BPA under fire from new studies

And the bisphenol-A (BPA) cycle of “is it safe or not?” goes on…

Severalstudies have again come out mostly from the Endocrine Society and noneof them were pleasing to the BPA manufacturers’ (and consumers’) ears.First stop is during the Endocrine Society’s annual meeting which washeld last week in Washington, DC.

The following papers were presented that according to the American Chemistry Council (ACC) have not been peer-reviewed or published in scientific literature.

  • Bisphenol-A Exposure In Utero Leads to Epigenetic Changes and Altered Developmental Programming, by Hugh Taylor, MD
  • Low-Dose Bisphenol A Promotes Arrhythmogenesis in the Female Heart Via Alteration of Calcium Handling, by Scott M. Belcher, PhD
  • Oral Exposure of Female Rhesus Monkeys…, by Frederick vom Saal, PhD.

ACCsaid few details were available in the abstracts and the scientiststhemselves bypass the scientific process in favor of sensationalism.

Someof the researchers’ method that ACC objected to include the injectionsof BPA into animals, which ACC said have limited value for assessinghuman health effects (as acknowledged by the National Institute ofEnvironmental Health Sciences); and that studies on cell cultures arealso unlikely to be directly relevant to human health unless suchrelevance is scientifically validated.


“Mostnotably though, the study presented on rhesus monkeys appears toconfirm that BPA is efficiently converted after oral exposure tobiologically inactive metabolites, which are then rapidly eliminatedfrom the body without bioaccumulation. If verified, this data stronglysupports the recent conclusions of eleven government bodies worldwidethat bisphenol A is not a significant health concern.” -ACC

Another studyfrom researchers at North Carolina State University (NCSU) and theNational Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) came out onJune 17 and was published by the journal Biology of Reproduction.

Thestudy reported the significant reproductive health effects in rats thathave been exposed to BPA in a dose that is said to be the equivalent tothe EPA’s ‘Lowest Observable Adverse Effect Level.’

Thestudy found that female rats exposed to a BPA dose of 50 micrograms perkilogram of body weight (µg /kg) in their first four days of lifeexperienced early onset of puberty. Female rats exposed to 50milligrams per kilogram of body weight (mg/kg) during their first fourdays of life developed significant ovarian malformations and prematureloss of their estrus cycle.

The ACC reiteratedthe limited value of doing BPA-injected animal experimentation and alsothe relevance of comparing BPA dosage level between animals and humans.


“Theresearch was done on rats, making it difficult to determine itsapplicability to humans… The researchers also state incorrectly thattheir study is significant because it used a dose equal to the EPAreference dose for BPA, which is a science-based lifetime daily intakelevel determined to be safe by EPA. The EPA reference dose isspecifically applicable only to oral exposure, not to injectionexposure.”- ACC

TheACC is hoping that the FDA will expedite their review on the safety ofBPA to clear the confusion on its safety. The group is also blaming media bias in their coverage of BPA, which ACC claimed “suppressed the scientific evidence and truth about its safety.”





Leave a Reply