Low Dose of Bisphenol A Causes No Harmful Effects on Children, Adults

by VR Sreeraman on  July 24, 2008 at 5:01 PM Research News
RSS Email Print This Page Comment bookmark
Font : A-A+

 Low Dose of Bisphenol A Causes No Harmful Effects on Children, Adults
A new multigenerational reproductive toxicity study of dietary Bisphenol A (BPA) in mice conducted by researchers at RTI International found no adverse effects of BPA on parents or offspring at dietary concentrations and doses comparable to those estimated for human exposure levels.

These findings strongly support the conclusion that oral exposure to BPA is not harmful to children or adults at the low doses to which people are exposed.

Show Full Article

The study, published in the August issue of the peer-reviewed journal Toxicological Sciences, assessed human health risks of oral exposure using a two-generation reproductive toxicity study of dietary BPA in mice.

The study is the largest and most comprehensive study to date that assessed the potential health risks of oral or dietary exposure to BPA. Its findings were reviewed and accepted as part of the comprehensive European Union risk assessment.

"A number of small-scale basic research studies reporting adverse effects of BPA have generated significant news coverage and public concern in recent months, resulting in an incomplete picture," said Rochelle W. Tyl, Ph.D., a senior fellow at RTI who designed, conducted the new study. "To appropriately assess health risks, robust studies, performed under rigorous Good Laboratory Practice principles must be used."

Researchers conducting the RTI study administered oral dietary BPA (the human exposure route) to mice, over a wide range of BPA doses, and assessed the systemic, reproductive and developmental effects in parents and offspring over two generations.

The researchers found no evidence of reproductive or developmental adverse effects from dietary exposure to BPA at estimated human BPA exposure levels, ranging from one or a few micrograms (one-millionth of a gram) or less per day, to doses up to 50,000 times higher than the estimated human exposure levels.

The findings from this orally dosed multi-generation study in mice are consistent with results of an earlier RTI multi-generation study of orally dosed BPA in rats (published in Toxicological Sciences in 2002), as well as those for an orally dosed BPA multi-generation study in rats, funded by the Japanese government. All three studies found no adverse health effects from BPA at low oral doses, equivalent to those estimated for human infants and children.

Two aspects of BPA exposure support the conclusion that BPA is not indicated to cause adverse effects in people. First, the oral exposure of BPA in the human population is very low, in both infants and for adults. Second, BPA administered orally is rapidly and efficiently metabolized in the intestines and liver even before it reaches the bloodstream. This means that at these low human exposures BPA is rapidly and completely eliminated from the body in urine, in both newborns and adults. This results in little or no internal systemic exposure from low oral doses.

"We conducted these studies in response to the continuing societal, scientific and international regulatory concerns about the safety of BPA," Tyl said. "The low dose effects of exposure to BPA reported in small, basic research studies have not been replicated or validated in rigorous, governmental testing guideline studies using oral administration, such as the guideline multigenerational studies listed above."

Source: Newswise

Post a Comment

Comments should be on the topic and should not be abusive. The editorial team reserves the right to review and moderate the comments posted on the site.
Notify me when reply is posted
I agree to the terms and conditions

This Website, which posted the article, “Low Dose of Bisphenol A Causes No Harmful Effects on Children, Adults,” calls itself “Research News.” This conveys the hope of independent and unbiased reporting, yet appearing on the same page of the article about the safety of BPA are links to several BPA-free baby bottle sites.

If the editor were asked about apparent conflict of interest, he or she could justifiably point out that the choice of ads is not under their control. That is true. “Ads by Google” placed the ads according to an algorithm, not specific consideration by a human. That way, nobody is to blame.

This brings up a question of ethics in journalism. Since editors are let off the hook, is there a temptation for “Research News” to push information that is ad-worthy rather than news-worthy? I believe there is.

There is also an ad titled “Bad bisphenol-A science,” which markets a book exactly diametrical to the article’s points. “Our Stolen Future” describes BPA as far worse than we have been told.

Consider this: Ads by Google lures biased journalism on one hand, while natural selection counters it with some more biased journalism. Why worry about truth if everyone makes money selling stuff? DK Pruitt

cc: spamgroup


Toxicity is determined by an applause meter.


Who funded the study? That's right - the plastics industry. 90% of the studies not funded by the plastics industry show harmful effects from BPA exposure at low levels.


I think it is worth noting that beside an article which reassures consumers about the safety of BPA, four out of five Ads by Google promote BPA-free products.


Interesting article. However, if you begin researching the relationship between industry, the firm responsible for the main body of BPA research, and the US Government, things get pretty scary.

News A - Z


News Search

Premium Membership Benefits

Medindia Newsletters

Subscribe to our Free Newsletters!

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

Stay Connected

  • Available on the Android Market
  • Available on the App Store

News Category

News Archive