In a survey of more than 250 brands of canned food, researchers found that more than 44 percent use bisphenol-A lined cans for some or all of their products.
With 109 brands not responding or providing enough information, that number could be a lot higher.
The survey, released today by the Environmental Working Group, found that 78 brands use BPA-lined cans for all of their products, 34 brands use BPA-lined cans for some of their products and 31 use BPA-free cans for all of their products. The survey was conducted between January and August of 2014.
BPA is used to make polycarbonate plastics and is found in some canned foods and beverages, paper receipts and dental sealants. Studies show that just about everyone has traces of the chemical in their body, and researchers believe diet is the major exposure route. The compound can leach out of can linings and into the food.
Exposure is a concern as BPA has been linked to a host of health impacts including reproductive and developmental problems, obesity, cardiovascular disease and cancer. The compound mimics estrogen hormones and can disrupt people’s endocrine systems.
Last week Environmental Health News reported on new research that found even after people metabolize BPA, the resulting compound may still spur obesity.
Some of the more popular brands that the Environmental Working Group found were completely BPA-free were Amy’s Kitchen, Annie’s Homegrown and Sprouts Farmers Market, while BPA users included Target’s Market Pantry, Bush’s, Carnation, Dinty Moore and Eagle Brand.
See the full report here.
Federal regulations do not require canned goods to disclose BPA-based linings. Environmental Working Group researchers had to rely on data from LabelINSIGHT, a company that gathers U.S. supermarket information.
“The biggest problem is that people have no reliable way of knowing whether they are buying food that is laced with this toxic chemical,” said Samara Geller, an Environmental Working Group database analyst, in a statement. “By releasing this analysis, we hope to arm people with the critical information they need to avoid BPA and make smarter shopping decisions.”
According to the report, “companies that said they had eliminated BPA or were in the process of doing so did not disclose the substitutes they were using,” so it’s unclear if the BPA-free products were using compounds similar to BPA, such as bisphenol-S, which has been shown to exhibit similar health impacts to BPA.
Researchers, however, have mostly found BPS in receipt paper.
BPA is no longer used in baby bottles and sippy cups in the United States, but the federal Food and Drug Administration has maintained the levels that may leach from canned goods into food do not pose a risk to human health.
Environmental Working Group’s director of research, Renee Sharp, said a national standard is necessary to protect people’s health.
“Many people on tight budgets or with little access to fresh food rely on canned food as a source of nutrients,” Sharp said in a statement. “That’s why we need to get this right. We need a clear national standard that limits the use of BPA in canned food and improves transparency so that people can know when and if they are ingesting this harmful chemical.”
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.