Summer lovin'

Lots of changes in the MJ-KC household, including the addition of a new kitty, the purchase of a house, and the announcement that there's a wedding to plan for!  Those are all very exciting things, and work has certainly been keeping me busy as well.  All of this means I've been rather distracted.

So to get back into gear here, an update on the two issues I mentioned in March:

1) Petition to outlaw BPA.
FDA was set to decide on this back in March.  Here's some discussion of it (and the Safe Cosmetics Act legislation) in Forbes.  The result?  The FDA rejected the ban proposal, claiming that the studies presented were inconclusive about the effect of BPA on humans.  (They did acknowledge that there are serious concerns about BPA's affect on children.)
So what happens now?
Well, despite the FDA's ruling, public concern about BPA has been on the increase.  So for now, we have market-driven reduction in BPA products, with many companies bragging that their products are "BPA-free."  One caution here, though.  While there's a case to be made that BPA is toxic, not much is known about the polymer products that will replace it.  Buying another plastic that is BPA-free may or may not be any safer than the BPA-product.
Another important point? Studies of BPA exposure suggest that the greatest exposure to BPA is from canned goods.  (BPA is used as a liner to prevent cans from rusting - a danger itself.)  BPA is used because it works well for this purpose and it's difficult to replace.  So changing your water bottles and Tupperware-ish containers aren't going to stop all of your exposure.  (Although it's worth noting that several major companies, like Campbell's and Heinz, have announced plans to phase out BPA.)  Another common source?  Receipts.
Time covered the FDA non-ban, too  A quick read detailing the concerns and the reasoning behind the FDA decision.


The final word on BPA isn't here yet though.  Just last month, Congressman Ed Markey petitioned the FDA to remove approval for BPA in infact formula packaging.  His reasoning?  It's been largely abandoned and should no longer be used.


2) Petition to label products containing GMOs
The FDA received the results of the "Just Label It" campaign in March - declaring that it received 394 comments.  How so few?  Well, the FDA counts multiple matching form letters as one "comment".  And a petition with hundred of thousands of signatures?  That counts as one "comment." too.  Read about such counting techniques from The Chicago Tribune.  To be fair, I sorta see where they're coming from, at least if you're talking about concerns to respond to.  There are 394 individual concerns voiced.  However, that doesn't equate to lack of public concern.
What happens next?
Well, there's still a lot of noise on this one.  Several states are sending proposed required labeling laws to the ballot.  If those pass, things get complicated for manufacturers, as it may set different requirements in Vermont than California than Kansas.
New York Times has a fairly comprehensive summary.
It's a complicated issue, to be sure, as some genetic modification is less worrisome than other.
To give equal time, some defense of GMOs by a biologist.