The U.S. Food and Drug Administration's refusal last month to rule on the safety of the chemical bisphenol A, colloquially known as BPA, is a terrible decision. The agency's failure to act responsibly and in a timely fashion likely puts the health of millions of Americans -- especially the young -- at risk for a variety of illnesses, including diabetes and cancer.
It's not the first time the FDA has dilly-dallied on the subject. The agency has had numerous opportunities to restrict or, better yet, ban the use of the chemical. It is found in innumerable consumer products, including baby bottles, water bottles, dental sealants and the lining of metal canned food containers. Delay, if not denial, has been the agency's preferred course of action.
During the Bush administration, the FDA argued that additional research was needed to make an informed decision about BPA. That decision wasn't based on science. Rather, it reflected the then-president's belief that little or no regulation was effective regulation. Never mind that it conveniently overlooked the ample body of evidence from many independent studies that link the chemical to disruptions in the body's endocrine system and to other ailments.
The agency explained the problem away by citing other studies -- underwritten by the chemical industry in large part -- that purportedly showed that BPA causes no harm. When testimony from experts debunked those studies, and made it clear that BPA is a toxic chemical and is now present in the urine of more than 90 percent of American adults and newborns, the FDA reluctantly agreed to revisit the topic. It promised a timely decision on the safety of the chemical. The nation is still waiting.
The December delay is not the first time the FDA has failed to meet a deadline. As usual, there's was no explanation for the silence on the subject. The Obama administration should demand one.
The agency's procrastination is dangerous. In addition to diabetes and cancer, BPA has been linked to cardiac disease and brain and reproductive disorders. Children, pregnant women and fetuses are especially at risk. The FDA might not accept those findings, but the much of the public clearly does. Given the serious health problems tied to BPA, that's an appropriate course of action.
Consumers have usurped the FDA's role in this instance, and properly so. They no doubt played a role in convincing most baby bottle manufacturers to voluntarily stop using BPA in their product. Public opinion played a role, as well, in prompting Connecticut and Massachusetts to ban BPA in baby bottles. Legislation is pending in other states and in Congress that would ban its use in baby bottles and many other items.
There is, in fact, no need to wait for the FDA to make up its mind. The body of evidence already suggests that Bisphenol A is dangerous and toxic -- especially to children -- and that its use in consumer products should be halted to help protect public health. Bills that outlaw it should be approved promptly, whether or not the FDA is ready to act.