San Francisco Chronicle
TOXIC TOYS
San Francisco prepares to ban certain chemicals in products for kids, but enforcement will be tough -- and toymakers question necessity
Jane Kay, Chronicle Environment Writer
Sunday, November 19, 2006
It's often impossible for parents to tell if the teething ring or baby rattle they hand their children contains bisphenol A or phthalates. The Chronicle purchased 16 children's products and sent them to the STAT Analysis Corp. laboratory in Chicago, one of the few commercial labs that test for these chemicals.
The city's ordinance bans the manufacture, distribution or sale of items intended for children younger than 3 if they contain any level of bisphenol A. Six different forms of phthalates are covered by the ban, which sets the maximum phthalate level at 0.1 percent of the chemical makeup of any part of the product. Three of those phthalates are banned only in items intended for kids younger than 3, but the law doesn't include age limits for products that contain three other phthalates -- DEHP, DBP and BBP.
http://www.avent.com/uk/en/learn_more_faq_bottle_feeding.php#q20
What is Bisphenol-A, and what are the issues surrounding BPA?
Bisphenol-A (BPA) is a chemical used in the production of polycarbonate plastic and food/beverage can coatings.
Over 50 years of research and extensive use throughout the world provides overwhelming scientific evidence that polycarbonate is safe for the manufacture of baby feeding bottles.
International regulatory agencies responsible for consumer protection, including the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the UK Food Standards Agency, the US Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) and the Japanese Ministry of Health, have assessed the potential health effects of BPA. All conclude that consumer products made from materials containing BPA, including polycarbonate, are safe for their intended use.
In April 2005 the FDA reconfirmed the safety of the use of polycarbonate for food contact including baby feeding bottles stating that “based on all the evidence available at this time, FDA sees no reason to change its long-held position that current uses with food are safe.”
Avent Bottles are independently tested in accordance with and comply to the latest European Standard for Drinking Equipment for Children-EN14350: 2004 which includes a limit for the migration of BPA.
Avent is committed to the safety of mothers and babies.
Avent bottles are used by millions of happy, healthy babies and families in over 70 countries worldwide and conform to the most stringent national and international standards.
2 comments:
dear Katie,
unfortunately you don't really know what you are talking about. cigarette companies used to say that their products were not dangerous and we all know what happened. if you saw the real research done on this subject you would be horrified.
it seems as though Avent have paid you to write this and it is not surprising. they always engage in this sort of practices.
the effects of BPA can be seen by the rise in the number of cancer cases, miscarriages, infertility etc. It is only since glass bottles went out of the market that the numbers of these cases rose.
Katie, you either work for Avent or the chemical industry as there has not been one independant research done that found that there is no problem with BPA. all of the industry funded research, surprise surprise, have found that there are no problems. we all know how strong the lobby is by the chemical companies, so much politics will guarantee that the interest of the individual will not be met.
i am sorry to read such a shallow blog.
Well, anon, I wasn't agreeing with Avent...I was just posting the links of their response...maybe I should have put a ::puke:: at the end or some kind of I'm in disbelief statement...but I didn't...I find that Bisphenol a and Phthalates are dangerous--just as I find vaccines and their contents dangerous. But thanks for stopping by--I'm sure you feel much better about yourself now, behind your anon and behind your self-righteous attempts at being offensive.
I bet you didn't even see my vaccine post--I bet you'd really like that--then again, you're not interested in that--because anything I say would be a waste of your time--because it's too "shallow."
Vaccine companies say their product is safe--but we're to believe them. I suppose your "cigarette company" analogy will only apply to what you want it to though. What's the catch?
Post a Comment