Strollerderby : BPA

Leaked Minutes: BPA Makers Fight Back

Miriam Axel-Lute — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 18:00:00 GMT

The public health blog Effect Measure has gotten their hands on a set of leaked minutes from a meeting of representatives of industries that use the toxic endocrine-mimicker bisphenol-A (BPA) on how to counter the negative media about it.

It's rich: They figure getting a scientific spokesperson won't be possible (gee, why?), but are hoping to find a young pregnant mom to do it. They want to emphasize the loss of conveinence to poor folks and busy mothers, appeal to our desire for choices, and make us worry about losing jobs. They don't figure they can win on Facebook and complain about already having spent too much money on this.

In fact it's so rich that I have to acknowledge that while I have no reason to doubt its veracity, if I were writing a satire of how I expected such a meeting to go, it would look just like that. Only it would be shorter and less detailed.

So y'all: You are forewarned. Someone's going to try to tell you BPA is good for you and your kids. It'll be just as insincere and self-serving as it sounds.

Photo of BPA-free sippy cups CC Tiffany Washko, via Flickr.

More by this author:

Breaking Bad on Plastics

JeanneSager — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 13:53:00 GMT

If only Benjamin Braddock knew then what we know now - plastics are a bummer for parents. Not to mention the environment.

But you don't have to be a graduate of anything to understand this helpful chart I picked up from the folks at Zo-Li, the baby product company that's managed to incorporate toxic-free plastics into all its goodies for kids.

Breaking down the different types of plastics, where you'll find them and what affect they'll have on your kids, the chart is a print and tack to the fridge if I've ever seen one. Because who wants to take a chance with their kids?

Their biggies to avoid:

Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) - also known as Plastic #3 - Usually found in cling wrap, squeeze bottles, bigs, mattress covers, diaper changing mats, bottles for cooking oil, window cleaner, and detergents PVC poses risks to both human health and the environment. PVC needs additives and stabilizers such as lead for strength and phthalates for ﬂexibility. The manufacturing and disposal of PVC emits dioxins into the air which settles on grasslands and water impacting the meat and dairy products consumed by humans. Dioxin is a known carcinogen and hormone disruptor associated with learning and behavioral problems in children, decreased birth rate, and reduced immune functionality.

Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) - also known as Plastic #6 - Used in opaque plastic cutlery and Styrofoam disposable cups, carry-out containers and meat trays. Styrene can leach from Styrofoam containers and is a known carcinogen that is toxic to the brain and nervous system through prolonged exposure.

Polycarbonate - This is a catch-all of all plastics that don’t fall into any of the other six groups. Some of the new bio-plastics that are corn / rice / potato / tapioca-based plastics as well as the newer plastics labeled BPA-free are included in this group, but the type of plastic to avoid in this group is polycarbonate. Polycarbonate is commonly used in plastic baby bottles, reusable water
bottles, and some clear plastic cutlery. Bisphenol-A (BPA), found in polycarbonate is a hormone disruptor, which can leach into the foods and liquids in polycarbonate containers. BPA has been linked to several health issues including prostate and breast cancer, early onset of puberty, miscarriages, birth defects, behavioral issues such as hyperactivity, obesity, diabetes, and impaired immune function.

Want the whole chart to keep your kids safe? Click on the image below to print and save.

Images: BarSupply/Zo-Li Baby

Ban BPA? Manufacturers Cry Poverty

JeanneSager — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 13:26:00 GMT

You've got to love the recession - all of a sudden big manufacturers are worried about the poor. Worried their poor customers won't have the money to buy their products anyway.

As Suffolk County, New York tries to become the first county in the country to enforce a ban on Bisphenol-A (BPA) in children's products, manufacturers are crying poverty.

Force them to remove the reported carcinogen, and makers say they'll have to jack up their prices so high it will be bad for low-income parents and create problems for hospitals. Snort.

