BPA, or Biphensol A, has become the scourge of environmentalists and health advocates. And rightly so – the chemical has been used for over forty years and is found in nearly everything made of plastic. From bottles, to children’s toys, to the lining of tin cans and even the coating of sales receipts, this chemical was long considered safe by the FDA. Then studies started showing up proving the government wrong.

Just how does BPA harm you? As Time reported, “the chemical has been linked to neurological disorders, hormonal disruptions, cancer and genital abnormalities in newborn boys.” Now studies have turned their attention to its influence on fertility, as lab animals showed side effects such as infertility.

Ah, yes, fertility. It seems like you can’t open a web browser these days without someone wringing their hands over the state of women’s reproductive abilities. (We’ve previously discussed fertility drugs and misconceptions about this topic.) Do we really need another discussion over the state of women’s reproductive skills? Won’t someone think of the (unborn) children?

Based on the recent news out of medicine covering the dangerous effect of BPA on fertility – yes, we do. As Time reports, extensive studies were conducted in 2007 and 2008 at the University of San Francisco to see if BPA had an impact on fertility and IVF by studying women who were undergoing the procedure. It turns out, it does. Scientists think that BPA damages the quality of eggs in women. They found that higher blood levels of BPA, they found, were linked to a “50% reduction in normal fertilization of eggs after they were retrieved for IVF.”

Further, BPA may damage sperm. Via The Daily Green, Kaiser Permanente recently published a report that BPA can reduce sperm count and mobility in men. BPA mimics estrogen in the body which would account for its negative influence on sperm. Experts conclude that more studies will be necessary to look at this connection. But in the light of this evidence, one wonders why Congress recently refused to ban BPA from baby products.

The good news? While regulations seem to rise and fall regarding the permanent disuse of this chemical, people are starting to listen to its dangers. Even the government has released a warning on how to reduce you and your children’s exposure to the chemical.

And until BPA is banned permanently, there are some easy ways to avoid BPA. Lose the plastic bottles and containers in your home. And if you must go plastic, avoid plastics with recycling codes 3 and 7. They are more likely to contain BPA. Also, lose any plastic containers that are scratched. This is an easier route for the BPA to leech into your system.

Image: stevendepolo

After years of claiming it’s not a risk, the EPA has announced that it will formally list Bisphenol A (BPA) as a “chemical of concern”. Considering all the studies showing how this hormone disruptor can affect our bodies, this is great news – but don’t expect big changes anytime soon. As we wait for manufacturers to perform tests on the chemical’s impact, it’s up to us to avoid BPA as much as we can.

Cutting BPA out altogether is easier said than done if you want to use any modern products whatsoever, but you can significantly lower your exposure – as long as you know exactly where this chemical is lurking. We’ve heard a lot about BPA in some reusable bottles, but some of the sources are surprisingly sneaky. Here are 17 common products that contain BPA and how to avoid them.

1. Dental Sealants – If you want to protect those pearly whites with some dental bonding or sealants, beware the specter of BPA. A study found that this chemical can leach into saliva following certain dental procedures. But don’t panic – BPA-free alternatives are available; just ask your dentist.

2. Receipts – You know how most modern receipts have a really smooth texture? That slick coating usually contains (you guessed it) BPA. And it’s no trivial nanogram quantity – we’re talking sizeable amounts that can pass into your skin or consumed when you eat. Studies on exactly how much ends up in the body are forthcoming, but at least this one is easy to avoid: just say no to receipts. You’ll save paper and prevent waste, too.

3. Baby Bottles – Babies are particularly susceptible to harmful effects from BPA, so many parents find the fact that it’s present in some bottles worrisome to say the least. Luckily, however, BPA-free bottles are now widely available and the top six baby bottle makers in the U.S. have agreed to stop using the chemical.

4. Children’s Toys – Nom nom nom! Gotta love all that BPA (not to mention lead and other toxins) that children end up chomping on when they’re innocently playing with their toys. But thanks to all those protective parents out there, the internet is rife with recommendations for BPA-free brands. Check out the Consumer Reports Toy Buying Guide for safe options.

5. Canned Food Liners – Soups, juices, beans and tomatoes. All of these goods and more are often tainted with BPA when canned, all because of a protective plastic lining. The Environmental Working Group performed tests on a wide range of goods and found the highest concentrations in infant formula, chicken soup and ravioli. But not all brands use BPA – get a list at Treehugger.

