On December 1, 2011, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) issued an opinion on the safety of bisphenol A (BPA), a chemical substance that comes into contact with food, concluding that the use of small amounts of BPA remains safe. The agency had issued the same opinion in 2010.
Recently, the French Agency for Food, Environment and Occupational Health and Safety (ANSES) published two reports on bisphenol A (BPA), stating that BPA has been proven to affect animal health and is suspected of affecting human health, even at exposure levels below the current regulatory threshold. Therefore, it is recommended that infants, pregnant women, and breastfeeding women should not be exposed to BPA.
Following the release of the report, the French National Assembly passed a bill in its first reading, banning the manufacture, import, export, and marketation of food containers and household appliances containing bisphenol A (BPA). The ban will take effect on January 1, 2013.
EFSA's opinion differs from ANSES's. In September 2010, EFSA issued a scientific opinion on bisphenol A, stating that there was no evidence to support revising the scientific recommendation that it is still safe to use small amounts of bisphenol A in certain plastic products, and that a daily intake of up to 0.05 mg of bisphenol A (per kilogram of body weight) is safe.
Because EFSA and ANSES held differing opinions, the European Commission requested EFSA to provide more scientific advice on the ANSES report and to analyze the latter's two reports to determine whether EFSA's 2010 opinion on bisphenol A needed to be revised.
Now, EFSA has released its analysis results, indicating that the disagreement between ANSES and EFSA regarding bisphenol A is mainly due to the fact that ANSES's study involved a safety assessment of bisphenol A exposure through non-dietary routes, while EFSA's opinion published in 2010 focused on a risk assessment of bisphenol A exposure through dietary routes.
EFSA also believes that the ANSES report referenced some studies with methodological weaknesses and shortcomings. Therefore, EFSA believes that a new acceptable daily intake of bisphenol A cannot be established based on the ANSES report, and there is no new data that would cause EFSA to change its opinion.
However, the EFSA emphasized that there are still uncertainties regarding the new studies on the toxicity of low-dose bisphenol A in animals. It is reported that the EFSA will further evaluate these new studies before reconsidering its opinion published in 2012.
EFSA's opinion drew strong responses from various parties. For example, a French member of the European Parliament called on the EU to follow France in adopting the principle of "prevention is better than cure" and urged the European Commission to recommend measures to gradually ban bisphenol A. On the other hand, industry groups representing bisphenol A producers welcomed EFSA's opinion, expressing confidence that member states and the European Commission would act based on expert advice.
EFSA’s opinion may lead member states that previously expressed concerns about the health risks of bisphenol A, such as Denmark, Austria and Germany, to change their positions.
Currently, Directive 2011/8/EU prohibits the use and importation of baby bottles containing bisphenol A (BPA), and also forbids the placement of such products on the EU market. Denmark goes further, requiring that all plastics used in food intended for children aged 3 and under be free of BPA. However, this ban is temporary and subject to amendment.
Austria has tightened its national regulations on bisphenol A (BPA) and is drafting legislation to ban the chemical from being found in baby bottle nipples and teething toys. Sweden is awaiting new information and observing the EU's actions before taking domestic action.
EFSA's opinion is unlikely to lead to further action at the EU level in the short term, and we are still awaiting new data and research results on bisphenol A.
Source: Taiwan Trade Development Council (TCT) website (2011-12-16)
