Three Dads against toxic baby bottles and food containers
By Representative Ben Cannon (D-Portland), Representative Tobias Read (D-Beaverton), and Senator Chris Edwards (D-Junction City & Eugene).
We all know that the economic crisis has taken a toll on Oregon families. It’s the reason that everyone in Salem, including us, is hard at work figuring out the best ways to create jobs and revitalize Oregon’s economy.
But as legislators who are also dads, with five kids between us, we believe it’s vital that we use this session to protect the health of all Oregon children by banning the dangerous toxic chemical bisphenol A (BPA) from their food and drink containers.
The evidence against BPA is alarming and growing.
More than 200 studies have implicated this estrogen-like hormone disruptor to serious health problems— from poor brain development in infants and early onset of puberty in girls to low sperm count, breast cancer, prostate cancer, diabetes, and heart disease. The science is so strong that nine U.S. states, including our neighbor to the north -- and Canada, the European Union, and the United Arab Emirates have banned BPA from children’s products.
Oregon should be the next state to join them in banning BPA.
There are safe, non-toxic alternatives to BPA that cost no more to use (in fact, they can even cost less). And while this bill may not create a job or reduce the budget shortfall, as dads and as legislators, we believe it is our job to make sure our children—and yours—have a chance at a healthy start in life.
Show your support by joining BPA-Free Oregon on Facebook.
|
Feb. 15, 2011
|
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
2:54 p.m.
Feb 15, '11
Make it four dads.
If I recall correctly, a few conservative Democrats joined the Rescumlicans last year and voted to keep BPA baby bottles in Oregon. When the choice is between corporate profit or poisoning children we know what to expect from conservatives.
2:58 p.m.
Feb 15, '11
Martha Schrader is not around to vote no this time, but she's been replaced by a REPUBLICAN (the correct name of their party), so that's a wash. will Verger & Johnson vote no again? they never explained why they voted no (that i have read). they just sat silent on the floor of the Senate & then killed the bill. let's hope they have been educated since. a yes vote on this is the right vote in every way. (except, of course, the corporate way.)
3:13 p.m.
Feb 15, '11
I totally agree. My kids are way passed the baby stage now, but we have switched from plastic to glass containers to store leftovers and other food in the fridge.
I don't think the average person realizes how many chemicals are not only in our food, but also in the food containers, cups, and other items we use.
I support this bill.
3:16 p.m.
Feb 15, '11
Just realized that I should've used "past" and not "passed" in my first sentence!
4:30 p.m.
Feb 15, '11
I am registered as a Republican and yes, I do want BPA out of Oregon. Please, no profiling. It's our job to educate our representatives, whichever party they belong to.
12:15 p.m.
Feb 17, '11
And thanks for being here, Rachel.
4:49 p.m.
Feb 15, '11
Thanks, Rachel. As a fellow Republican, I get tired of people who make outrageous assumptions about where I stand on issues just because I happen to be conservative. It gets tiring.
7:13 p.m.
Feb 15, '11
Oh…poor poor Republicans always getting bunched in w/ those other corporatist anti-science, anti-choice, anti-environment, pro-poison baby bottle conservatives. Is it really “tiresome” Jason? Please spare me your pathetic drivel.
News flash: the Republican Party has become the biggest pile of crap known to man. Your party has obstructed human progress at every turn for decades (no not every single member.) On political blogs people are gong to talk generally about political groups, i.e., Republicans, conservatives etc. So if our going to be part of such a disgraceful group you ought to get used to hearing the truth about that group.
Do you know why the GOP opposed the bill last year to ban the BPA bottles? Is it because they need to be educated?
11:56 a.m.
Feb 16, '11
I rest my case.
12:06 p.m.
Feb 17, '11
This has been studied time and time again and it continues to be exonerated.
The full body of research and scientific organizations around the world cannot find a problem with BPA. Some studies have found spurious correlations but these studies are flawed and represent a small amount of the full body of research. Over 50 years of research has been done on this product.
The EPA has established a level where there are no observable effects from BPA. This level is 50 mg per kg of body weight per day. They then wanted to be extra safe and divided that by 1000. The safe exposure level is .05 mg per kg of body weight per day. Human exposure to BPA is currently….babies and children and adults…is 100 to 1000 times less than the safe exposure limit.
In fact an infant would have to drink 423 4 oz bottles per day to reach the EU’s recently set safe intake level. This safe intake level already includes a 100 fold safety factor.
A consumer would have to ingest more than 1300 pounds of food and beverages in contact with BPA every single day for an entire lifetime to exceed the safe level of BPA set by the US EPA.
http://www.cascadepolicy.org/pdf/FullreportBPA-012710a.pdf
12:07 p.m.
Feb 17, '11
The truth is that the environmental orgs and the politicians that want to use this as a political move will very much cause more harm than good. BPA is not just used in water bottles but it is used in a whole host of products including making medical devices safer. BPA lines cans and lids of containers to prevent the leaching of metal into food and beverages.
BPA also protects against food contamination. It is widely used because of this capacity to protect against a whole host of possible food contamination issues.
What enviros, politicians and all around chemical hypochondriacs are saying is that they want to ban a product that has been in safe use for over 50 years and switch to an inferior less tested less safe alternative that may not even exist.
12:09 p.m.
Feb 17, '11
Some have noted (including on this post) that there are estrogen mimicking effects associated with BPA. Humans on average are exposed to natural estrogen mimicking effects on the order of magnitude 100,000 to 1 million times greater than any exposure to BPA. In fact, current BPA exposure is as safe as drinking one tablespoon of soy milk a day. And I do not think Oregon is going to work towards banning soy anytime soon.
2:06 p.m.
Feb 17, '11
Note for readers: Todd is on staff at the Cascade Policy Institute, an organization dedicated to obstructing regulation of private enterprise, and which does not publicly report its donors.
2:33 p.m.
Feb 17, '11
Note for readers: Kari does not have any facts or stats to the contrary of Todd's report so he makes generalized attacks on the funding and mission of Cascade.
11:32 p.m.
Feb 17, '11
Todd - I would like to read what you are relying upon; links?
I found this:
http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucm197739.htm
Yes, it is just a fear of risk at a nascent level, but I'm curious to see how the epidemiology is developing.