Once again, the FDA says that a trace of toxic chemical in your blood isn’t bad for you

Taking care of their own

Before I knew what a polyphenol was or what double-blind placebo-controlled really meant, I believed the words “FDA approved” meant something was effective and, more importantly, safe.

What can I say? The past 14 years have been an education.

These days, I find the words “FDA approved” more frightening than the warning on a cigarette pack.

For the logic behind that fear, you only need to look at the agency’s latest position on Bisphenol A (BPA), the toxin that lines most canned goods and many other food containers.

All evidence aside

Three years ago, a Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) study linked high BPA urinary levels to increased risk of heart disease and type 2 diabetes.

Then, in another JAMA study published last year, subjects who ate freshly made soup every day for five days had an average BPA level of 1.1 micrograms per liter of urine. Average BPA in subjects who ate soup from cans was an astounding 20.8 micrograms per liter!

Recently, the Natural Resources Defense Council petitioned the FDA to ban the use of BPA in any container where food makes contact with the chemical.

But instead of reviewing existing evidence, FDA scientists conducted their own BPA research. The final opinion from FDA researchers: Blood levels of BPA are too low to do any harm.

In short: Don’t worry your pretty little heads about daily BPA intake. Now run along!

Here’s Dr. Spreen’s take: “The FDA loves to play those games where ‘it’s so little it doesn’t matter.’ So a little mercury is okay, though we don’t argue that it’s toxic. A little radioactivity is okay, though we don’t argue that it’s toxic. A little lead, fluoride, formaldehyde, Round-Up, cadmium, aluminum, etc., ad nauseum.

“What they always end up saying is, ‘Keep it below our totally arbitrary cut-off level that we just made up.'”

Meanwhile, two industries are celebrating.

The food industry is an obvious winner. Food producers won’t have to spend millions refashioning their canned goods.

But the truly big winner is the chemical industry.

Bloomberg News reports that BPA production profits run about $8 billion per year. The two biggest producers are powerful chemical industry giants: Dow and Bayer.

An FDA ban of BPA wouldn’t hurt you, me, or millions of other consumers. The ban would only hurt Dow, Bayer, and a few large food producers.

As usual, “FDA action” is FDA inaction. And what it really means is “the check has cleared.”

Sources:
“Feds Reject Petition to Ban BPA in Food” John Hamilton, NPR, 3/30/12, npr.org

“BPA in Your Food? The FDA’s Still Okay With That” Tom Philpott, Mother Jones, 4/4/12, motherjones.com