In its report on bisphenol A (BPA), WWF presented what it called "a range of evidence" demonstrating endocrine disruption, including links to reduced sperm production, increased prostate weight and endometriosis, a condition in which uterine tissue is found outside the uterus. The NGO said that children were at the highest risk from endocrine disrupters, and called on the UK government "to phase out or ban" production and use of "known hormone or endocrine-disrupting chemicals such as bisphenol A".
European chemical industry association Cefic and partner organisations in the USA and Japan today hit back at WWF's study, contradicting all its main conclusions. The chemical is not persistent as claimed by WWF, they said, and the "low-dose" theory, under which even very small exposure to chemicals might have significant biological effects, "scientifically highly questionable".
The manufacturers asserted that the "weight of scientific evidence...demonstrates that bisphenol A does not pose a meaningful risk to the environment," while existing regulations "protect consumer health". The chemical should not be considered a selective or developmental toxicant, they said, and does not even meet established criteria for being classed as an endocrine disrupter. WWF's call for elimination of human exposure "is therefore unfounded".
Please enter your details
Not a subscriber?
Take a free trial now to discover the critical insights and updates our coverage offers subscribers.