<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: French Food Safety Authority Offers Lifeline To Bisphenol A Producers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://the-health-gazette.com/1069/french-food-safety-authority-offers-lifeline-to-bisphenol-a-producers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://the-health-gazette.com/1069/french-food-safety-authority-offers-lifeline-to-bisphenol-a-producers/</link>
	<description>Your interactive source for health news, views and reviews</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2012 17:48:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Editor</title>
		<link>http://the-health-gazette.com/1069/french-food-safety-authority-offers-lifeline-to-bisphenol-a-producers/comment-page-1/#comment-193</link>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 02:34:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://the-health-gazette.com/?p=1069#comment-193</guid>
		<description>California is virtually going the opposite way. Instead of rejecting all of the scientific studies and claiming more studies are needed before acting BPA could be listed as a toxin by the Californian Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). 

The OEHHA is considering the listing following a request from the Natural Resources Defense Council. In a letter to the OEHHA, the organization’s senior scientist Gina Solomon said: “We write on behalf of the Natural Resources Defense Council – an environmental and public health organization which as 1.2m members…250,000 of whom are Californians – to ask OEHHA to move forward immediately to list bisphenol A under Proposition 65 as a chemical that is known to the state to cause reproductive toxicity.” 

Its petition was based on a 2008 National Toxicology Program report which concluded that there is widespread exposure to BPA and that this may affect human development or reproduction.

Under state law, so-called Proposition 65 requires the governor to publish a list of chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>California is virtually going the opposite way. Instead of rejecting all of the scientific studies and claiming more studies are needed before acting BPA could be listed as a toxin by the Californian Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). </p>
<p>The OEHHA is considering the listing following a request from the Natural Resources Defense Council. In a letter to the OEHHA, the organization’s senior scientist Gina Solomon said: “We write on behalf of the Natural Resources Defense Council – an environmental and public health organization which as 1.2m members…250,000 of whom are Californians – to ask OEHHA to move forward immediately to list bisphenol A under Proposition 65 as a chemical that is known to the state to cause reproductive toxicity.” </p>
<p>Its petition was based on a 2008 National Toxicology Program report which concluded that there is widespread exposure to BPA and that this may affect human development or reproduction.</p>
<p>Under state law, so-called Proposition 65 requires the governor to publish a list of chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