They do realize six of the largest baby bottle makers JUST announced they're going BPA free, right? It's obviously working for some companies . . . or at least six of them. Lobbying against the county, representatives of the plastic bottle and sippy cup makers asked lawmakers to point the bill toward EMPTY containers, freeing them up to fill bottles of formula sent to hospitals for newborn babies with lots of icky chemicals.

But, hey, they're helping poor people. They can sleep at night!

The Suffolk County Legislature voted unanimously in support of the ban on BPA earlier this month, and a set of state legislators are now working together to make a similar ban effective across New York.

Image: OhMyGov

UPDATE: Bye Bye BPA: WHICH Bottles Will Go Bisphenol Free

JeanneSager — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 17:57:00 GMT

Checking for the BPA-free label when shopping for baby bottles may soon be a thing of the past. The six largest manufacturers of bottles in the United States have voluntarily agreed to go Bisphenol-A free.

We reported on this story over the weekend (see below), but thanks to our friends at SuperEco, we now have a list of who's involved in the manufacturer cave in.

Going toxin free are Gerber, Avent America (which stopped production back in December), Evenflo, Disney's First Years, Dr. Brown and Playtex.

Attorneys general in Connecticut and New Jersey put forward a request to the bottle makers, asking for the hormone-disrupting chemical to be removed from the manufacturing process. The request came on the heels of newer research that shows the affects of BPA are large even at low doses, doses lower than the FDA's current standards. Studies have linked BPA to everything from cancer and obesity to problems with brain function and mood disorders. They've also shown BPA is building up in the bloodstream. In a study of people age six and older, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found detectable levels of BPA in ninety-three percent of two thousand five hundred seventeen urine samples.

Of course, the big companies aren't exactly doing this all out of the goodness of their hearts. Babies R Us and a number of other retailers announced last year that they would phase out all sales of bottles with BPA in them. Canada has outright banned the substance.

But sometimes even the big companies make decisions that are good for parents.

Image: OhMyGov

BPA More Ubiquitous and Tenacious than Previously Thought

Shannon LC Cate — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 23:04:00 GMT

Bisphenol A (BPA), a controversial chemical many scientists say contributes to a variety of health problems, has been used for years to harden plastics, like the plastic used in many baby bottles. You've probably heard the outcry among parents and seen the shift to "non-BPA" plastic bottles, glass bottles, stainless steel bottles and the like.

Now scientists say that either BPA is not eliminated from the body as quickly as its defenders have always claimed, or we are all exposed to much more of it than previously supposed. Researchers tested subjects by having them fast for various lengths of time and found that the BPA in participants' urine changed little from those who had recently eaten to those who had fasted for several hours.

Scientists speculate that tap water, house dust, and other sources may be causing a more constant level of exposure to the chemical. It is also possible that BPA lingers in the body long after exposure. It is, of course, most disturbingly possible that both are true.

This is a big problem because when the FDA ruled last year (to great protest from the scientific community) that BPA is safe enough not to ban, it based its conclusion on the idea that humans are exposed to only a tiny amount of BPA--far lower than lab animal testing suggested might be problematic. Now it looks like we are exposed to quite a bit more of it--or it builds up in our bodies--than we knew. It could be that a BPA pile-up in our bodies could reach those more dangerous levels.

As soon as I learned about BPA, I switched out my plastic baby bottles to glass, my plastic sippy cups to stainless steel, my plastic food containers to glass and I tossed all toys my kids chewed on that might contain it. But as a working mom with two small children and a mountain of laundry, house dust is far from my control, however fruitlessly I attempt to combat it. Here's hoping researchers find the answers about BPA soon, and do something to protect those of us with out of control dust bunnies.

For more on how we manage to accidentally poison our children, see:

Trace Mercury Found in High-Fructose Corn Syrup

Peanut Corporation of America Knowingly Sold Tainted Food

Peanut Allergies, Peanut Schmallergies?

Web Index of Recalled Peanut Butter Products

What Will Tainted Peanut Butter Really Do to Our Kids?

