BPA / #7 plastic - confusing, possibly bad news

Like Teflon, Polycarbonate plastic pops up in the news fairly often.

The typical pattern consists of a warning, often alarming, posted by an environmental group (Greenpeace, Environmental Working Group etc.) followed quickly by a denial from The Society of the Plastics Industry (S.P.I.), usually drawing on historical data from previous case studies.

Back and forth, the unending war between those groups apparently most concerned about health and those apparently most concerned about wealth. Add the fact that the plastic is hard to recycle (it's #7 in the PIC, plastic identification code) and my spidey-sense tells me something's up.

No one seems to disagree with what this plastic does; it leaches BPA, bisphenol A, into whatever the bottle contains, which is typically water or formula as food-grade polycarbonate seems most often utilized in water and baby bottles. The disagreement stems from what amount is considered to be an acceptable, tolerable level.

Because BPA mimics estrogen in our bodies, it is considered to be an endocrine disruptor.

And that's not good ...


From The Hormone Foundation,
"via a network of glands and organs that produce, store and secrete certain hormones ... the endocrine system works with the nervous system, reproductive system, kidneys, gut, liver and fat to maintain and control;
* body energy levels
* reproduction
* growth and development
* internal balance of body systems (homeostasis)
* responses to surroundings, stress and injury

Not a system you'd want to obstruct, especially given the prevalence of related diseases.

So while they duke it out, deciding if 100 micro-thingeys is acceptable, but 101 maybe isn't, I figure I'm better safe than sorry, so goodbye water bottle. I'm still looking for the best substitute, which hopefully isn't a donkey bladder. Glass is heavy and I'm clumsy so I might go with stainless steel and select a SIGG bottle with a safe lining.


Unfortunately, now I'm hearing more and more about the presence of BPA in canned food, due to the epoxy resin lining. Again, we know it's there but the one hand says it's poisoning and the other hand says it's better than botulism.

Seemingly, fewer and fewer folks are continuing to use the old Nalgene bottles (especially since companies such as M.E.C. have stopped selling them), but everyone has a can opener. For all I know there's a correlation between the amount of canned food one consumes and the incidence of certain diseases - yikes!

As diligent as we are about eating non-packaged, minimally processed foods, like most people in similar climates there are periods of time when we're can-opening, not peeling, while preparing portions of our meals.

Not including my emergency kit which is heavy with cylinders of beans and soups, we generally eat three foods out of cans; baked beans, organic tomato paste and organic tomatos. And as much as I'm inclined to pat myself on the back and think oh goody for me, we eat very little canned food, it occurs to me that highly acidic food like, say, tomoto products, could pose a higher risk of jeopardizing the integrity of a can's lining. And what of temperature levels? My canned food is stored in the kitchen yet perhaps it should be kept in a cooler place. I suddenly have many questions for the canning industry.


While I'm at it, I should also explore the validity of Eden Organics claim that they don't line their cans with epoxy resin, presumably making them safer.


And what of the people who produce that little bit of canned food I regularly eat? I don't know enough about any of these companies, so I guess I'll contact these three (Heinz, Utopia and Ontario Natural) and ask them to respond to my fears of contamination; as when visiting the doctor, we have to be our own health care advocates.

Fingers crossed - I'm not ready to start baking my own beans.