FROM GARRY GORDON, M.D.
No matter what the FDA chief says, once again it is clear FDA is biased toward the chemical industry and has to be hit over the head before they will admit BISPHENOL A is really a POISON. Now with the huge outcry over their ridiculous position that it is safe, the FDA is going to review the matter more!
This is sad when Randy Jirtle at Duke proved with the agouti mice that the epigenetic change Bisphenol A induces in areas like methylation, led to obese, diabetic, yellow mice forever, without nutrient intervention with methylators. Also the PBS documentary Ghost In Your Genes shows all this on NOVA, but no one at FDA notices all this??
I routinely recommend methylation support now for all of my patients with either Beyond B12 or H.R.T Plus to get the 5’MTHF form of folic acid that I DEEM VITAL TO HEALTH now. Also the MSM and TMG, which is key to the success routinely reported in cancer and other serious health issues by users of Longevity Plus’s Vitamin C product, BioEn’R-G’y C.
Because it provides essential methylation support that product is changing peoples’ health. This is an epidemic today partly because we have these epigenetic changes due to our soaring levels of poisons like phthalates and Bisphenol A. These toxins make adequate methylation support vital and that is why Beyond B12 or H.R.T along with BioEn’R-G’y C makes a real difference in your health. It would be cheaper to stop exposing us to these toxins!!
We must recognize now that we have an epidemic of obesity and diabetes and phthalates and Bisphenol A contribute to this epidemic but it seems FDA cannot admit their mistakes.
Garry F. Gordon MD,DO,MD(H)
President, Gordon Research Institute
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122546346918387999.html?mod=djemHL
The Wall Street Journal
OCTOBER 31, 2008, 2:05 P.M. ET
Review Reignites Questions Over BPA
By JARED A. FAVOLE
GAITHERSBURG, Md. — Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach on Friday said a highly critical review of the agency’s stance on a chemical found in plastic food and drink containers raises important questions.
A review released Wednesday was sharply critical of the FDA’s view that the chemical Bisphenol-A, or BPA, is safe at current levels found in plastic food containers, saying the agency relied too heavily on studies funded by the chemical industry and didn’t back its stance up with available science.
“Let me be clear: There’s no shame for having” your hypothesis disproved, Mr. von Eschenbach said, referring to BPA without mentioning it by name, at a panel meeting of outside medical experts.
The FDA in August issued a report saying BPA is safe at current levels found in plastic baby bottles and canned foods. The report prompted criticism from lawmakers and scientists because it relied largely on industry-funded studies and contradicted over 100 studies suggesting BPA is harmful to humans.
The FDA asked a panel of scientific experts to review its August report. The panel said in its report it disagrees with the FDA’s decision to dismiss many other studies on BPA. “The subcommittee finds that the draft assessment conclusions are not supported by the available data and science,” the report said. It adds that the studies dismissed by the FDA “raise additional and unsettling concern.”
The report is the subject of a panel meeting Friday in Gaithersburg, where outside medical experts may make recommendations about what the FDA should do going forward.
FDA spokeswoman Judy Leon previously said the report raises important questions and the agency “agrees that due to the uncertainty raised in some studies relating to the potential effects of low-dose exposure to Bisphenol-A, additional research would be valuable.” The FDA is already moving ahead with planned research to address the potential low-dose effects of BPA,” she said.
Norris Alderson, associate commissioner for science at the FDA, said in an interview the agency will likely begin research early next year to determine the toxic effects of BPA on babies less than a month old. Babies are considered the most susceptible group to the effects of BPA. It’s unclear, however, when those studies will be done.
Critics say more studies will only leave BPA on the market longer. Canada started banning plastic baby bottles containing BPA, and retailers such as Wal-Mart Stores Inc. have removed plastic baby bottles containing BPA from their shelves.
“The FDA is once again taking up the traditional call of the chemical industry that “more research is needed to settle all uncertainties before we take regulatory action” — delay, delay, delay!” said Frederick vom Saal, a leading expert on BPA and a professor or reproductive biology and neurobiology at the University of Missouri-Columbia.
The panel’s review is sure to reignite questions about the FDA’s handling of BPA. The chemical is used to make plastics hard and is found in everything from baby bottles to sunglasses. Some studies suggest BPA may be associated with problems such as early onset of puberty in women and behavioral problems, while other studies suggest the chemical is safe.