A peer-reviewed scientific article “Human exposures to bisphenol A: mismatches between data and assumptions” appeared April 4, 2013 in the journal Reviews on Environmental Health (Vandenberg et al. 2013). The article is written by experienced BPA scientists from the US and gives an overview of the current hot issues in the debate about this endocrine disrupting chemical.
In particular, the authors discuss human biomonitoring of the plastic compound in blood samples, an issue that has been a topic lately even in mainstream media. Levels of active, free BPA measured in human blood samples are relevant, according to this article. Further, these scientists note that known exposure sources to BPA may not account for all BPA found in humans—an assumption that is in direct contradiction to the European Food Safety Authority’s (EFSA) assumption (EFSA 2010) where exposure via food packaging is thought to be the only relevant route. Both EFSA and the FDA discounted non-oral dosing BPA animal studies in their risk assessments. Therefore the scientists call for a better understanding of all BPA exposure routes and consideration of all low dose animal experiments when setting of assumed safe exposure levels for the entire population—including sensitive groups like fetuses and newborn children.
Reference
Vandenberg, L., et al. (2013). Human exposures to bisphenol A: mismatches between data and assumptions. Reviews on Environmental Health. 28: 37 (online April4, 2013)
