It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Did Big Plastic Pay Off The FDA???

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 20 2008 @ 09:02 PM
That's the headline of one article.

It's questioning why the FDA has allowed the use of a chemical that is found in plastics, it is called Bisphenol A, or BPA.

Bisphenol A, or BPA

It is a key monomer in production of polycarbonate plastic and epoxy resins.[4] Polycarbonate plastic, which is clear and nearly shatter-proof, is used to make a variety of common products including baby and water bottles, sports equipment, medical devices, CDs, and household electronics.[5] Epoxy resins are used as coatings on the inside of almost all food and beverage cans

BPA leeches out of plastics at low levels, and it is also used in baby bottles, that when heated up or cleaned in a dishwasher release higher doses of the chemical.

Did Big Plastic Pay Off The FDA???

The main problem with BPA is that it's being used in CANNED FOODS and baby bottles such at Avent's plastic baby bottles. Numerous studies have shown that when the baby bottles are exposed to boiling water or when they are put through the dishwasher they break down and the BPA seeps into the baby's milk/formula.

And the health affects from BPA?

When legitimate scientists have conducted studies on BPA, it is consistently linked to obesity, developmental problems, risk for heart attack, and breast and prostate cancer.

Here are some websites with info on some of the studies done on this chemical.

Bisphenol A Leaching from Popular Baby Bottle
A Survey of Bisphenol A in U.S. Canned Foods
Toxic Baby Bottles
Studies Link Chemicals to Genital, Breast Development
Boiling Water in Bottles Quickens Release of Bisphenol A: Study

So, despite ALL these studies claiming how harmful this chemical is, the FDA still allows the use of this chemical in food containers.

FDA Decision on BPA Outrages Health Advocates

Scientists, physicians, and children's health advocates expressed outrage with the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) announcement that bisphenol A - the hormone disrupting chemical found in numerous consumer products including can linings and baby bottles - is "safe."
"The FDA's assessment relies on just two studies which were funded by the American Chemistry Council (ACC). This ignores dozens of other studies done by independent scientists which have found evidence of health consequences," says Dr. Sarah Janssen, a physician and scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).

With sooo many studies (numbering over a hundred according to one article) saying BPA is harmful, why does the FDA decide to choose not to take any of these studies into consideration, and just use 2 studies that were funded by, would you believe, the American Chemistry Council!

American Chemistry Council

The American Chemistry Council represents the companies that make the products that make modern life possible,

Can you believe that!

The FDA is only using the studies funded by a company that represents the companies that make the products!


So, do you think the FDA might have been paid off?

[edit on 8/20/2008 by Keyhole]

posted on Aug, 20 2008 @ 09:37 PM
There is no doubt in my mind that the FDA betrayed us completely.

But since plastics are among the most profitable of petroleum byproducts, the corporate two-party regime will never reverse the decision unless coerced legally.

posted on Aug, 20 2008 @ 10:05 PM
Actually, it looks like Congress, or at least one Congressman, may come to the rescue!

Or, at least he's trying to!

FDA Decision on BPA Outrages Health Advocates

"The chemical industry's efforts to hide or misrepresent the hazards of its product have been so blatant that Congress has felt the need to intervene," said Dr. Jennifer Sass, a scientist with NRDC. Congress is scrutinizing the communications between the ACC and a PR firm, the Weinberg Group, whose clients have included the alcohol and tobacco industries.

A Union of Concerned Scientists poll of FDA scientists indicated broad industry interference within the agency.

Congressman Edward J. Markey (D-MA): "Since the regulators are asleep at the wheel, I've introduced legislation to ban BPA in all food and beverage containers, and will continue to work to ensure that it is enacted into law."

So, BPA may still be banned, but why is the FDA using studies/research paid for by the American Chemical Council (ACC)?

That's the real question I think!

Kinda seems to me there's a "Conflict of Interest" there to say the least!

[edit on 8/20/2008 by Keyhole]

posted on Aug, 20 2008 @ 10:32 PM
Freakin FDA are the most incompetent of all government agencies, which these days says a lot. Another example:

Mexican peppers posed problem long before outbreak

By GARANCE BURKE – 2 days ago

FRESNO, Calif. (AP) — Federal inspectors at U.S. border crossings repeatedly turned back filthy, disease-ridden shipments of peppers from Mexico in the months before a salmonella outbreak that sickened 1,400 people was finally traced to Mexican chilies.


A total disgrace if you ask me.

posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 05:48 PM
Here's some more new info on this: (you'll have to register to see the article, but it's a free medical website)

Plastic-Additive Bisphenol A Linked to Diabetes and Cardiovascular Events in NHANES Analysis

Last year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced that BPA was detected in the urine of 93% of tested participants, in the same overall NHANES database, who were six years old or older, "a finding that indicates widespread exposure to BPA in the US population. [2] " Concentrations varied inversely with age and with income, and women had higher levels than men.

Elevated urinary levels of bisphenol A (BPA), an additive in plastic and other materials used in food packaging and consumer products and one of the world's most widely used industrial chemicals, significantly raise the chances of also having diabetes or a history of cardiovascular events, according to a study based on the 2003-2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) [1].

A one-standard-deviation rise in BPA concentrations was associated with a 63% increased risk of having been diagnosed with coronary heart disease, a 40% greater likelihood of having had a "heart attack," and a 39% increased risk of diabetes, in the cross-sectional analysis adjusted for age, sex, and other risk markers. In the NHANES cohort of more than 1400 patients, the same degree of BPA elevation was also associated with abnormally high liver enzymes.

But, these studies don't mean a thing if the only studies the FDA will even consider are paid for by a company that "represents" the plastic companies!

new topics


log in