Environmentalists Use Scare Tactics on BPA Chemical to Get State Bans
Washington, D.C., April 22, 2011 - In an ill-considered move that could jeopardize public health, Maryland legislators last week banned the chemical Bisphenol A (BPA) from infant formula and baby food packaging. Despite a lack of evidence that BPA poses any health risk, other states may follow suit. A new study from the Competitive Enterprise Institute explains why this is bad public policy.
This anti-BPA legislation is based on environmental activists' wrongheaded claims that BPA poses an unreasonable risk to human health - specifically to children - but the overwhelming body of research suggests otherwise, said Angela Logomasini, Senior Fellow for CEI's Center for Energy and Environment and author of the report.
Unfortunately, as more of these misguided bans succeed, policymakers are likely to begin targeting BPA use in all types of food packaging, as several bills already introduced in Congress do, Logomasini warned.
These policies threaten to undermine food safety because BPA is used to make resins that line metal cans and other packaging to prevent the development of dangerous pathogens and other contamination, and there are few good alternatives, Logomasini concluded.
BPA has been the subject of state and federal legislation for several years. Connecticut banned BPA for infant formula packaging and baby food containers starting in October 2012. And other states and localities also have already passed anti-BPA regulations, including: Minnesota (effective January 2010), Chicago (effective January 2010), and Suffolk County, New York (effective June 2009). Most of these laws focus on banning plastic sippy cups for toddlers and baby bottles made with BPA, but the focus of new legislation is now shifting to food packaging.
- Read the CEI report:: Anti-BPA Packaging Laws Jeopardize Public Health, by Angela Logomasini.
- Read more on BPA on Openmarket.org.