Science Forward

In recent years, there seems to be a growing number of studies on bisphenol-A that contradict each other. One study claims that BPA is somehow linked to child obesity, while more popular studies propose that BPA is an “endocrine disruptor” (a chemical that mimics the structure of certain endocrines, like estrogen, and disrupts the balance of said endocrines in the human body). On the other side of the spectrum, alternate research seeks to disprove the claims that BPA is harmful to humans, and that BPA consumption is not in quantities significant enough to pose a threat (if there really is one). With the possibility of such threats from this enigmatic substance (BPA is found in almost every container we eat and drink from) it is important, as a general consumer, to become informed about the studies that are taking place and to make your own educated inferences until conclusive evidence is found.

One “discrepancy” in the opposing arguments is that groups concluding that even “low dosages” of BPA are harmful are using dosages that are still much higher than the average BPA intake. Epidemiologist and Forbes writer Geoffrey Kabat points out skeptical scientists/researchers who claim that most instances of BPA causing harmful effects were ones where even the “low doses” were much more than average. The moral of the story, when researching BPA, or any other science-related issue, it is important to be able to sift through different conclusions based on the means of research, and the methods by which data was collected. It is still very possible that BPA has harmful effects on the endocrine system, but larger-than-normal doses of the substance will not provide real-life conclusions.

Other scientists have suggested that “endocrine disruption” may occur with the consumption of even small amounts of BPA, however, this phenomenon should not be judged as an “end point.” In other words, scientists should not be so quick to make the conclusion that BPA causes endocrine disruption, as the effects of this may not be so clear. Studies now claim that BPA causes endocrine disruption–and that’s a bad thing. But many opposing scientists argue that research conclusions should not revolve solely around the endocrine-disruption phenomenon. A group of leading toxicologists led by Daniel Dietrich of the Faculty of Biology at the University of Konstanz, Germany, claims that “assessment of a hazard should be based on ‘whole human or animal systems’ and not on ‘isolated test systems of unknown homeostatic significance’ and on a characterization of ‘real-life potency.'” [1]

There is plenty of contradicting research on the topic of BPA. But while we wait for more conclusive data to be presented, we can take a moment to reflect on the research that has been done already, and determine for ourselves whether drinking from a plastic bottle is worth the (not so clear) risk.

1. Kabat, Geoffrey. “The raging controversy over BPA shows no signs of abating.” Forbes.