Tag Archives: AB 1319

California

Speaking as a Doctor, and a Mom

Cold hard facts can only get you so far in making your case before policy-makers.

Fortunately, with a proposed ban on a toxic chemical in baby products, California health and environmental advocates have both facts and emotion on their side.

Testifying in her role as a doctor and a mom, Dr. Sarah Janssen of the Natural Resources Defense Council captured my attention as she spoke yesterday before the state Senate Environmental Quality Committee about AB 1319, the California bill that would ban the toxic chemical bisphenol-A (BPA) in baby bottles and sippy cups.

As folks who've been following CLCV's Groundswell blog know, I'm pregnant (I'm talking REALLY pregnant, as in I can now only wear flip-flops because my feet apparently think they are also pregnant). And as I've been researching and shopping for products for my baby, I'm blown away that anyone with access to the latest information about the dangers of BPA would defend its presence in products for infants and children. Similarly, I pay attention when someone identifies herself as “a doctor and a mom” and says we should ban a toxic chemical from baby feeding containers.

Along with bill author Assemblywoman Betsy Butler, Janssen and fellow BPA ban supporter Renée Sharp, senior scientist with Environmental Working Group, testified about the alarming number of studies (more than 220) that link BPA exposure with cancer, obesity, ADHD, and disrupted development of hormones, the brain, and the immune system.

They testified, as they had in similar Assembly policy hearings, that while safer BPA-free alternatives are widely available in many California communities, low-income families don't always have access to BPA-free products. Without a ban, products containing BPA (some of them from other countries like China, the EU, Canada, and the ten American states that have already passed or implemented bans on BPA) could easily be dumped in stores in poor California neighborhoods.

They also noted that, for the very first time this year, the burden of evidence of BPA's danger to human health is enough for several respected professional medical societies to join in supporting the ban. Just recently, the American Medical Association joined the California Medical Association, the California Nurses Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics of California, and the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in officially supporting a ban of BPA in feeding products for infants.

So, we've got facts and emotion on our side. But the opposition, in particular the chemical industry, has money. Lots of money. They've spent a lot of that money and time trying to, er, confuse (a nicer word than “buy off”) California legislators with “data” from other studies (many of them funded by their industry) that say there are no straight-forward conclusions about the effects of BPA on human health. Laughably, in yesterday's hearing, one of the representatives from the American Chemistry Council actually tried to convince legislators that he was genuinely concerned about the health impacts of alternatives to BPA. What utter nonsense.

Bill co-author Senator Fran Pavley spoke up, comparing the chemical industry's tactics to those used by the tobacco industry, which for years lied about the dangers of using their products and conducted their own studies to confuse the public and policy-makers alike.

As mom/doctor Sarah Janssen states in a recent post on NRDC's Switchboard: “my medical knowledge and experience aren’t enough to protect my daughter from exposure to toxic chemicals.” But a ban on BPA in baby bottles and sippy cups would go a long way to protecting our daughters and sons, when they are most vulnerable, from this dangerous chemical.

I'll end with good news: the bill passed out of the Environmental Quality Committee yesterday and now goes to the full Senate floor for a vote. Make your voice heard, and sign the petition asking legislators and Governor Jerry Brown to stand up for California kids — not the chemical industry — by passing the Toxin-Free Infants & Toddlers Act (AB 1319).

California

Bill to ban toxic BPA from baby products moves forward

It may not be as comprehensive as it once was, but the bill to ban Bisphenol A (BPA) in children’s feeding containers in California, AB 1319, passed the Senate Health Committee today in yet another narrow vote.

In order to secure state Senator Michael Rubio’s vote (the final vote needed for passage), bill author and Assemblymember Betsy Butler agreed to accept amendments that included eliminating language in the bill that would have banned the chemical from baby food and infant formula. The ban would still apply to baby bottles and sippy cups, making it similar to more limited bans that have passed elsewhere including in Canada.

The fact that the bill passed through this committee at all is a testament both to Butler’s dedication, and to the work of environmental and children’s health groups to spread the word to their members. Nearly 2,000 CLCV members and others have signed our petition in support of the bill, which was delivered to Senator Rubio’s staff. (Click here to view the petition: http://salsa.wiredforchange.co…

It shouldn’t have been a close vote. Watching several Senators (including Committee Vice-Chair Tony Strickland) protest that because they aren’t scientists, they’re not fit to make a decision about BPA (oh and by the way, they’re parents of small children, so it’s not that they don’t care about kids!), made me feel physically ill. And not just because they make decisions about other issues all the time without having earned a PhD in the subject. It’s called being an elected official.

As a (very) pregnant woman who’s recently done my share of shopping for baby items, I know there are plenty of retailers (online and otherwise) that have BPA-free products available. They include major retailers like Target and Wal-Mart. But many (especially those with actual storefronts) continue to sell products loaded with the chemical. I happen to have both the awareness about BPA and the ability to shop for products that make “BPA-free!” part of their prominent sales pitch. So does each and every member of the Senate Health Committee, whether or not they admit it.

(Seriously, does anyone think any given member of the state legislature would knowingly give their child a bottle that contained BPA?)

But not every mom or dad in California has the information or the access to buy BPA-free. Many families must shop at the local dollar store for feeding containers like bottles and sippy cups. It’s their children who will bear the burden of BPA exposure if the bill does not succeed.

State Senator Kevin DeLeon remarked on this fact in his comments to the committee today, saying: “Every child deserves to grow up in a healthy environment; it’s an equity issue. We have to do everything we can to protect young babies.” He reiterated his support for the bill (with or without the amendments) and thanked author Butler for her courage in championing the issue.

AB 1319 now moves to the Senate Environmental Quality committee before heading to the full California state Senate floor for a vote, and then to Governor Brown’s desk.

The battle is far from over. Chemical companies want to see this bill go down. While they may have lost some of the players involved in the opposition (for example, infant formula manufacturers may no long put as much self-interested energy into opposing it), they’ll almost certainly intensify their campaign over the next several weeks to continue to try to mislead Senators about the science on this toxic chemical.

If you haven’t yet done so, please sign the CLCV petition in support of AB 1319: http://salsa.wiredforchange.co…

Meanwhile, the evidence continues to mount that BPA is dangerous. A new study from the University of Missouri says that human exposure to BPA has actually been underestimated, because prior lab tests have looked at single exposures rather than daily diets.

The study is the “first to examine BPA concentrations in any animal after exposure through a steady diet, which mirrors the chronic exposure that humans receive through food packaging.” It further says more than 8 billion pounds of BPA are produced every year, and more than 90 percent of U.S. residents have measurable amounts of BPA in their bodies. Published in Environmental Health Perspectives, the study’s funding came from the National Institute of Environmental Health and Sciences.

You don’t have to be a scientist to look at the mountain of evidence and understand this is a chemical we should be very, very worried about, and to know it doesn’t belong in infant and children’s products. You don’t need a PhD, you don’t even have to be a parent. You just have to use common sense… and it also helps if you’re not accepting donations from the American Chemistry Council.

I’m just sayin’.

Jenesse Miller

Communications Director, CLCV