Peanut Butter Recall Expanded

Peanut Allergy Scare Overblown?

They Say – Most Toys Are Toxic

Brett Singer — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:30:00 GMT

NYPIRG, which is an acronym for "New York Public Interest Research Group" and not an ancient Hebrew word meaning "bummer", tested a bunch of toys for toxic materials. And they found nothing wrong! Right?

WRONG.

A third of the 1,500 toys NYPIRG tested contained "'medium' to 'high' concentrations of toxic chemicals." Oh, but they didn't test any cool toys that you might actually want to buy. Right?

WRONG!

The Disney Fairies Fold Out Chair and Sleeping Pad had "dangerous levels of mercury and bromine," according to published reports.

Well I’m fine because I stick with more traditional wooden toys from brands like Melissa & Doug. Those are OK.

WRONG!

NYPIRG tested Melissa & Doug's Beginner Band Set, whose label declares that the toy wooden instruments "are handmade, non-toxic and exceed U.S. standards." Those Grinches at NYPIRG found "high levels of lead and arsenic." This toy, as well as the Disney Chair/Pad, were found on the shelves at a Toys R Us in Manhattan. Fun!

Now, I'm not trying to make light of this situation. But it really feels like the only way to fully avoid nasty substances to do is not buy anything. I mean, if you can't trust Melissa & Doug, who can you trust? (This may not be an issue, since, as Madeline put it, nobody's buying anything this year anyway.)

I should also state clearly that I am only reporting what NYPIRG found. I have no direct knowledge of the levels of toxins in any toy made by Disney, Melissa & Doug, Irving & Wendy, or any other manufacturer or individual, known or unknown, on planet Earth or planets yet to be discovered.

NYPIRG suggests that parents visit HealthyToys.org before they shop. Of course, that won't help if no one has tested the toy that you want to buy. But I suppose it's a start.

Still, I'll ask the parent gallery – when you shop for toys, do you think about whether or not they contain potentially harmful substances? For some reason I think most parents (and this is just off the top of my head, I haven't asked anyone other than me) are more inclined to avoid potentially nasty stuff in food or food receptacles, such as BPA-free baby bottles. Will BPA-free toys be next?

Source: Metro

Image: Amazon.com

Are You Cutting Back This Holiday Season?

Morning News: Congresswoman Slams Down the Phone on Obama ... Twice! (also some toy news)

Babble's Ultimate Holiday Gift Guide

Mini Baby Sculptures Not Edible, Selling Like Hotcakes

Make Your Own Religious Doll (maybe these are non-toxic)

Denis Leary Puts Autism Comments In Context

Autistic Girl Kicked Out Of Girl Scouts

Brain Wave Study Sheds Light On Autism

They Say: "Microwave Safe" Ain't

Miriam Axel-Lute — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:00:00 GMT

If you're the type to be suspicious of chemicals and corporations, and especially their mixture, this will likely not surprise you:

A team of investigative journalists from the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel did one of those surprisingly simple things that we love real, honest-to-god investigative journalists for: an experiment. Specifically, they took 10 items marked with the comforting phrase "microwave safe" that were likely to be ingested by children or used for children's food (several were actually baby food, one was formula), heated them (in both a microwave and an oven), and had the contents tested for bisphenol-A (BPA).

(If you've been under a rock, BPA is the hormone-like substance that everyone from the Canadian government to Wal-Mart have been all freaked out about getting out of baby bottles recently, on account of it's been shown to do nasty things to neurological development and also cause pre-cancerous changes to mammary glands and other fun stuff at super low levels.)

I think you can tell where this is headed: All of the food had levels of BPA that were shown in lab tests to be problematic. The food in the Rubbermaid all-purpose container and the infant formula had the highest levels. So much for worrying about the bottles themselves. The article estimates how much an average kid might be ingesting per day, and it ain't pretty.

