Friday, July 15, 2016
Source:
American Chemistry Council

Last week a flurry of news stories reported on a new study of bisphenol A (BPA) in canned foods led by a researcher at Stanford University. Based on an analysis of BPA levels in urine and self-reported canned food consumption, the researchers came to the conclusion that “[c]anned food[s] … were associated with higher levels of urinary BPA concentrations.” But the study missed the point: yes, we know BPA is present in trace amounts, but is it safe?

Monday, June 6, 2016
Source:
The Sweethome

You can find alarmist warnings about BPA, a demonized chemical, in every nook and cranny on the Internet: it’s an endocrine disruptor, it can give you diabetes, breast cancer, or ADHD, among other things. It has a long and confusing rap sheet, and a lot of this stuff is really scary and people don’t know what to believe...

...That being said, health risks from BPA seems to be very, very small (remember: far-away sharks). There are many other things that are a much higher health risk, such as eating poorly, not getting enough exercise, riding in a car (especially if you’re a kid), or swimming in pools with hungry sharks. But if you’re still worried about being bitten, go for the (liningless) stainless steel.

Tuesday, May 17, 2016
Source:
Science Media Centre

Prof. Sir Stephen O’Rahilly MD FRS FMedSci, Professor of Clinical Biochemistry and Medicine and Director of the Metabolic Research Laboratories, University of Cambridge, said:
 
“The findings of this very small study are highly preliminary and should not influence public health policy. The hypothesis that BPA exposure during pregnancy predisposes to childhood obesity needs to be tested more rigorously in samples from considerably larger studies.”

Wednesday, May 11, 2016
Source:
Washington Post

We at Speaking of Science do our best to deliver you solid, sound science reporting. But just in case you haven't been paying attention, comedian John Oliver — host of "Last Week Tonight" — is here to school you.
 
...A lot of this comes down to common sense: Does something sound kind of crazy? If it does, you probably want to find out what experts outside of the study have to say about it. 

Wednesday, April 6, 2016
Source:
Facts About BPA

Last week the South Korean Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) published its risk assessment of BPA in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Environmental Research.  The MFDS is a government agency that is responsible for promoting public health by ensuring the safety of foods and other products.
The details are important, but what everyone wants to know is the bottom line. MFDS concluded:

We find that there are no health concerns for the general Korean population from dietary exposure or from aggregated exposure [to BPA].

Monday, October 26, 2015
Source:
Montreal Gazette

“More research is needed.” That’s a common final sentence in scientific papers, especially when it comes to studying the effects of environmental chemicals on health. With numerous chemical reactions going on in our body all the time, and exposure to thousands and thousands of chemicals, both natural and synthetic, it is a huge challenge to tease out the effects of a single substance. That brings up the question of when the effort and funds invested in studying a chemical have been sufficient. Is there a point at which further research is unlikely to lead to a major revelation? Can research funds be better spent on alternate projects that are more likely to yield meaningful results?
 
We may be reaching such a stage with bisphenol A (BPA), a chemical that has been the subject of more studies in the toxicological literature than any other.

Pages