Peril in plastic

But it found that adults have almost nothing to worry about. How to reduce BPA exposure Because it is so pervasive avoiding BPA completely is all but impossible. But experts say there are ways to decrease exposure Canned foods are a key source of BPA exposure. Use powdered infant formulas packaged in non steel cans. Steel cans for powdered formulas likely have a BPA lining. Leaching from plastics appears to occur at a much lower level than from can linings. Polycarbonate plastic food containers marked on the bottom with the recycling label No. Rigid and transparent plastic containers for food and drink and toddler sippy cups may contain BPA. Avoid using old and scratched plastic bottles which leach more. Plastics with the recycling labels No. on the bottom do not contain BPA. When possible use glass bottles or those made from the safer plastics polypropylene and polyethylene. Soft or cloudy colored plastic does not contain BPA. Bottles used to pump and ! store expressed breast milk by the brand Medela are also labeled BPA free. Many metal water bottles are lined with a plastic coating that contains BPA. Look for stainless steel bottles that do not have a plastic liner. Use ceramic glass and other microwaveable dishware. In the past some plastic wraps may have contained BPA. Some brands such as Saran do not contain BPA. And they warn that the chemical is especially toxic to babies and children. These scientists point to hundreds of studies showing that Bisphenol A harms animals. They say problems occur at exposure levels equivalent to those commonly seen in humans. Several state legislatures including those of California and Minnesota have considered but not passed bills limiting use of BPA. Hubbard a Democrat introduced a bill outlawing use of BPA in baby products including toys and bottles. The bill was voted down Hubbard will try again in the January legislative session. Passed in the law requires companies to! ask the U. Environmental Protection Agency for permission to use new chemicals. The big picture is that there s a complete lack of basic public health information. But the chemical industry says the law is effective. TSCA is a strong statutory framework for chemical regulation. They say this is particularly true of chemicals including BPA introduced before TSCA took effect in . Such compounds received a waiver and are automatically assumed to be safe. Goldman was a high ranking EPA offical in the Clinton administration. That s a perverse disincentive for industry to find out more about their chemicals. Everyone agrees that BPA mimics estrogen. The disagreement is over how much effect the compound has and at what doses. The debate over BPA has heated up in recent months. But it concluded that the chemical is unlikely to cause other harm. Both panels were funded by the federal government but they worked separately. Environmental Protection Agency and consisted of scientists who had studied BPA or endocrine disruption. This panel ! consisted of researchers who were not BPA experts. It is not unusual for the NTP to use non experts on a chemical review panel. But many scientists criticize this approach and say non experts can t adequately understand the complexity of the issue. The NTP panel also excluded many lab studies that found BPA risks.

Source: http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/ideas/bal-id.bpa23dec23,0,894641.story?coll=bal_sports_highschool_baltimore_util


Another site recomended to review: dvd download ( http://www.world-films.org )

Today was a loss. What can I say? Oh well. I've just been letting everything happen without me these days. Not that it matters. I guess it doesn't bother me.

Feel free to read: dvd download ( http://www.world-films.org )