The manufacturers' response, of course, is to say it's just a tiny amount and won't hurt you. The FDA says "What they said" and goes back to buffing up an 8-year-old resume. There are (prepare to be shocked now) apparently no standards whatsoever behind the designation "microwave safe." If the container doesn't blow up, which would presumably generate complaints if not any regulatory action, then it can be labeled zappable.

This was one of those stories I almost didn't read, because I am (1) predisposed by my environmental studies background to be veeeerrrry skeptical of claims that strange chemicals are harmless and (2) completely and utterly dependent on my microwave. I'm sure as hell not going to put a pan on the stove every time I need to heat up a quarter cup of frozen peas or leftover lentil soup for my daughter.

I had been comforting myself with the vapid mneumonic that Real Money readers came up with a while back about the better and worse plastics ("1, 2, 4, 5 will keep you alive; 3, 6, 7 will send you straight to heaven." Yes, I am embarrassed that I remember it), but the infuriatingly thorough MSJ notes that BSA was leaching from no.s 1, 2, and 5 as well. Great.

I guess this is where I consider dropping the plastic bowls when microwaving is needed and hoping my toddler doesn't shatter enough of our motley assortment of ceramic ones to constitute its own safety hazard. The plastic is still going in the dishwasher though. I know my limits.

More by this author:

Six Steps to a Parent-Friendly Wedding

BPA Bottles to Be Banned in Canada

Jen Chaney — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 19:03:00 GMT

They don't mess around with their baby bottles in the Great White North. The Canadian government announced Friday that it plans to ban bottles that contain bisphenol A, or BPA, the controversial chemical found in many plastic products. As we've all heard umpteen times by now, there is evidence that exposure to BPA may cause health problems, including possible hormonal and reproductive disorders in infants.

Here in the U.S., the federal government has not proposed banning baby bottles that contain BPA. But, as the AP reports, several state goverments are considering ways to restrict its use. Some major retailers also have pulled BPA-containing products from their shelves.

If there is a reason that U.S officials haven't issued a ban, it's probably because the scientific community at large can't seem to agree on whether BPA is really harmful. The FDA still says it's safe, although an independent panel is in the process of reviewing that claim. But that panel's effectiveness recently has been called into question because its chairman, Martin Philbert, headed a research center that received a donation from Charles Gelman, a well known critic of the BPA backlash.Lawmakers are investigating that potential conflict of interest. In other words, this whole thing has turned into one hot, baby bottle mess, which means that getting a clear answer about the potential hazards of the chemical may take a while.

What do you think? Is Canada doing the right thing by swfitly banning BPA bottles and erring on the side of caution? Or is the U.S. taking appropriate action by evaluating more evidence before considering a nationwide ban?

Related Posts:

Morning News: No One Told Hillary That Palin Would be There!

Back to School for the Plastics Paranoid

Photo: green-mommy.com

What Won't Men Do With a Diaper?

JeanneSager — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 16:31:00 GMT

I'm beginning to wonder if some men just have a diaper fetish.

First it was the guy stealing dirty diapers off porches in upstate New York. Now a Ukranian boxing champ is extolling the use of his son's wet diapers to reduce swelling in his fists.

"Baby wee is good because it's pure, doesn't contain toxins and doesn't smell," Vitali Klitschko told a German newspaper this week. "The nappies hold the liquid and the swelling stays down."

Apparently he's had one knock too many on the noggin.

Let me poke a little at his bubble. I'll do it carefully; I don't need to be "wee'd" on. See, babies are little humans. In other words, he's wrapping his hands in human waste. Doesn't sound quite as nice as baby wee, but what the hey.

Oh, and about those toxins. Apparently he doesn't keep up with the 'Derby. Because Amy gave us the lowdown months ago on all the toxic nasties that have been popping up in baby piss tests of late - think that unpronouncable hot parenting word, phthalates. Considering he got the idea from his Grandma, I guess we can excuse that part. Granny wasn't worrying about phthalates or BPA when she plopped her kids in their lead-painted crib.

