Canada moves to protect babies from chemical

World Report

Canada moves to protect babies from chemical A debate is raging in North America over the safety of bisphenol A—a chemical found in a wide range of plastic products, including polycarbonate baby bottles. Canada is taking steps to limit infant exposure to the substance, while the USA says the chemical is safe. Paul Webster reports. The Canadian government says it aims to become the first government in the world to label bisphenol A—a chemical widely used in plastic food containers, medical devices, and several other products—toxic under a health-protection law later this year. Once that’s done, Canadian Health Minister Tony Clement says he will begin banning products containing bisphenol A. “I am proposing precautionary action to reduce exposure and increase safety”, Clement explains. “It is our intention to ban the importation, sale, and advertising of polycarbonate baby bottles. With this action, Canada will be the first country in the world to take such action to limit exposures to bisphenol A.” Bisphenol A is used as an interior protective lining for food and beverage cans, and is also found in the metal lids of some jars and bottles, and polycarbonate containers such as baby bottles and drinking bottles. Studies have shown that the chemical can leach into food and beverages if it is used in the packaging of these items. Canada’s announcement follows the release of a Draft Screening Assessment,

AP

The printed journal includes an image merely for illustration

Government ministers hand out baby bottles that are free of bisphenol A

2074

which concluded that disturbing levels of bisphenol A are accumulating in the Canadian environment and that the substance “is capable of altering hormonal, development or reproductive function”. A report released by Canada’s Government suggests that Canadian

“...the [US] FDA says bisphenol A is safe.” infants are exposed to levels of the substance approaching those which are known to trigger neurodevelopmental effects in rodents. The report was led by toxicologist Karen Lloyd, acting director of Health Canada’s Safe Environments programme, which is currently reviewing the safety of hundreds of chemical compounds. Describing the government’s plan to fast-track a ban on some uses of bisphenol A as a “dramatically different approach” from historical patterns of non-regulation, Lloyd says the government was galvanised to act because “there is not a big enough margin of safety”. Consumer reaction to the government’s plans for bisphenol A regulations was swift. Several big retail chains immediately stopped selling all food and drink containers which contain the substance. But some participants in the process worry that the government’s efforts do not go far enough. “The proposed government action excludes hundreds of sources of BPA [bisphenol A] to continue the status quo”, notes Fe de Leon, a researcher with the Canadian Environmental Law Association who serves on a Health Canada panel helping to guide the federal agency’s chemical management policies. “Babies and the rest of Canadians will continue to be exposed

if we drink soup or juice from cans that are contaminated with BPA therefore leaving the environment and rest of human population susceptible to exposure.” By introducing a ban of products that expose infants to high levels of bisphenol A, Health Canada is, for the first time in its chemical-control efforts, relying on a “precautionary approach”, which requires that “the absence of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason to postpone decisions where there is a risk of serious or irreversible harm”. Before announcing its plans to limit bisphenol A, Health Canada asked a panel of medical and legal experts on the “precautionary principle” to review the government’s strategy. Ted Boadway, who chairs the government’s panel of precautionary experts, acknowledged that the precautionary principle is “an important trigger” for regulatory action, but declined to explain the panel’s decision to endorse a strategy criticised by de Leon and others as far from precautionary, citing confidentiality rules. “There are a great many questions about how the assessment of precaution is being conducted”, de Leon says. “We would like to require full accountability and transparency on these decisions.” Meanwhile, in the USA, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published a Draft Brief in April, which stated that “some studies in animals suggest that BPA may raise concerns for developmental effects in humans”. On June 6, the FDA announced plans to convene an independent external panel to assess bisphenol A. In the meantime, the FDA says bisphenol A is safe.

Paul Webster www.thelancet.com Vol 371 June 21, 2008