6. Canning Jar Lids – Alas, even when you preserve your own foods, BPA is there to rain on your parade. Canning jar lids have a lining similar to that in tin cans, but there’s usually minimal contact with food. If you want to be extra-careful, seek out glass-lidded canning jars like those made by Weck.

7. Plastic food containers – They may be convenient, making it easy to store, transport and reheat food, but plastic food containers are one of the biggest sources of BPA. The easiest and most important step you can take is to stop microwaving food in plastic containers. BPA-free stainless steel and glass options are readily available and last longer anyway.

8. Medical Devices – Could plastic components be leaching BPA into patients’ bodies during heart bypass surgeries and hemodialysis? The FDA haslaunched a pair of studies to find out. It’s a concern due to the length of time that patients can be exposed to the chemical, but it only affects a small portion of the population so chances are, you don’t have to worry about this one.

9. Pizza Boxes – If you haven’t groaned in frustration already, do it now and get it out of your system. Yes, even certain recycled pizza boxes are said to contain BPA. Since pizza boxes can’t usually be recycled anyway, why not make this easy on yourselves and either make pizza at home or eat in instead of getting delivery. Score an easy and extremely delicious New York-style pizza crust recipe (my personal favorite) from Recipezaar.com.

10. Toilet Paper – Remember those pesky receipts? It turns out, they’re often recycled into toilet paper, BPA and all. But this problem is bigger than the amount that gets transferred to your private bits in the bathroom. Once toilet paper is flushed and processed at waste plants, much of that BPA ends up in surface water and groundwater. Does this mean we should ditch recycled toilet paper and use that virgin tree stuff instead? Not necessarily, but it is a tough call.

11. Water Coolers – The large hard plastic bottles used in water coolers are yet another source of BPA. A better (and less wasteful) option is to simply outfit your kitchen faucet with a filter from Brita or PUR, which are BPA-free.

12. Soda Cans – If you’re one of those people with a Diet Coke can permanently glued to your hand, listen up. Bizarre chemical ingredients and artificial sweeteners aren’t the only enemy in that caustic stuff – BPA is found in almost all brands of canned soft drinks. Cut back on your soda intake, and you’ll be better off in more ways than one.

13. Beer and Wine – While there’s no good way to avoid the BPA that is sometimes found in the epoxy lining of wine vats short of giving up wine altogether (crazy talk!), you can skip the BPA-flavored beer by simply choosing bottles over cans. BPA is a bigger risk in canned beer than in soda, because it’s highly soluble in alcohol.

14. Eyewear – If you wear sunglasses or eyeglasses with plastic lenses, you’re probably in constant contact with BPA all day long. It’s tough to tell how much of an impact this could have on health, but if you want to be safe, metal frames are a good bet.

15. CDs and DVDs – It’s probably safe to say that you don’t often lick your CDs or DVDs, and we handle them so briefly, the BPA contained within these items isn’t a threat to most people.

16. Blenders and Food Processors – Since these items are in direct contact with our food, it’s good to know which brands contain BPA and which don’t. Consumer research website Z Recommends has a handy guide, with the Beaba Babycook, the Vita-Mix 5200 blender and Hamilton Beach’s Big Mouth food processors all coming out winners in the “safe” category.

17. Car Parts – These days, car interiors are almost entirely made from hard plastics, so it’s not too surprising to learn that BPA lurks in the steering wheel, gear shift, dashboard and more. Good luck finding a plastic-free vehicle – but hey, it’s another good excuse to walk more often.

Images: stevendepolo, conor lawless, rolandslakis, fernashes

Last week, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reversed its position on the safety of a chemical used especially in canned food and drink packaging, plastic and baby bottles – Bisphenol A.

Sounds like a jazz cover of a Radiohead album? It’s so much worse, if that’s possible.

Bisphenol A, also referred to as BPA, is harmful to human health, the FDA finally admitted if not wholeheartedly. With human adults, exposure to BPA has been associated with everything from erectile dysfunction to miscarriages. In animals, it has caused breast cancer and development problems.

While the Bush administration all but ignored previous studies, at least the FDA is beginning to change its course. Sadly, both the FDA and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) are delaying an all out ban on this questionable-at-best chemical.

