What BPA Is

There’s been plenty of hubbub lately about Bisphenol A, commonly abbreviated in the news as BPA. It’s used to make plastic hard and shiny yet astonishingly clear, almost like glass, but less breakable. That’s why it was popular for making baby bottles (nowadays not so much).

Generally, if a plastic piece is labeled with the recycle number 7, it’s probably polycarbonate, which incorporates BPA—though not necessarily so. If the plastic is inconveniently not marked, and the company using said plastic is refusing to make clear remarks on whether it contains BPA or not, bet on “yes, BPA” if the plastic is something you’d replace glass with. On the other hand, some pretty innocent-looking stuff does contain BPA.

It’s important to know that Lexan™ is the trademark name of polycarbonate, so claiming that something is Lexan™ really is saying that it’s got BPA in it. It’s also important to know that polypropylene (aka PP, recycle number 5) is not polycarbonate, despite the similarity of syllables and letters, and thus doesn’t contain BPA. These seem to be the main confusion points in the arguments against/for BPA.

The BPA Wikipedia article is actually very linky to studies and papers, and has a timeline of what’s been happening with BPA in research since the 80’s. Some Wikipedia pages are better than others (don’t entirely trust the one about elephants, for instance), and there’s a reason why citations are useful even in truthiness-scattered Wikipedia land.

For those who dislike Wikipedia, here’s Wise Geek’s article (which is also much shorter and more layman-oriented).

The Flamewar Fight

While there are people who are against BPA, and those who are very much against banning BPA (important note: some of the impartial-looking folks on this side are actually industry lobbyists), I don’t really care about that flamewar fight. I do my own research, and come to my own conclusions, and that’s pretty much it. I may change my mind later, but I want to make sure, thus I’ve been reading from both sides of the line.

My conclusion: this is very likely a case of Science Marches On, where a substance previously thought not that harmful has been discovered to be more harmful in increasingly more advanced studies. And since the 80s are 20 years ago now, I figure that the more recent studies are the ones to pay attention to.

Of course, this is just me. You gotta make your own decision. I don’t really care if other people decide to happily use plastic containing BPA in cooking, or canned food using epoxy-based linings containing BPA; BPA plastic is a very, very handy material, after all. Likewise, I don’t really care if other people choose not to use BPA, and think that course has advantages, like finding out which companies care about what their customers think.

Even those who don’t see the harm in BPA should, for instance, be a bit concerned about Cuisinart’s very confused denial, to the point of making mistakes about which plastics are which. Conversations with them tend to go:

Cuisinart rep: Our stuff is made of Lexan™! Not polycarbonate at all!
Other folks: Um, dude(ette)… that is polycarbonate.

Compare this to, say, Rubbermaid™, who lists all their BPA-containing products on their own website, even though they definitely still support BPA usage and explain why.

When BPA is (Possibly) Dangerous

BPA leaks out of plastic (“leeches” is the term) when in contact with food or liquids, whether the plastic container has been heated or not. However, heated polycarbonate definitely leeches far more BPA than cool polycarbonate; and orders of magnitude so. Whether you think BPA itself is harmful or not, the facts are that (a) BPA does leech, (b) more BPA leeches the more time food is spent in contact with it, and (c) BPA does leech more when warmed, and very much more when hot.

You can see why polycarbonate baby bottles are not popular (warm formula and all that).

You can also see why BPA plastic isn’t as much of a concern with water bottles; is a little more of a concern with long-term food storage containers; and is way more of a concern with respect to steamers—steam is hotter than boiling water, though it is less substantial, but on the other hand, it’s the heat and food contact we’re concerned about, not the source of the heat.

And this is also why canned food is way more of a concern than any of the above. Most cans—the most cost-effective cans for a canning company to use—have an epoxy-based lining that uses BPA. Canned food is poured in very hot, and then stored for months. You’d still ingest less BPA using an Oster steamer every day with fresh food versus eating Campbell chicken noodle soup every day.

If you’re interested, here’s Consumer Reports’ research on the matter. Here’s also Environmental Working Group’s research. And an extensive article from The Journal Sentinel.

Notably, this kind of lining is most useful for tomato-based products, because tomatoes are very acidic and tend to react with everything except (a) glass and (b) BPA-treated material, except that leeching still occurs.

So basically: BPA + heat + food + time = food with lots of BPA in it.

If you don’t care about avoiding BPA, you can definitely stop reading now.

If you do care, read on.

Avoiding BPA Without Going Crazy

What has BPA? What doesn’t have BPA? It’s in appliances, containers, food, argh!

Fortunately, for almost everything, there are BPA-free alternatives (tomatoes are still a challenge, though, even to companies who want to avoid BPA).

Here are some resources I’ve found on teh Internets:

Organic Grace’s listing of which canned food brands contain BPA versus not

Kind of depressing, but there are BPA-free companies listed. I’m listing this first, because canned food is definitely priority one where BPA is concerned.

Z Recommends on food processors and blenders and BPA

One of the best guides to this otherwise not well-covered topic. My basic take-away was: Cuisinart™ drools, Hamilton-Beach™ rules. And I tend to not like Hamilton-Beach™ products.

Some BPA product listings

• Rubbermaid™ should win an award for clarity.

• Tupperware™ listing from Z Recommends, because I couldn’t find the Tupperware product listing on tupperware.com, even though they refer to it in their FAQ)

• Oxo™ non-BPA products. They don’t list which products do contain BPA, but anything else that’s clear apart from the new POP containers contains BPA—that unfortunately includes their measuring cups and their fat separator.

• Sassy™ Baby Feeding Products at The Soft Landing.

• Japanese Bento Boxes

Some Brands (Almost) Completely Free of BPA

Note: any knock-offs may contain BPA.

• Lock&Lock™ (recently; avoid premium or crystal clear products)
• Pyrex™
• Corelle™
• Corningware™
• Nalgene™ (very very recently)
• Thermos™
• Laptop Lunch™

Doomed to Have BPA

• “Unbreakable” polycarbonate “glass” ware, all brands. Obviously.
• Campbell’s™
• Coca Cola™ (isn’t that really depressing?)
• Soda cans in general (now that’s definitely depressing)

Odds and Ends

• World Kitchen Canada: Pyrex™ lids have no BPA
• ZDNet: Nalgene™ Abandons BPA
• Nalgene™ comments on epoxy-based lining metal bottles
• Z Recommends: Z Report on BPA in Infant Care Products

Is BPA the End of the World

If you’ve ingested stuff with BPA, and you’re worried about that, then simply stop ingesting stuff with BPA. Your body will get rid of it; it doesn’t stick around forever. I don’t think you’ll, you know, be instantly thinner or better in bed or anything. Possibly you will be healthier in the long run, though.

But hey. It’s a reason to shop.