Canada Declares Bisphenol A to Be a Toxic Substance

Canada recently became the first country in the world to declare bisphenol A (BPA) to be a toxic substance that poses risks to human health and the environment.

"The Government of Canada has a strong record of taking action on Bisphenol A to protect the environment and health of Canadians," said Environment Minister Jim Prentice. "We are continuing our leadership on this issue and...working hard to monitor and manage Bisphenol A." 

BPA is an industrial chemical used to make a hard, clear plastic such as re-usable polycarbonate baby bottles. It is also used in the manufacture of epoxy resins, which act as a protective lining on the inside of metal-based food and beverage cans. 

In the order adding BPA to the toxic register, Health Canada identified dietary intake as the primary source of human exposure. It underlined concerns regarding the link between the chemical and neurodevelopmental and behavioral effects in rodents and said it was "considered appropriate to apply a precautionary approach when characterizing risk to human health". 

"Therefore, it was concluded that bisphenol A should be considered as a substance that may be entering the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that constitute or may constitute a danger in Canada to human life or health," said the government order. 

Canada ' s decision comes after two year's of deliberations and differs markedly from the recent opinion from the European Food Safety Authority which dismissed scientific concerns raised recently in scores of studies, including BPA's link with neurodevelopmental and behavioral effects. FSA said it had found no scientific evidence that would lead it to recommend altering the tolerable daily intake of the chemical.

The Canadian position decision on BPA was also reached in the face of fierce opposition from the chemical industry. The American Chemistry Council executive director Steven Hentges said the move was "contrary to the weight of worldwide scientific evidence, unwarranted and will unnecessarily confuse and alarm the public". 

But the Canadian government said its actions had been based on "robust and relevant scientific evidence." It noted that Health Canada had considered both studies that were based on guidelines for good laboratory practice and those that were not because "they were considered relevant to risk characterization". 

In the United States, one of the reasons that the Senate failed to vote on pending food safety legislation before the current recess is that Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) insisted on including a U.S. ban on BPA in the bill. That amendment is opposed by many in the U.S. food manufacturing and chemical industries, but supported by a number of food safety and consumer groups. 

Of considerable interest in the United States is the effect that Canada's BPA finding might have on future sales of U.S. food products north of the border. Now that Canada has declared BPA to be "a substance that may be entering the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that constitute or may constitute a danger in Canada to human life or health," it is difficult to see how Canada would continue to accept U.S. food products whose packaging materials contain BPA.