The Media Fell For It Again

Steven Hentges, Ph.DFriday, August 2, 2019 SAFETY
According to the headline on a recent press release, exposure to common chemicals inplastics is linked to childhood obesity. The headline further states that a new study“finds replacement chemicals for BPA aren’t safe for consumers.” Not surprisingly,
journalists uncritically took the bait and reported the story just as written in the press
release.
Maybe they should have read beyond the headline because there’s much less to thestory than meets the eye. The underlying premise for the new study is that BPA(bisphenol A) has been “identified as an obesogen” and is being replaced with otherchemically similar bisphenols, in particular bisphenol S (BPS) and bisphenol F (BPF).
The term “obesogen” was coined about 10 years ago to describe substances that candisrupt metabolic processes in the body and potentially lead to obesity. Research on
the topic is at an early stage and for now there is not a clear consensus on thedefinition or public health implications of obesogens.
The story starts to fall apart with the reference in the headline to common chemicals inplastics. There is little or no basis in fact that BPF and BPS are being used as
replacements for BPA, and certainly no basis to say that these substances arecommonly present in plastics.
And it only goes downhill from there. Although the first sentence in the scientificpaper claims that BPA is an obesogen, it is stated later in the same paragraph that BPA
1 / 2

was “not statistically significantly associated with general obesity, abdominal obesity, or
any body mass outcome.” In other words, BPA was not associated with obesity in thisstudy, in direct conflict with the start of the paragraph.
Most importantly though is a major limitation of the study that is highlighted in
the scientific paper but without even a hint in the press release. The limitation isimportant enough that it is repeated in its entirety below.
“As with the previous studies on this topic, our results should be interpreted withcaution. The cross-sectional design precludes our ability to infer whether
exposure to bisphenols may influence weight gain or obesity, or whether obese
children may have greater exposures to or excretion of bisphenol
compounds. The methodologic issues involved in the study of this relationship havebeen well described.” (emphasis added)
Put more simply, the study, by design, is incapable of identifying any substance as anobesogen. The study only examines statistical associations but with no capability
whatsoever of establishing a cause-effect relationship between any substance andobesity. As important as it is, that limitation is entirely missing from the press releaseand media coverage of the study.
Given this significant limitation, it should go without saying that the study is also
incapable of assessing the safety of BPA or the so-called replacement chemicals.
Support for the bold assertion in the headline about the safety of the replacement
chemicals is a complete mystery. The press release doesn’t provide an explanation andthe scientific paper doesn’t even mention the word “safety” much less evaluate safety.
As to the safety of BPA itself, the views of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration andother regulatory authorities around the world are very clear and well documented.
These authorities consistently find that BPA is safe as used. You won’t find that in thepress release either.

2 / 2