Attorney Daily - Your source for the most important legal news

On May 8, 2009, Minnesota Public Radio discussed the signing of a bill by Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty that will restrict the sale of children’s drinking products made with Bisphenol A, or BPA. BPA is a common chemical that helps harden plastic, and is found in numerous plastic food storage containers. It also lines the inside surface of metal food and soft-drink cans.

Tests show that trace amounts of the chemical leach out of these containers and into the foods and liquids they’re storing, particularly when exposed to heat. Animal studies have linked BPA exposure to reproductive problems and even a potential cancer risk.

While Minnesota is the first state to ban BPA in baby bottles and sippy cups, several others states, including California, Connecticut, Michigan and New York, are pondering similar legislation.

Some retailers and manufacturers, responding to pressure from consumers, have already eliminated BPA from their products. But state Senator Sandy Rummel, chief author of the BPA legislation, says the situation is still inconsistent from store to store.

Minnesota lawmakers sought the ban in baby products because federal officials have been slow to respond to concerns about BPA. There is very little oversight when new chemicals are introduced into the market. And once those products are in circulation, the government can’t ban them unless they prove that they are dangerous to human or animal health.

In addition to the BPA ban, the governor has signed legislation called the Toxic-Free Kids Act. It’s designed to get ahead of the federal government on chemicals used in consumer products. It requires the Minnesota Department of Health to assess chemicals used in consumer products and publish a list of those with known human health risks.

Representative Kate Knuth is chief author of the bill. She says the list should send a clear signal to manufacturers that they should avoid using those chemicals. If the plan works, Knuth says the Legislature shouldn’t have to spend its time banning individual chemicals.

“The point is we shouldn’t have to have a huge public relations and advocacy effort to phase out toxic chemicals,” she said. “I think that should just happen as a matter of basic public policy.”

This entry was posted on Monday, May 11th, 2009 at 6:49 am and is filed under Bisphenol A (BPA), Toxic Exposure. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.