Chemistry World Blog

In lieu of US federal action to address health concerns about the controversial chemical bisphenol A (BPA), states are stepping up to the plate. On 10 October, the Attourneys General from Connecticut, New Jersey, and Delaware wrote to eleven companies – including baby formula makers Abbott, Mead Johnson and Wyeth – to request that they immediately discontinue the use of BPA in their products.

The state officials note that BPA is a hormone disrupting chemical used to line food cans like the ones that contain infant formula, and there is growing scientific evidence that BPA in this form leaches directly into the food.

‘The release of a toxic chemical directly into the food we feed our infants is intolerable,’ write Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, Anne Milgram of New Jersey, and Joseph “Beau” Biden of Delaware, who is the son of Democratic vice presidential candidate Sen. Joseph Biden. ‘As Attorneys General, we call for the immediate elimination of this dangerous chemical from our children’s food,’ they conclude.

The attourneys general also note that laboratory evidence suggests that even low-dose exposure to BPA can cause serious damage to the reproductive, neurological, and immune systems of fetuses and infants.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has so far elected not to ban BPA in any fashion, and Blumenthal recently wrote to the agency requesting that it bar the chemical from baby bottles and baby formula containers.

Meanwhile, media reports have surfaced indicating a potential conflict of interest involving BPA at the federal advisory level.

Charles Gelman, a retired medical supply manufacturer who considers BPA to be safe, allegedly donated $5 million (£2.9 billion) to a University of Michigan Risk Science Center that is codirected by Martin Philbert, the chairman of the FDA panel currently deliberating about the chemical’s safety. The donation, which was undisclosed, is reportedly 25 times larger than the annual budget of the centre, which was founded by Philbert.

US lobby groups like OMB Watch say FDA should have done a better job uncovering this potential conflict of interest.

The largest group US Nobel Laureates to ever endorse one candidate for elected office came out in favor of Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama on 25 September. In an open letter to the American people, 61 Nobel award winning scientists – including 14 who won the award in Chemistry -claim that Obama is ‘a visionary leader who can ensure the future of our traditional strengths in science and technology and who can harness those strengths to address many of our greatest problems: energy, disease, climate change, security, and economic competitiveness.’

The Nobelists go on to blame the current administration of Republican of George W. Bush for damaging the nation’s scientific enterprise through ‘stagnant or declining’ federal support for research. ‘We have watched Senator Obama’s approach to these issues with admiration,’ the scientists write. ‘In particular, we support the measures he plans to take – through new initiatives in education and training, expanded research funding, an unbiased process for obtaining scientific advice, and an appropriate balance of basic and applied research – to meet the nation’s and the world’s most urgent needs.’

The endorsement came the same day as Obama issued an 11-page “science and innovation plan” that includes a strategy to double federal support basic research at key federal science agencies over a decade.