The Netherlands Listens to the Science on BPA

Steven Hentges, Ph.D
Tuesday, May 22, 2018 inWe know from authoritative sources that BPA is safe. For example, the U.S. Food andDrug Administration (FDA) asks and answers the question on its website: “Is BPA safe?
Yes.” And the U.S. is not alone; many other government authorities around the world say
something similar about the safety of BPA.
Those bottom line conclusions on safety may be all we want or need to know. But
inquiring minds might also wonder how we know that BPA is safe, not just who said so? In
particular, what scientific data supports those conclusions?
A very important type of data comes from the field of exposure science. If we want toknow if just about anything is safe, we need to know how much of it we’re exposed
to. After all, we could be harmed by overdosing on just about anything. The basic
scientific principle commonly stated as “the dose makes the poison” has been known forcenturies.
Fortunately, we know quite a bit about how much BPA we’re exposed to and where itcomes from. A good example was reported recently by the Dutch National Institute for
Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) in a report titled “Dietary sources of exposure tobisphenol A in the Netherlands.”
From previous analyses, we know that our primary source of exposure to BPA is from ourdiet. One reason is that many food and beverage cans contain an epoxy resin-based
protective coating to prevent corrosion of the metal can and contamination of thecontents. Exposure can occur if trace levels of residual BPA in the coating migrate into afood or beverage.
1/3

What the RIVM scientists did is calculate BPA exposure from measured levels of BPA invarious foods and Dutch food consumption patterns. Full details of how they did this foryoung children (ages 2-6 years), older children and adults (ages 7-69 years), and women ofchildbearing age (18-45 years) are provided in the RIVM report.
Consistent with exposure estimates in other countries, the calculated exposures for theDutch population are quite low. The RIVM scientists then concluded with theirinterpretation of what these exposure levels mean: “The exposure estimates indicate thatpossible health effects of BPA exposure via food are negligible.”All exposure estimates were well below the safe intake level for BPA set by the European
Food Safety Authority (EFSA), as well as applicable standards in the U.S. and elsewhere in
the world. The RIVM scientists further noted that “the conservative choices made toaddress the uncertainties have very likely resulted in an overestimation of theexposure.” That’s an important point that increases confidence in the overall safetyconclusion.
The EFSA safe intake level for BPA was established in 2015 after a thorough review ofavailable scientific data on BPA. What wasn’t available at the time were the results of
the CLARITY Core Study, which was conducted by senior FDA scientists to resolve any
remaining uncertainties about the safety of BPA.
The results of that study, which is of unprecedented size and scope for BPA, were recentlyreleased by the U.S. National Toxicology Program, which provided funding for thestudy. As stated in the conclusion of the draft study report, “BPA produced minimal effects
that were distinguishable from background.” Overall, the results indicate that BPA hasvery little potential to cause health effects even when people are exposed to it throughout
their lives.
Although EFSA has not yet incorporated the CLARITY study findings into its safetyassessment, FDA has already started to do so. In a statement released in conjunction withthe report, Dr. Stephen Ostroff, Deputy Commissioner for Foods and Veterinary Medicine
at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) noted: “our initial review supports ourdetermination that currently authorized uses of BPA continue to be safe for consumers.”

2/3With the results of the CLARITY Core study now available, the Dutch are wise to listen tothe science on BPA.

3/3