In an article published on September 6, 2017 by the U.S. magazine Undark, journalist Ramin Skibba reported on the use of the chemical bisphenol A (BPA, CAS 80-05-7) and its common substitutes such as bisphenol S (BPS, CAS 80-09-1) and bisphenol F (BPF, CAS 620-92-8). Skibba outlined the concerns about the safety of BPA due to its endocrine disrupting properties and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) subsequent ban of the substance in baby food contact materials (FCMs). Further, Skibba illustrated the emergence of ‘BPA-free’ products using substitute chemicals such as BPS and BPF. These chemicals are structurally similar to BPA and thus “likely to have analogous effects on health,” meaning “that a ‘BPA-free’ label might be of little consequence to a consumer concerned about the potential impacts of exposure,” Skibba explained.
Read more
Ramin Skibba (September 6, 2017). “The pros and cons of ‘BPA-free.’” Undark
