The non-FDA experimental evidence about the safety of Bisphenol A (BPA) is still under debate. While the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) considers low levels of BPA exposure safe, several non-FDA studies suggest there may be potential health risks associated with BPA exposure. Here are some findings from non-FDA studies:
1. Animal Studies: Numerous animal studies, mostly conducted on rodents, have shown various adverse effects of BPA exposure. These effects include disruptions in reproductive health, altered brain development, changes in behavior, increased risk of obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and certain cancers. However, it is essential to consider that the doses used in these animal studies are significantly higher than typical human exposure levels.
2. Cell and Tissue Studies: Many in vitro studies using cells and tissues have observed BPA’s potential to interfere with hormone signaling pathways and cellular functions. These studies often suggest that BPA may act as an endocrine disruptor, mimicking estrogen or interfering with other hormone-related processes. However, it is challenging to directly translate the findings from cell studies to human health effects.
3. Epidemiological Studies: Epidemiological studies investigating the association between BPA exposure and human health outcomes have produced conflicting results. Some studies suggest potential links between BPA exposure and adverse health effects, such as obesity, insulin resistance, reproductive disorders, and cardiovascular diseases. Conversely, other studies have found no significant associations or have indicated inconclusive results. It is important to note that these studies often rely on self-reported BPA exposure estimates, making it challenging to establish a clear cause-effect relationship.
Some Abstracts of Interest
Follow the links for journal article, authors and dates.
2022 Aug 15. “Bisphenol A (BPA), an important industrial material widely applied in daily products, is considered an endocrine-disrupting chemical that may adversely affect humans. Growing evidence has shown that intestinal bacterial alterations caused by BPA exposure play an important role in several local and systemic diseases. Evidence from several experimental settings shows that both low and high doses of BPA interfere with the hormonal, homeostatic, and reproductive systems in animals and humans.” {PubMed}
2019 May 26.“There is perhaps no endocrine disrupting chemical more controversial than bisphenol A (BPA). Comprising a high-volume production chemical used in a variety of applications, BPA has been linked to a litany of adverse health-related outcomes, including effects on brain sexual differentiation and behaviour. … Evidence of altered neuroendocrine development, including age- and sex-specific expression of oestrogen receptor (ER)α and ERβ, and the abrogation of brain and behavioural sexual dimorphisms, supports the conclusion that developmental BPA exposure, even at doses below what regulatory agencies regard as “safe” for humans, contribute to brain and behavioural change. {PubMed}
2018 November. “Based on rodent studies after prenatal and/or perinatal or adult exposure, there is now evidence that BPA may increase metabolic disturbances eventually leading to type-2 diabetes development via an ED MoA. In particular, BPA has been shown to alter insulin synthesis and/or release by pancreatic β-cells, and insulin signaling within insulin-sensitive organs (i.e., liver, muscle, adipose tissues).” {PubMed}
2017 November. “Bisphenol A (BPA) is used in the manufacture of polycarbonate and epoxy resin plastics. There has been interest in the possibility that BPA has immunotoxic properties, and a variety of investigations have explored this. … The conclusion drawn here is that presently there is no clear evidence that BPA has the potential to cause immunotoxicity resulting in adverse health effects. {PubMed}
2016 July. “Bisphenol A (BPA) is a ubiquitous compound used in polymer manufacturing for a wide array of applications; however, increasing evidence has shown that BPA causes significant endocrine disruption and this has raised public concerns over safety and exposure limits.” {PubMed}
2015 Sep 9. “Bisphenol A (BPA) is a plasticiser found in a number of household plastics, electronics, and food-packaging materials. Over the past 5 years, several human epidemiological studies have reported a positive association between BPA exposure and adverse health outcomes in children, including obesity, asthma, preterm birth, and neuro-behavioural disturbances. These findings are in conflict with international environmental risk assessment models, which predict daily exposure levels to BPA should not pose a risk to child health.” {PubMed}
2014 November. “BPA is a ubiquitous environmental contaminant, resulting mainly from manufacturing,use or disposal of plastics of which it is a component, and the degradation of industrial plastic-related wastes. Growing evidence from research on laboratory animals, wildlife, and humans supports the view that BPA produces an endocrine disrupting effect and adversely affects male reproductive function.” {PubMed}
Overall, the non-FDA experimental evidence indicates potential health risks associated with BPA exposure, especially at higher doses. However, the exact level of concern and the extent of these risks in humans remain uncertain. It is an ongoing research area, and further studies are necessary to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the safety of BPA.
A point worth mentioning is that this conflict of views after years of research feels very fishy. Simply looking at the details in abstracts of these top hits for BPA studies on PubMed and seeing what appears to be a scientific consensus that there is/are dangers, one wonders, once again, if the USA has a captured agency pay-to-play system where manufacturers with enough money control the regulators to keep products on the market which are harming the public. It is possible, as stated, that this concern is not warranted. Why is there even a debate if the FDA has better data on safety of BPA than these other researchers? I can think of no reason beyond regulatory capture, but I’d be very glad to hear a more reassuring answer along with appropriate confirming experimental peer-reviewed article data.
For now, you may want to look into how to avoid exposure to BPA if you are having any health issues mentioned in the research on this widespread industrial material.