Remind me not to shake hands with any boxers from the Ukraine.

Image: DiaperReview

Dirty Diaper Thief on the Loose in Upstate New York

Five-Year-Old Catches STD From Dad's Towel?

Part II: Why Parents of Boys Have It Better (And Why They Don't)

Do Your Kids Go to Camp Grandma As Much as You Did?

Three-Year-Old Romanian Girl Youngest Singer, and She's Cute As All Get Out

Mob Mol Who Smuggled Sperm Says Prison System Hates Her Child for Being Born

Morning News: No One Told Hillary That Palin Would be There!

Madeline Holler — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 13:30:00 GMT

Today we've got Palin, sure, and the ancillary bits and pieces she brings with her (like blindsiding Hillary Clinton!). But there's also big news on oil drilling (and the Republicans are mad!), a new, new study of BPAs (bad news everyone), a new superbug plaguing hospitals, smart babies, big married babies, something free from the IRS and the loss of a television institution.

Let's sweep up our hair, rub our freshly colored lips together and get started with Daily Palin:

Hillary Clinton abruptly canceled her scheduled appearance at a rally next week in NYC to avoid a clash with the secret headliner, Sarah Palin. Organizers of the rally, a protest against Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, also invited the VP candidate. Only, they didn't mention that rather notable detail to Clinton. The senator's aides first learned that Palin would attend the rally from reporters. Needless to say, they're pissed.

Not only will Sarah Palin not testify in Troopergate (get background here), none of the key witnesses will either unless a full Senate or the Alaskan Legislature compels them to. Republican lawmakers in Alaska filed a lawsuit in an effort to just end the investigation already.

Speaking of ends, is this it for Carly Fiorina and McCain's campaign? Yesterday she told a radio DJ that Palin was not fit to run a major company. To help clarify what she meant, she later said she didn't think John McCain was qualified to run a big company either. Wow, Carly ... your campaign surrogate calendar just got a whole lot emptier.

In other political news, the House approved off-shore drilling and the Republicans are mad -- not enough oil in the allowable areas. Bush is already planning a veto.

Is there enough money to keep bailing out financial institutions? Which money-handler will collapse before our eyes today?

The IRS is looking out for the bottom line too -- tax filers' bottom line. They want private tax-filing software companies to provide free e-filing. Some of the companies are looking at allowing lower-income filers to send their forms electronically at no extra fee. Nice idea, but let's consider how they'll work it into a new, higher purchase price.

Researchers are warning of a new superbug that is invading hospitals. It's a virulent strain of a common intestinal bacteria and now rivals MRSA -- that other nasty hospital superbug -- in its threat to humans. Ick!

A boring old straight couple getting married in California objects to the new, gender-neutral language on the marriage license forms. Instead of "bride" and "groom," the simple sheet asks for Party A and Party B. They're exploring their options. In the meantime, she's not getting Party A's health insurance, nor are they officially married. Huh. Must be frustrating to just want to settle down and get married without a bunch of laws and ill-fitting labels getting in the way!

Bisphenol-A bad! Bisphenol-A good! Bad! Good! Bad! Good! Okay, a new study -- one actually conducted on humans, living, breathing, plastic off-gas intaking humans! -- has given food safety officials pause. Not saying there's a connection, a cause-and-effect relation, just that those with a bunch of BPA in their pee tend to have diabetes and heart disease. This study is of note for those on Capitol Hill who are investigating whether industry had undue influence on regulators, who determined that studies had been done on mice and therefore ... g'head with the BPA-loaded sippy cups!

So you know how your one-year-old's just totally bright and really gets you? The good news is, you're right! The not-so-great news? Baby's not so special. Researchers are finding 12-month-olds are wise beyond their year.

Finally, a moment. Let's join hands and say good-bye to an old friend. The LA Times is reporting that TRL, that institution, that show that launched a thousand unworthy careers, is laying down the mic, no longer taking calls, pulling the curtain across the window view of Times Square. Total Request Live is over. What will be left for our children?

