The report that Campbell's is phasing out BPA is way off the mark

Soup can linings playbook

The reports of the death of BPA have been greatly exaggerated.

And that’s a shame. In fact, for some it might be deadly.

Last year, I told you about a surprising announcement. We learned that Campbell’s was aggressively phasing out the use of BPA in the lining of canned products.

But someone pulled a fast one. It appears that someone outright lied.

I’ll put it more simply… Don’t buy Campbell’s products if you want to avoid BPA.

A welcome boost

As I’ve mentioned many times, BPA is the hormone-like chemical that lines most canned goods.

For years, food safety activists have pressured Campbell’s to replace BPA with something safer. They’ve targeted Campbell’s because it’s the Big Kahuna. The company sells billions of cans every year.

That’s right — billions.

And that’s a LOT of BPA.

That’s why activists celebrated last year when Food Production Daily made a stunning announcement. Campbell’s, they said, would be BPA-free by 2015.

The FPD report quoted an “industry insider” described as “a source close to the firm.”

Hmmm. That sounds a little less than rock solid.

More recently, a bona fide Campbell’s insider (the VP of Corporate Social Responsibility), spoke candidly to Forbes. And he didn’t put any distance between Campbell’s and BPA. In fact, he embraced the chemical. He defended its use. He called it “safe.”

And then he added this… “We realized that the media got the Campbell’s BPA story wrong.”

Really! And yet, the company did NOT rush forward to correct the misconception. And why would they? It gave Campbell’s a welcome public relations boost. It was practically gift wrapped!

Suddenly, activists were applauding big bad Campbell’s instead of pestering them about BPA.

In the Forbes article, another Campbell’s VP offered a warm-n-fuzzy PR spin. He said Campbell’s is “responsive to public concerns” regarding the “debate” over BPA. “But,” he said, “the science says it’s safe, and we will follow the science.”

In other words, the BPA stays. Because I’m sure Campbell’s will cherry pick the “science” they decide to follow.

For instance, I don’t think they’ll follow a Journal of the American Medical Association study that linked high BPA urinary levels to increased risk of heart disease and type 2 diabetes.

And I doubt that Campbell’s will dwell on another JAMA study from 2011. In that one, subjects who ate soup every day from BPA-lined cans had urine levels 20 times higher than subjects who ate freshly made soup.

And the conclusions of five expert panels will probably not interest the company. The panels found that recent trends in human diseases relate to adverse effects in animals exposed to low doses of BPA. The diseases include breast and prostate cancers, type 2 diabetes, and neurological disorders.

I’ll hand it to Campbell’s. They came clean to Forbes. They were honest about their commitment to stick with BPA.

Unfortunately, the Forbes article hardly made a blip on the mainstream media radar. So millions of consumers probably still believe the widespread misinformation from last year. It’s likely some consumers are eating Campbell products right now, believing they’re reducing BPA exposure.

Don’t buy it. Literally. Don’t put down cash money for any product packaged with BPA.

Several U.S. brands have sworn off BPA use. They include Eden Foods, Muir Glen, Trader Joe’s, Vital Choice, Wild Planet Foods, and Eco Fish.

See? It’s doable. If Campbell’s should ever want to do it.

Sources:
“Campbell Soup to complete bisphenol A phase out before 2015 — source” Rory Harrington, Food Production Daily, 3/8/12, foodproductiondaily.com

“Campbell’s Big Fat Green BPA Lie — and the Sustainability Activists that Enabled It” Jon Entine, Forbes, 9/18/12, forbes.com