.americanchemistry.com/s_plastics/bin.asp?CID=1102&DID=4645&DOC=FILE.PDF

From MedicineNet.com I read this article on BPA: http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=88802 In the article it notes: "Polycarbonate plastics that contain bisphenol A usually have a No. 7 on the bottom...." I am bewildered, because it does not mention resin codes 3 or 6.

In the May 2008 issue of Consumer Reports (tm) appears a feature "Recalls & Safety Alerts," specifically entitled, "A new focus on plastic ingredient [sic] in bottles and cans." This article summarizes the agreements and disagreements of governments and health organizations around the world. The next-to-bottom line reminds me of the O.J. Simpson trial, with lawyers and prosecutors arguing over "what OUR experts say is...", "Well, OUR experts say...." Offered in conclusion, CU suggests that we avoid polycarbonates with the recycling code 7 or the letters "PC," or both. However number 7 bottles made with BPA-free PES (polyethersulphone) will NOT have the "PC" marking. So this means what to me? I can safely offer a number 7 bottle with no marking other than the number 7? Furthermore, other BPA-free plastic alternatives include polyethylene, which may be marked with codes 1, 2, and 5. There is no mention of resin code 3 (polyvinyl chloride) which we have elsewhere been directed in so many words to avoid.

From the Polycarbonate/BPA Global Group I read an article about human safety and BPA. This, as you might imagine, is very Pro-BPA. However, it seems to indicate a miniscule risk of BPA doing any damage to humans: "Consumers would have to eat more than 500 pounds of food and beverages in contact with polycarbonate plastic or epoxy resins every day of their lives to exceed exposure levels determined to be safe by the European Food Safety Authority and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency."

There are additional papers from the Polycarbonate/BPA Global Group of which may be found on the web.

When word came out about BPA possibly being found in the liners of baby bottles, suddenly BPA became hot press; the mention of "leeching" and "baby bottles" in the same breath meant becoming glued to the television, awaiting the further details. The news seldom makes any mention of what the presence of BPA in a plastic actually means. They WILL say "unsafe", but that is an opinion, not a fact. Sadly it seems that "BPA" has become a buzzword that a vast majority of the public doesn't understand. This is not unlike "airline safety" or "handguns", or if you will go back forty years or so, "cyclamates." Before that, "fluoridation."

In the hundreds of manufacturers' special offers we receive each week, one entitled "No BPA Water Bottles!!!" caught my eye. The offer is for a "new soft squeezable co-poly water bottle, with sparkling clarity, high gloss and quality." The bottle is noted as #6 Recyclable. What? I thought a 6 was on the list to avoid.

SInce mid-2007 our purchase orders have carried this disclaimer: "In accepting this order, you are certifying that products contain no lead-based materials; that products will pass current federal tests for flammability; and that products contain no chemicals, exposure to which has been dertermined to be hazardous to humans." It is unfortunate that we cannot call a vendor of sport bottles and ask: "Are these BPA-free?" and expect from most any more than an answer, "Uh... what?" Eventually we can get a definitive answer, but this should be an up front "Yes/No" from anyone in customer service.

I am not one who is convinced that BPA at the levels to which we humans are exposed (without being force-fed gallons of heated liquid in a laboratory) is dangerous. Most of the negatives I find deal with heated liquids in water bottles, and most people I know carry ice water in their bottles. (For coffee tumblers and travel mugs, we suggest stainless liners.) Nonetheless, someone is going to HAVE to get the governments or the United States and Canada, the plastics industry and the advertising specialties industry squared away soon. Very soon. And this, as we enter our huge plastic water bottle sales season.

Permit me to assure you that for the time being, if you DON'T WANT BPA, then you WON'T GET BPA.

-Later, you-