Morning News: Tina and Sarah and Cindy -- Oh My!

Political Nanny: McCain Gets Grilled on 'The View'

Morning News: Sarah P. Soothes Some, Induces Spit-Takes in Others

Photo: abcnewsgo.com

Back to School for the Plastics Paranoid

Miriam Axel-Lute — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 18:45:00 GMT

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean half the things your kid touches aren't toxic. Sadly plenty of them are, or might be. If you're still trying to sort out the question of BPA in bottles for your infant, you may just want want to bookmark this one for future reference: Center for Environmental Health and Justice's list of PVC-free school supplies. (Note to self: Since when is a cell phone considered a school supply? Aren't they banned in most schools?)

Photo by the prodigal untitled13

Greenhouse: BPA Ban Fails

Amy Kuras — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:30:00 GMT

Proponents of banning bisphenol-A, a chemical used in baby bottles, sippy cups, and the coating of formula cans were handed a huge defeat Monday, when the California Legislature voted down a bill that would ban the chemical from baby bottles.

Another bill to ban a chemical compound called PFOA, which is used in food packaging and is a key ingredient in Teflon, also was defeated.

Concern has been growing among parents about BPA, which is believed to mimic hormones in the body and disrupt the endocrine system. It's been linked to male infertility, among other issues, and is widely used in baby bottles and sippy cups, although more and more BPA-free alternatives are on store shelves.

Senate Bill 1713 by Sen. Carol Migden of San Francisco, would have banned bisphenol-A from baby bottles and other products. Laboratory studies show the chemical harms brain development. Migden's measure failed on a 27-31 vote when 22 legislators abstained from voting.

Senate Bill 1313, by Sen. Ellen Corbett of San Leandro, would have banned the chemical PFOA from food packaging, which has been identified as a likely human carcinogen. It fell five votes short of the 41 needed with 11 members of the Assembly not voting.

However, the Food and Drug Administration released a report last Friday, right before the California vote, declaring that BPA is safe in the levels human are typically exposed to.

The chemical industry rallied aginst the bills, running ads showing an empty grocery cart in a dry lake bed, wich implied that every item in a typical grocery list would have to be pulled frmo the shelve sif the bill were to pass.

It's possible the legislature will revisit both bills again.

They Say: BPA-Larded Plastic Bottles Safe and Delicious

Madeline Holler — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:03:00 GMT

The European Union's top safety officials say that the tiny amount of BPA found in plastic baby bottles -- you know, the ones you threw out a few months ago and replaced with heavy glass -- isn't enough to harm humans. Or baby humans. Only rats. And baby rats.

From MSNBC:

A scientific panel of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has looked into how people metabolize BPA and concluded that tiny amounts of the chemical to which humans are exposed leave body quick enough to cause no harm, EFSA said Wednesday.

The tests that got everyone in an uproar were done on rats and humans, turns out, are different from rats.

I don't know, though. The cats out of the bag on this one for me. I'm one of those that went through the cabinets and tossed most of our sippies and kiddie cups (not much of a sacrifice since my youngest is old enough to drink from unlidded glass cups). We also cut down on our bottled water consumption, which can only be a good thing in the broader picture. So I don't think this study will get me to go back to plastic just yet.

What about you? Did you throw out the babies bottles with the earlier BPA study? Think you'll go back? Or are you going to sit tight like me and see what else comes out about this?

Photo:

Fear of plastic + timing = big bucks

Brett Singer — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 14:30:00 GMT

Interesting article over on Forbes.com about the BornFree people. Turns out they not only make the bottles, they help make sure that people know how dangerous the BPA-filled versions are.

Apparently, when BornFree began back in 2006, very few people cared about BPA. So what does a dadpreneur (that's a dad entepreneur – see how dumb it sounds?) do? Make sure that everyone knows how bad plastic is. According to Forbes, BornFree's President Ron Vigdor "sometimes exaggerates when comparing bisphenol A-free bottles to polycarbonate versions. 'One is with arsenic, one without. Which one would you like to buy?'"

