Subscribe: If you would like to receive a daily email notification as new messages are posted, click here to subscribe. (Note: New messages are also included in the "My Plastic-Free Life Weekly Digest", so do consider how many emails you would like to receive.)
To add a new topic: Decide which category it will be (plastic-free alternatives, plastic news, rants, etc.) and click on that category. Then, you will see the "Add Topic" button at the top right of the section for that category.
Why Register? You may post as a guest without registering, but your post will be held in the moderation queue until I approve it, and depending on my schedule, that could take a while. If you register, your posts will go through immediately. If you have trouble registering or adding topics, please contact me for help.
Beth, The BPA issue is important because of the potential threat to the young, with mouth- hot milk feeders more likely to leach out the chemical. There have been some welcome moves on this with non-BPA bottles available and actual bans enforced in some areas.
Keeping the pressure up will move the situation forward and alternatives are likely to be found for all current uses of BPA. The safety of plastics is now being questioned where previously the supposed convenience was all that mattered.
I subscribe on line to CR but it appears that the whole article is available even if you are not a subscriber. At the left hand side of the overview screen there are a bunch of subheadings that will take you to the other portions of the article section by section.
The "BPA-free" products that were tested were Vital Choice's tuna which tested on average 20 ppb BPA and Eden baked beans averaging 1 ppb BPA, both in non-epoxy based liner cans. The article is worth reading in its totality and the basic take away is you as consumer just can't know what is in your food these days. The industries' response is pretty disturbing in its lack of responsiveness to concern.
So it is only the cans that are lined with plastic that are a problem? If I have plain old ordinary cans this wouldn't be an issue? There isn't any way to know before you buy whether the lining would be inside, but once purchased, those that have it could be avoided afterward.
Ah Clif. There is no "ordinary" BPA-free food or beverage can. They all have it except for a few rare exceptions, and this article is saying that even the exceptions have it too. We're talking about both food cans and soda cans. Search this site for "BPA" and you'll find an article that explains it.
I did some research at the beginning of the year (2009), and I came up with the following information about plastics liners in food products. The comments are directly from the e-mails sent to me by representatives from the companies in response to my requests for information.
I think that a lot will change as more studies are released about the harmful effects of BPA. Obviously there are alternatives to the BPA liners (as Eden Foods is using them), and so the effort should be for us as consumers to choose with our dollars and avoid the food manufacturers who blithely use BPA.
And here’s a link to a site that is tracking BPA in cans: http://organicgrace.com/node/316.
Eden Foods: “Eden began using the BPA-free can lining for EDEN Organic Beans in 1999. Ball first made this can for us April 22, 1999. All Eden Organic Beans are produced at our AIB International ‘Superior Rated’ (the highest rating) kosher cannery, Meridian Foods in Indiana.
12 varieties of EDEN Organic Unseasoned Beans in 15 ounce cans
4 varieties of EDEN Organic Unseasoned Beans in 108 ounce cans
6 varieties of EDEN Organic Refried Beans in 15 and 16 ounce cans
5 varieties of EDEN Organic Seasoned Beans in 15 ounce cans
6 varieties of EDEN Organic Rice & Beans in 15 ounce cans
Eden Organic Canned Tomatoes are packed by a co-packer. They are packed in steel cans coated with a baked on r-enamel lining. Due to the acidity of tomatoes, (to prevent the can from rusting) the lining is epoxy based and contains a minute amount of bisphenol A. In extraction test on the r-enamnel lined can bisphenol-A was found to be in the “non detectable” range. The test was based on a detection limit of 5 ppb (parts per billion).”
Muir Glen (http://www.muirglen.com): "Scientific and government bodies worldwide have examined the scientific evidence and consistently have reached the conclusion that BPA is not a risk to human health. Recent examples include comprehensive risk assessments in Japan and Europe and a review by an independent panel of experts organized by the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis. The can coatings used in Muir Glen packaging comply with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration requirements for use in food contact applications. These coatings have long played an essential part in food preservation, helping to maintain wholesomeness, nutritional value, and product quality. . . .We work closely with our suppliers to ensure that all of the food ingredients and packaging materials we use are fully in compliance with U.S. Food and Drug Administration requirements and meet our high quality standards. . . . We will continue to monitor this situation.”
Tropicana: “We understand your concern with the plastic lining of cartons of orange juice due to new information about plastic. The liner contained within our fiberboard packages is a Low Density Polyethylene liner. Please be assured that our product packaging does not contain bisphenol A (BPA).”
Hain/Celestial: “Tests have indicated that trace amounts of BPA may be present in these can coatings. The minute amounts detected are well below levels deemed to be of concern for public health according to the FDA."
Most Users Ever Online: 320
Currently Browsing this Page:
Guest Posters: 149