Just this past week a study was published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives raising new concerns (and supporting past concerns) about the negative effects of BPA on human health.
One of the major research findings was that humans are exposed to higher levels of BPA than previously predicted.
In an effort to protect our health, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency determines reference doses for chemicals. A reference dose is the maximum daily exposure level, which is expected to not cause any significant risk for human health.
For BPA, the EPA determined a reference dose of 50 µg/kg/day. However, the study published by Taylor et al demonstrated that in order to achieve the levels of biologically active BPA that have been detected in human serum, the rhesus monkeys had to be given a dose that was 8 times the EPAs reference dose.
The results bolster scientists’ concerns that we truly do not know all of the sources of BPA exposure. Aside from plastic bottles and canned goods, there are new routes of exposure that continue to be identified such as thermal (carbonless) receipts.
The study also directly compared BPA studies using mice and rhesus monkeys, and demonstrated that, in fact, rodent studies are a valid model for human effects. To date, the biggest argument used to discredit the massive amount of data showing BPA can have negative effects on human health, had been that rodents were not a good model.
With all this new evidence, I wonder how long until a real regulation gets put into place to protect consumer health. I’m also excited to see what the counter argument will be. Stay tuned!
[Image credit: brian.gratwicke]