The feds have rallied on behalf of industry, though, promising to help manufacturers of baby bottles and sippy cups find BPA-free materials they can use, and to find new ways to line infant formula cans with research and dollars.

Our green blogosphere has been fiercely a-tweet and a-post about this toxic mixture of plastics and food, politics and science. Study up with the links below, and take action if inspired.

We think a BPA ban might remain a hot, green topic online for a while. Especially since health is priced at a premium here in the U.S. – and hopes for an affordable public option are likely dashed by the election of Republican Scott Brown, now Massachusetts senator-elect.

BASIC READING

“Recent research has linked BPA to disruptions in the endocrine system, an issue that can cause reproductive, neurological, and behavioral problems, causing a growing number of consumer and health advocates to push for greater regulation of the chemical’s use in food containers. In 2008, near the end of the Bush Administration, the FDA conducted a toxicology review of the chemical and maintained that foods containing low levels of the chemical were safe. New research and increased public concern has caused HHS and the FDA to reevaluate the safety of the chemical.” – From a news feature for FoodSafetyNews by Helena Bottemiller

“The FDA is going to punt, and spend $30 million on research over the next two years, while the industry scrambles to find some kind of affordable and effective substitute for BPA in cans. And they better find one, because I suspect that the studies will prove that feeding birth control pill hormones to babies has never been a particularly good idea.” – A Treehugger post by Lloyd Alter parsing the FDA’s press release, and its BPA “concerns.”

“While this announcement is an improvement from their previous conclusion that [BPA] was safe in our food supply – it is too little, too late”¦ The FDA [has] not acknowledged the impacts of BPA on adults. Biomonitoring data shows that babies are being born with BPA already in their blood, which means that they are being exposed through their mothers before they are born. Furthermore, BPA exposure in adults has been associated with miscarriage, erectile dysfunction, heart disease and diabetes.” – An article by scientist and writer Sarah Janssen for GreenAndSave.com

FURTHER RESOURCES

A blog feature by S.L. Baker for NaturalNews.com recounting various studies that link BPAs to heart disease, and other health problems

A blog post by Dr. Ari Brown that guides parents to products for babies that are free of or very low in BPAs, and discusses the harmful effects of BPAs on child development via WebMD

OMBWatch.org, a blog focused on “open government” looks into the regulatory issues surrounding the BPA controversy of Jan. 2010

An activist, Mary Olivella, writes for HuffingtonPost and calls for the immediate, all-out ban of BPAs in food and beverage containers

This is the latest installment of EcoMeme, a column featuring eco news, tech and business highlights by columnist Lora Kolodny.

Image: Timlewisnm

Everyone knows that shopping can be dangerous to your bank balance. But did you know it could also be dangerous to your health?

A little history. Last year, researchers in Switzerland decided to find out what happens when the flu virus is put on banknotes. So they got some nasal secretions from children, mixed it with some flu virus and placed it on some Swiss franc notes. Sounds pretty gross. But the results, as far as I’m concerned, are even more gross. Turns out that on some of the banknotes, the flu cells lasted up to 17 days. Sure, it was a controlled study, but when I think about the hygiene habits of the general population, it almost makes me want to avoid money altogether.

Then earlier this year, researchers at the University of Massachusetts tested banknotes from 30 cities around the world and found an increase in the number of banknotes with traces of cocaine on them. Cocaine! Makes sense when you consider that banknotes are used as a tool for users to get the cocaine from whatever surface it’s into the nose. Which means that not only could that note you are holding have traces of cocaine on it, but it could also have traces of someone’s nasal secretions.

For future reference, by the way, the cities with the highest cocaine levels on banknotes were Washington, D.C., Baltimore, Boston and Detroit. Salt Lake City had the least.

However, it’s not just the money that’s the problem for shoppers.

Now researchers are saying that shopping receipts could also pose a health risk.

Not from viruses. Not from cocaine. But from bisphenol-A (BPA), the hormone-altering chemical found in primarily in plastic bottles.

Research done at the Warner Babcock Institute for Green Chemistry has determined that many of these crisp, clean shopping receipts are coated with a powdery layer of bisphenol-A (BPA). Furthermore, lead researcher John Warner believes we are getting much more exposure to BPA through shopping receipts than through bottles or cans.

