Consumers’ Union, the group that publishes the popular Consumer Reports, wants the federal government to ban BPA in food and beverage containers, in order to protect all consumers–especially children.

Last month, 26 percent of Coca-cola shareholders expressed concern about BPA, asking the company to reveal its plans for the future concerning the chemical. But that wasn’t a large enough proportion for the top brass to do anything about it.

A study at Penn State University School of Medicine found a correlation between fetal exposure to BPA and wheezing in infants. BPA, you recall, is the false estrogen that is used in manufacturing clear plastic bottles, lining food and beverage cans, manufacturing thermal paper for receipts, and so on.

The FDA and the EPA are using outdated testing and review procedures for chemicals, according to scientists representing societies from eight fields who signed a letter in the journal Science.

Vom Saal’s lab has been testing fetal exposures that are far, far lower than the levels the FDA’s toxicologists are thinking about, and finding adverse effects in animal studies. The reason BPA acts in such tiny doses is that that is the way the body is designed to work, responding to tiny doses of hormones in the bloodstream. “We are between 10 and a hundred to a thousand-million times lower than whatever toxicologists were thinking about,” said Vom Saal.

A physician, Samuel S. Epstein, wrote a book last year on the subject and chairs the Cancer Prevention Coalition. The coalition seeks to get the FDA to act on its mandate to get rid of toxic or potentially toxic ingredients in personal care products, such as lotion, deodorant, or shampoo. So far, apparently, the FDA has NEVER banned a personal care product ingredient in the past sixty years. That despite a mandate in the law that set it up: “Each ingredient used in a cosmetic product and each finished cosmetic product shall be adequately substantiated for safety prior to marketing.” Hence there are plenty of cosmetics and personal care products out there that contain “allergens, hormones, carcinogens and their precursors, and ultra-microscopic nanoparticles,” Epstein charges. These include phthalates and BPA.

The report, Seeking Safer Packaging 2010, tallies the results of questionnaires sent to food companies, and gives each company a grade. To get an A, a company has to be taking steps to test materials and eliminate use of BPA, and also has to have a time table for getting rid of it.

I don’t know about you, but I want to support the companies that are making efforts in this area. Here is who got the A grades:

I don’t know about you, but I see plenty of people born in the late 80s and 90s and later who are far taller than their parents. There isn’t any obvious reason for it except for this hormone disruption. I also see plenty of early puberty for girls, which I have mentioned on this blog before. I know that infertility is a big problem these days. There seems to be a lot more squirreliness in kids, and much more labeling of ADHD and so on. Even the autism epidemic may have a cause here, in the decreased effectiveness of the liver in removing toxins. Many parents who have “recovered” their kids from autism have done it by using a detoxification process of some kind.

The FDA needs to let go of its cronies and listen to Dr. Vom Saal. Their job is to protect us, not protect the jobs. That is clear to me.

A leading environmental group filed suit Monday against the Federal Drug Administration (FDA), charging it with foot-dragging in protecting the public from bisphenyl A (BPA). BPA is a synthetic estrogen used in food packaging, widely believed to be damaging to health, especially for children and fetuses.

My sister sent me an article from the Albuquerque Journal dated May 9, 2009: “Artificial sweetener effective bug killer.” In it, Richard Fagerlund, “the bugman,” advises readers on issues involving getting rid of pests. Here’s an effective way to get rid of ants and mice: just put some powdered Aspartame in a dish, and they’ll eat it up and die. “It’s a very powerful ant and mouse killer,” wrote Fagerlund.

So it’s harmless for humans? NOT! Now, doesn’t this make you question the usefulness and integrity of the FDA, which is supposed to be protecting us??