A team of UK researchers from the Peninsula Medical School and the University of Exeter said analysis of new data from the United States demonstrates that “higher BPA exposure, reflected in higher urinary concentrations of BPA, is consistently associated with reported heart disease in the general adult population of the USA”. Their research was published in the journal PlosOne. (David Melzer, Neil E. Rice, Ceri Lewis, William E. Henley, Tamara S. Galloway. Association of Urinary Bisphenol A Concentration with Heart Disease: Evidence from NHANES 2003/06. PLoS ONE, 2010; 5 (1): e8673 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0008673)
This was a follow-up to a study the previous year and it confirmed the earlier findings. Predictably however, the The American Chemistry Council (ACC) adopted the same defensive strategy used by the tobacco industry when similar research raised the link between their products and cancer and other diseases. Steven G. Hentges, of the body’s Polycarbonate/BPA Global Group said: “Studies of this type are very limited in what they tell us about potential impacts on human health. The study itself does not establish a cause-and-effect relationship between BPA exposure and heart disease.”
Given the findings however, only fools, the ignorant and the corrupt or greedy would continue to support BPA exposure. Meanwhile sensible people will avoid bisphenol-A.
Using data from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2006- 2006 population study, researchers evaluated 1,493 people aged 18 to 74. They discovered that urinary concentrations of BPA had dropped by 30 per cent compared to previous results from 2003-04. However, they also found that higher BPA concentrations in urine were still associated with an increased prevalence of coronary heart disease in 2005-06.
The study authors are well aware of the limitations of associative research. Professor Galloway, professor of Ecotoxicology at the University of Exeter and senior author of the paper, said more investigation was needed into the cause of the health risk associations to clarify whether they were caused by BPA itself or some other factors linked to BPA exposure.
BPA is a chemical used in polycarbonate products such as baby bottles and sippy cups, as well as in the expoxy lining of food cans. Its continued inclusion in food packaging has raised consumer anxiety in the United States. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is currently reviewing its stance that the chemical poses no threat at existing acceptable levels. The agency was due to deliver its verdict by 30 November, 2009, but has failed to release its decision. See our earlier reports and associated comments from 17 November to 20 December 2009.
Tags: bisphenol A, BPA, heart disease
Australian health authorities, like the FDA, claim that BPA poses no health risks. It is unclear whether they actually think for themselves or consider research that conflicts with their judgements.
When approached by Choice, a major Australian consumer organisation, Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) had restated its position that BPA and phthalates posed no significant health risks at the low levels found in food but said it was planning to review its approach to regulating food packaging materials.
Choice said there was now enough sound scientific evidence “to raise genuine concerns that BPA and some plasticisers can cause health problems – even at the very low levels to which we are currently exposed”.
Choice acknowledged the threat level from these substances was uncertain but questioned the necessity of taking any risk, particularly with young children. It added that continued use of phthalates and BPA was no longer needed as safer alternatives were now available.
The consumer organisation said that plastics as a whole did not present a risk but highlighted two chemicals whose molecules are small enough to migrate from packing into food. It said BPA in polycarbonate bottles and the epoxy linings of food cans was a chemical that industry players should seek to eliminate from their products. The group also raised concerns about plasticisers in PVC, such as phthalates and DEHA (di-(2-ethyhexyl)adipate, used in the manufacture of bottles, cling wrap and the seals for screw-cap jars. It said such plasticisers can make up 40 per cent of the plastic material.
“While these compounds are undoubtedly hazardous at high levels of exposure, scientific opinion is divided over the risk from the much lower levels that we’re exposed to every day in our food,” according to a Choice statement. “There is, however, growing scientific evidence that even at these lower levels of exposure, phthalates and BPA may be causing problems such as infertility, obesity, breast cancer, prostate cancer, heart disease and diabetes.”
Filling the breach by FSANZ, Choice advised consumers to steer clear of plastics with the identification codes 3 – for PVC – and the catch-all category of 7. Choice also said to avoid fresh meat and vegetables wrapped in cling film, stating: “Most cling wrap sold for domestic use is now made from low density polyethylene (4), which seems to be safe,” said the group. “But supermarkets and many independent butchers and greengrocers are still wrapping meat and fresh vegetables in cling wrap made from PVC.”