Advertisement The concern around bisphenol A isn’t unfounded, especially for infants and pregnant women, for whom the switch to BPA-free alternatives may make sense, experts say. But it’s important to put this development in context and weigh it against known and controllable risk factors.
Consumers have seen this before: A widely used or ingested chemical undergoes studies that show inconclusive results and causes worry about its effects on human health. It may be tempting to tune out yet another concern due to health-scare fatigue or a feeling of powerlessness. But it’s wise to pay attention to new potential risks and modify behavior or buying patterns when appropriate — as long as that doesn’t substitute for taking action on the known and biggest health risks.
“I so often see people very concerned about some things that have some risk, minimal risk, and they obsess on it,’’ said Dr. George Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Associa-tion, a nonprofit group of public-health practitioners, in Washington. “Then they drive without their seat belt while they’re smoking.’’
For Benjamin, the decision about whether to make personal changes comes down to a few basic questions. First, who is saying something is a threat?
“I try to judge the credibility of the source,’’ he said.
“I try to do a little research myself. Then I ask the second question: Who’s taking it seriously?’’
Regulatory agencies, other researchers and retailers are among those whose actions would raise a red flag, he said. He also asks the fundamental question of who’s at risk, under what conditions, and whether the threat is clear and immediate or more subtle and long-term.
``Every now and then something gets to be a risk, and over time is not as big a risk as we thought,’’ Benjamin said, noting that research has gone back and forth on the value of red wine, for example, as well as the potential health problems from artificial sweeteners saccharine and aspartame.
In the case of bisphenol A, many scientists and consumer advocates agree with the National Toxicology Program’s draft report recently released that said the chemical is cause for some concern, though not alarm. BPA’s effects haven’t been tested in humans, but animal studies reveal it causes worrisome behavior changes, tissue changes and early puberty in females.
"We don’t know if there’s any risk at all,’’ said Dr. Michael Shelby, director of the National Toxicology Program’s Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction in Research Triangle Park, N.C.
"What raises our concerns a bit is there are some studies where animals have been exposed either as fetuses or newborns or young animals that have shown changes in behavior, tissue changes in the prostate gland or mammary gland that leave enough uncertainty about those effects that we can’t dismiss the possibility that there may be similar or related effects in humans,’’ he said.
David Schardt, senior nutritionist for the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a nonprofit consumer watchdog group in Washington, agrees that the research demands the public’s attention and further investigation.
"There’s enough disturbing evidence from well-designed studies that you can’t dismiss this as harmless,’’ he said. "There may be something going on and it has to be pursued.’’
Some companies such as Wal-Mart have begun moving away from products made with BPA. Concerned parents can shop for BPA-free baby bottles from manufacturer Born Free, Schardt said. For people who want to avoid canned foods, aseptic packages for items such as juice, milk and soup don’t contain bisphenol A, and Eden Foods uses can linings that are free of the chemical, he said.
