Danger Bisphenol @en @en

It is difficult to understand why food safety agencies continue to place their trust in ambiguous animal data when human data is readily available. The fact thatDES and BPA share striking similarities in their structures is extremely worrisome and lends weight to the possibility that BPA is a “chemical time bomb” in terms of our health.

Antidote Europe welcomes the decision by the French Secretary of State for Ecology, Ms Chantal Jouanno, to instruct the national Food Safety Agency (AFSSA) to take a closer look at the chemical bisphenol A (BPA).

Laboratory results obtained by Antidote Europe suggest that BPA could be a “chemical time bomb” ¹. Originally manufactured in 1936 as a synthetic oestrogen for women, it was soon discarded and replaced by a much more powerful synthetic oestrogen, called diethyl stilbestrol (DES). Between the 1940s and the 1970s, DES was prescribed to 200 000 French women to prevent miscarriage, resulting in one of the biggest drug tragedies in modern times. In addition to causing malformations and cancer in the reproductive organs of children born to DES mothers, these effects were seen in some of their grandchildren as well, especially in girls. Unlike DES, we are all unknowingly exposed to BPA on a daily basis because of its presence in so many manufactured articles, ranging from dummies to plastic drinking bottles and the linings of tinned food and beverages. DES and BPA share strikingly similar structures, hence the concern that BPA may have similar biological activity to DES ².

“According to “experts”’:https://antidote-europe.eu/cp25aou08_gb.htm who have largely relied on animal data, BPA poses only a “mild” or “insignificant” risk to humans, despite the fact that this chemical continues to build up in our bodies. These same experts also tell us that pregnant women and their unborn foetuses have nothing to fear because “pregnant women rapidly metabolise and excrete this chemical”. Surely these experts must know that the speed at which a substance is broken down and passed out of the body has nothing to do with its biological activity while it is inside the body? Otherwise medical drugs would have no effect! This is a basic principle of pharmacokinetics (drug action).

These facts have been conveyed to the French Minister for Ecology.

1. See https://antidote-europe.eu/cp25jun07_gb.htm for registration of results in an international scientific database

2. See https://antidote-europe.eu/bpa_gb.htm

According to EFSA, the exposure of the human foetus to bisphenol A would be negligible because the mother rapidly metabolizes and eliminates this substance from her body. This conclusion is in contradiction with basic pharmacokinetics knowledge.

At a time when the Canadian government seeks to ban bisphenol A (BPA), especially in baby items, EU authorities appear to want to look the other way. Research commissioned by the group Antidote Europe has revealed the toxic potential of BPA, and the group is therefore dismayed that the EU authorities choose to ignore the health warnings associated with cancer and endocrine disruption.

Based on studies conducted in rats, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) published 23 July 2008 what it considers to be a “Tolerable Daily Intake” (TDI) of the chemical, at 0.05mg per kilogram of bodyweight.

Despite acknowledging significant differences between humans and rodents, EFSAapparently chose to ignore data on BPA obtained in human cells, which Antidote Europe presented to it in May, to bring the TDI figure more into line with data relevant to humans.

In support of its recommendations, EFSA stressed the fact that “people metabolize and excrete BPA far more quickly than rodents”, and concluded that “the exposure of the human foetus to BPA would be negligible because the mother rapidly metabolises and eliminates BPA from her body”. This suggests that rapid metabolism of a chemical provides protection against adverse effects. However, many prescription drugs are also metabolized quickly in the body and eliminated in a matter of a few hours, yet are able to exert powerful pharmacological effects on the body.

We would therefore urge EFSA to base its recommendations on the risk posed by BPAto humans, on data obtained from human cell cultures to begin with, using methods that are now well established, in place of unreliable animal tests.

The results of our analysis of bisphenol A using toxicogenomics techniques have been conveyed to the French and European agencies for food safety and to Canadian Health Authorities.

The results of a new scientific analysis revealing the dangers of bisphenol A (BPA) have been conveyed to the French Agency for Food Safety (AFSSA), the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) as well as the Canadian Health Authorities. The analysis was commissioned by the group, Antidote Europe. BPA is a key component in many plastic products, ranging from plastic baby bottles to food containers and even CDs. Canada is the first country in the world to complete a risk assessment of BPA, and to initiate a public consultation on whether to completely ban polycarbonate baby bottles which contain the substance.

A close examination of BPA using an advanced scientific technique called toxicogenomics showed that normal gene activity was severely compromised. Human cell cultures exposed to BPA and its by-products caused the genes in the cells to behave as if the cells were becoming diseased. The early warning signs indicated the cells were headed for disease processes associated with cancer, hormone imbalance and Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s diseases.

Animal tests conducted in the 1980s showed BPA to be safe in human food. Since then, however, BPA has become suspect at causing health problems, especially in unborn children, at very low concentrations. Says Dr Claude Reiss, president of Antidote Europe, “with more than 250 rat strains and 330 mouse strains to choose from, it is not surprising that the health authorities have been confused for the past 25 years and unbelievably slow to recognise the dangers to human health of BPA. That is why we used human cells in our analysis”.

Notes to editors:

A “proof of principle” as to the efficacy of toxicogenomics as a screening method has been demonstrated in a study by Antidote Europe on several test chemicals, including BPA and ingredients found in pesticides and cosmetics. The results have beenlogged in ArrayExpress in compliance with the MIAME (Minimum Information About a Microarray Experiment) database. Ref. E-TOXM-31 and A-MEXP-798.