Paul Saladino· MD
BPA free. Well, that just means that the next xenoestrogenic bisphenol is now in the in the can lining, in the soda can lining.
Loading…
We can't find evidence that holds up here. Proponents are reasoning from mechanism or analogy rather than direct human data, and the most credible skeptics raise objections we can't dismiss.
BPA free. Well, that just means that the next xenoestrogenic bisphenol is now in the in the can lining, in the soda can lining.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
So, again, you look at this label, it says BPA free, you think, "Great, you know, problem solved." No, that problem is not solved. It's just a different problem for which we don't have the data yet or or only the scientists in my field have the data, but it hasn't gotten to the regulatory level yet.
the bisphenol example you gave is really the poster child for this concept of regrettable replacements. Like bisphenol A was replaced with bisphenol S and it looks like bisphenol S is probably at least if not more toxic than bisphenol A.