So what's wrong with that?

It makes me wonder how many supposedly dangerous things are the result of hype rather than fact. I'm not saying BPA-free bottles are a bad thing, or that Bisphenol-A isn't harmful. I have no idea. I'm not taking a side, and if people would rather use BPA-free bottles, I think it's great that they have the opportunity to do so. But think about it this way: if you have a product that you think meets a need, and nobody seems to care, how far do you go to create that need? Are you doing the world a favor or just making a quick buck? Or both? Does anyone have a problem with that? How many question marks can I use in a single post?

image: Amazon.com

Words Have Many Meanings, Part 2

Lingo-watch: Manimony

BPA-Free? Not So Much

Wee*Go's Soft-Shelled Glass Bottle Defies Toxins, Breakage Alike

A Cheap* Plastic Cup That Won't Kill or Maim You

BPA-Free? Not So Much

Amy Kuras — Tue, 06 May 2008 19:54:00 GMT

We're all worried these days about bisphenol-A (or BPA), a chemcial that leaches from hard, clear plastic polycarbonate baby bottles and can cause disruptions ot the endocrine system
So what a fabulous idea from Amazon to open their BPA-Free Baby Store, gathering a selection of their products that don't use the chemical and putting them all in one place on the site.
Only one problem: Some of the products do contain BPA.
According to Z Recommends, which uncovered the problem, only four of 14 products lumped in the BPA-Free Store contained BPA, and of those, two had it in the handles or a flip-top that covered a sippy spout –in other words, areas that were unlikely to leach (BPA leaches when the plastic containing it is heated, which is why bottles are such a concern).
Two of the others, though, were bottles: Gerber's ComfortHold bottle and Dr. Brown's standard bottle. In the case of the Dr. Brown's bottle, it may have been a mix-up –the company recently introduced a glass bottle and announced plans to release a BPA-free plastic one, but clicking on the product ID number went right to their polycarbonate models.
None of the manufacturers are claiming their products are BPA-free – Amazon, however, did. A quick check of Amazon before I posted this found the offending products gone from the BPA-Free Shop, nore did they come up in a search for "BPA-Free."

Z Recommends has a very detailed report on the issue on their site, so follow the link. Their main concern, and mine, is that people could be misled into buying bottles that have BPA in them. Being a smart consumer saves the day.

The Poison Bottle: Canada and Walmart Take BPA Off Market

Cole Gamble — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 16:00:00 GMT

Thanks to Canada’s proposed ban on plastic baby bottles with the chemical BPA, Walmart stores have announced they look to have such bottles free from their stores by next year.

Playtex, manufacturer of baby bottles, has also jumped aboard the anti-BPA bandwagon, announcing the company will discontinue BPA products by years end.

BPA, or bisphenol A, is a common plastic component found in dental sealants, baby bottles, the liners of food cans, CDs and DVDs, eyeglasses, water bottles and hundreds of household goods. If you are not familiar with the possible dangers of BPA, check out Amy’s or Madeline's post. Among the concerns over BPA addressed in a recent report from the U.S. government's National Toxicology Program are changes in behavior and the brain, early puberty and possibly precancerous changes in the prostate and breast.

While the National Toxicology Program’s findings have found the evidence of BPA damage in animal tests to be “limited” this report states the possible effects on humans “cannot be dismissed.”

Evidence of BPA’s dangers has been around for a while, but this is the first major government initiative to get them out of circulation. How about you, have you been BPA free for a while or is this all news to you?

On a complete unrealted note, take a look at thebaby picture in this post. Are those infant's ears pierced? Who does that?

Photo: www.growingkids.co.uk

Health Agency: Um, Oops! Some Plastics Might Be Dangerous

Madeline Holler — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 20:34:00 GMT

The federal government has reversed its stance on the risks of certain plastics. The agency in charge is now saying that BPAs actually might be harmful, especially to the very young.

