Certain natural and man-made substances can exhibit hormone-like properties. These substances are generally called 'endocrine disruptors', although not all of them really fulfil the accepted definition of such endocrine disruptors. For Bisphenol A (BPA), the expression 'endocrine modulator' would be more suitable.
Endocrine disruptors have given rise to many chemical scare stories, urban myths and internet-spread rumours about avoiding products made with polycarbonate plastic or epoxy resins for fear of adverse health effects due to bisphenol A (BPA). None of these adverse health claims have been proven.
The weight of scientific evidence regarding BPA is clear: Consumers may only be exposed to very low levels of BPA and there is no risk to humans, wildlife or the environment from products made from BPA-based materials in their intended uses.
Simply put, BPA is not an endocrine disruptor, according to the widely accepted Weybridge definition, as it does not show any reproducible evidence of adverse effects as a result of hormone-like properties. Like many naturally-occurring substances and everyday foodstuffs, BPA shows very weak, estrogen-like activity, but only at extremely high levels to which humans can never be exposed. This measurable estrogen-like activity is still significantly lower than that of soy beans or even an everyday plate of carrots at comparable levels, for instance.
Furthermore, robust multigenerational animal studies have shown that human reproduction and development are not affected at realistic dose levels of BPA (compared to the extremely low levels of possible consumer exposure). These studies cover a wide variety of parameters able to detect disruptions of the hormone system.
More information
Home