Receipts that use BPA technology (applying a powdery layer of BPA to one side of thermal imaging paper so that when heat or pressure is applied, printing will appear) will, on average, have 60 to 100 milligrams of free BPA on them. And unlike the BPA in plastics that’s bound into a polymer, the BPA on receipts are loose molecules which potentially makes it easier to transfer BPA from receipt to fingers to, say, food, and thus be ingested.

Warner acknowledges that more research to quantify the prevalence of BPA-laced receipts is needed. But his initial findings indicate that someone really should.

Meanwhile, concerned shoppers, especially pregnant ones, need to be aware of this BPA risk.

So what’s a keen shopper to do?

You could stop shopping but that wouldn’t help you, or come to think about, the economy.

A better answer is to use a bank card for transactions and say no to receipts, especially at times where having a receipt is not necessary.

Although alternatively, we could all wear gloves?

Image: ebedner

This is a new SIGG water bottle with a Keith Haring lady liberty design, part of a limited edition series celebrating America, land of the free, home of  thirsty. Perhaps you could score one of these cool designs for free by getting rid of an old SIGG bottle that contains poison, and you can enjoy the benefits without having to worry about exposing your body to a synthetic drug known to disrupt normal endocrine function.

I simply won’t stand for that in a water bottle. How about you?

If you bought a metal SIGG bottle before August of 2008, you have until Halloween to trade it in for a bottle with the new and improved EcoCare liner free of bisphenol A (BPA), a synthetic sex hormone chemical linked to cancer and neurological problems. In other words, switch that trick for a treat.

What is the trick in the SIGG exchange program? Last week, Steve Wasik, chief executive officer of SIGG Switzerland, shocked the reusable water world by admitting that the liners were made with an epoxy resin that contains BPA. As Elaine Shannon of the Huffington Post pointed out, this was an about-face from his previous posture that the bottles simply didn’t leech the harmful chemical and were totally safe.

“He decided on his authority, consumers didn’t want or need to know more,” Shannon observes, adding it is difficult to see Wasik’s stance as anything but cynical.

Wasik’s posting on the SIGG website explained that the BPA debate has heated up dramatically in the last 12 months with the conversation progressing from a focus on leeching to the mere presence of BPA in products. He stresses that this dialogue has evolved to the extent that “some states are considering legislation.”

In fact, last May, Chicago was one of the first U.S. cities to ban the sale of baby bottles and sippy cups containing the chemical and the Food and Drug Administration recently announced it would undertake a new BPA review. In 2008, the FDA resisted recommending retailers discontinue using products that contain BPA until it had completed its risk assessment process. “However, concerned consumers should know that several alternatives to polycarbonate baby bottles exist, including glass baby bottles,” the feds said.

Meantime, you have to follow your own instincts and decide if you want to exchange your SIGG or simply find another aluminum or other bottle brand.

In terms of determining if you have the old kind of bottle, SIGG has provided the best kind of crisis PR fact sheet on its site with visuals that show the difference between the bad and good liners.

The EcoCare liner has a dull, pale yellow appearance while the former liner has a shiny copper bronze appearance.

For details on the exchange program and other issues pertaining to the safety of these bottles, go to the My SIGG website.

I hope you’re not one of those people who squirms when a mother breastfeeds her baby in public, because I’m one of those publicly breastfeeding mothers. If that makes you uncomfortable, well, talk to the breast!

There is no better food for babies than breast milk, of course, so it’s a great decision for mothers who are able to do it. And when it comes to social graces, I’m just not sorry to say that I won’t run off to nurse in a bathroom or tote bottles around to preserve a faux Victorian modesty (ahem, Facebook). We see more breast online and at Fox news than I could possibly compete with.

Besides, the breast is the ultimate eco-friendly feeding option. Formula is made from either cow’s milk or soy, and both come with problematic environmental implications. Then there are the bottles, usually made of plastic, which even when BPA-free, still need petroleum to be made.

What’s with our shyness? I say it’s high time to get rational and respect the breast. There’s no need to look away in embarrassment or frown disapprovingly if you see my baby noshing on my nipple. After all, what could be more sane, healthy and normal than using breasts the way nature intended? Sure, the world might be sex-crazed over boobies, but for my baby, it’s what’s for dinner. Nomnomnomnom.

Image: Raphael Goetter