Bisphenol A (BPA) is used in everything from dental fillings to sports water bottles. It's also found in most baby bottles and is also used to line the inside of formula cans.

Breastfeeders, you're not off the hook either. Apparently it's not unusual to have harmful amounts in breastmilk, too.

From the WashingtonPost.com

The National Toxicology Program, part of the National Institutes of Health, released a draft report today that says exposure to the chemical may be linked to breast cancer, prostate cancer, early puberty in girls and such behavioral changes as hyperactivity. It urged further study.

Earlier, the agency said small amounts don't carry much of a health risk. But now they're saying even low doses pose a risk. If the EPA adopts the findings, they may act to impose limits on the amounts of the chemical that can be used in various products.

BPA-free products are available, but they can cost a fortune. Still, with these findings, don't you feel like less of a sucker for buying some?

Photo: green-mommy.com

Can the Formula: Canned Baby Formula Contains Chemicals

Karen Murphy — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 13:27:00 GMT

Remember BPA? It wasn't long ago that people were all up in arms about it: Bisphenol-A, found in plastics like polycarbonate baby bottles, has been found to cause all sorts of bad stuff that you want your baby to avoid, so much so that you're now using glass bottles or expensiver BPA-free bottles, right? Too bad what's going in them, namely canned ready-to-feed baby formula, ALSO contains BPA.

Screwed by the FDA, the BPA-baby way!

Yes, a non-profit advocacy and research organization called the Environmental Working Group has conducted tests of several leading-name canned baby formulas (concentrated and "straight" versions) and has found them to contain BPA. (Their report, released yesterday, can be found here.) But when confronted with this information, the FDA claims yes, it's true that the inner coating on the cans contains BPA, but that it's at levels considered "safe."

So why am I uncomfortable with this? After all, there seems little disagreement that the BPA in the bottles was potentially harmful, so why would it suddenly be safe in cans? So, cancer-causing nasty chemicals are bad, but a little is okay? And who decides how much is okay? After all, there haven't been a lot of trials on humans up to this point. Anyone want to donate their baby for experimental purposes? No? I thought not.

There are going to be people who helpfully suggest, "You could always go back in time and breastfeed instead of giving your baby formula!" so I'll just clear that one away now, m'kay?

So, breastfeeding people, play nice.

And formula people, you might want to look into other-than-canned formula. And if you're one of those who fed your kid canned formula, take a deep breath, hug your kid, and remember that we're all exposed to cancer-causing agents practically all the time, and sometimes we can only rely on the information we have. So no kicking yourself, 'kay?

Photo: thedoctorcooks.com

Plastic Bottles Suck

Karen Murphy — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 11:28:00 GMT

Parents have enough to worry about these days as it is, especially parents of newborns. But here's one more: experts are advocating that you refrain from using poycarbonate baby bottles and sippy cups.

Yikes! We've mentioned this before, but it's worth another go: these clear, hard, shatterproof plastic items contain Bisphenol-A (BPA), which is being blamed for lots of bad stuff like cancer! Early onset of puberty! Infertility! More cancer!

Baby bottle brands containing BPA include Avent, Dr. Brown's, Evenflo, Gerber and Playtex. And, oh, when I say "experts", I mean the writers of a fairly mainstream baby advice book called Baby 411, which has been revised to include a warning against bottles with BPA.

Here's how you can avoid BPA in your baby's life if you use bottles:

1. Use glass bottles.

2. Use opaque-plastic bottles, like from Medela.

3. Use BPA-free plastic bottles, like from Born Free.

4. Use a drop-in system with bottles.

5. Don't buy store-bought baby food in metal or plastic containers

Oh! And what about toddlers, you ask? There's an excellent non-BPA sippy-cup wrap-up over at Z Recommends. I favor the stainless steel Kleen Kanteen myself.

Update! Here's another excellent and brand-specific wrap-up of baby bottles over at Z Recs!