Oct

29

BPA Free Thanksgiving?

Filed Under Bisphenol-A, Food Safety | 14 Comments

Pin It

    pie(Re-posted from a while ago but a good one to revisit!) Since all this started I’ve been trying desperately to come up with alternatives to the old family favorites that require a can of this or that.  So here’s a few solutions I’ve come up with that replace those cans that plague our meals with BPA.  No one wants hormone disruption with their dinner do they? (Yes I’m being cheeky.)

    Cream of Mushroom Soup

    Many recipes during the holidays require cream of mushroom soup.  Finding it not in a can has proven to be next to impossible. Thanks to the magic of Twitter I’ve heard of a few solutions.

    Use Cream of Celery Soup: Swap this in its place… can be found in box form in the natural foods aisle of many grocery stores.

    Make it yourself: A little more time consuming but you could do a large batch and freeze 10 oz. portions for use later.

    Cream of Mushroom Soup Recipe

    1 lb. fresh mushrooms
    2 c. onions
    1 1/2 tsp. sugar
    3 tbsp. flour
    1 c. cold water
    15 oz chicken soup
    1 c. all purpose cream
    Salt & pepper to taste
    2 tbsp. butter

    Grate mushrooms and onions. Melt butter and saute onions and sugar until brown. Add mushrooms and saute for 3 minutes. Stir in flour until smooth. Add cold water and stir until blended. Add can of soup and simmer for 15 minutes. Just before serving, stir in cream.

    Or: Make a roux with butter and flour. Add milk and veggie broth to desired thickness then add sauteed mushrooms.

    Pumpkin Pie

    What’s Thanksgiving without pumpkin pie?? But what about those pesky convenient cans of perfectly spiced pumpkin? I’ll be the first to admit that going the DIY route sounds unappealing with as much preparation Thanksgiving dinner requires.  But if you’re ambitious then here’s a DIY idea for you I found on the Mother Nature Network:

    Do It Yourself:  Buy a little, tender, organic sugar pumpkin at the farmers market, cut it in eighths, scrape out seeds, and steam or boil it. Cool, remove skin, and blend until smooth like a puree. Should result in roughly 15 oz. or so you’ll need to fill a deep dish pie recipe.

    Edit to Add: A reader commented about this method and since she’s done it before she had some better tips on cooking pumpkin:

    They are still very watery squash and will make a bland, soggy pie if used in the way you describe. Instead, what you should do is cut the pumpkin in half, scoop out seeds, roast it face down on a cookie sheet (about 1 hour at 375 should do it) and then once it’s cool peel the skin off. Now you still need to get rid of the excess water. Wrap the pumpkin flesh in cheesecloth and squeeze the heck out of it repeatedly until it is about 1/4 the original volume. Finally, puree the condensed flesh until smooth. Because so much of the pumpkin is water I would actually recommend using 2 sugar pumpkins to get the 15oz usually called for in pumpkin pie recipes.

    As the article says, many pie recipes call for a can of condensed milk, which you can substitute heavy cream (or soy milk for vegans).  Great tip!  The article also has a great egg-free, soy recipe.

    Make Sweet Potato Pie Instead: I’ll admit I didn’t grow up eating sweet potato pie. But it is a great alternative to pumpkin and doesn’t require the can of pumpkin to make. You can cut up and steam sweet potatoes and blend until smooth to get the puree you need.  No can required. It’s just as festive and delicious as a pumpkin pie.  Here’s a delectable recipe from Alton Brown (I love him!) on the Food Network:

    Sweet Potato Pie

    • 1 pound 3 ounces sweet potatoes, peeled and cubed
    • 1 1/4 cups plain yogurt
    • 3/4 cup packed, dark brown sugar
    • 1/2 teaspoon of cinnamon
    • 1/4 teaspoon of nutmeg
    • 5 egg yolks
    • Salt
    • 1 (9-inch) deep dish, frozen pie shell
    • 1 cup chopped pecans, toasted
    • 1 tablespoon maple syrup

    Directions: Put cubed potatoes into steamer basket and place steamer basket into a large pot of simmering water that is no closer than 2 inches from the bottom of basket. Allow to steam for 20 minutes or until the potatoes are fork tender. Mash with potato masher and set aside. Preheat the oven to 350 degrees F. Place sweet potatoes in the bowl of a stand mixer and beat with the paddle attachment. Add yogurt, brown sugar, cinnamon, nutmeg, yolks, and salt, to taste, and beat until well combined. Pour this batter into the pie shell and place onto a sheet pan. Sprinkle pecans on top and drizzle with maple syrup. Bake for 50 to 55 minutes or until the custard reaches 165 to 180 degrees. Remove from oven and cool. Keep refrigerated after cooling.

    Green Bean Casserole

    Ok… I didn’t grow up with this dish at my family table.  I never even heard of it until I moved to Philadelphia.  I also think it’s a vile vile food.  But my husband and family love it and think of it as a staple on Thanksgiving day. Problem is it requires not only a can of cream of mushroom soup (se above for alternatives) but it alse requires canned green beans.  Solution?  Buy bags of frozen, cut green beans instead.

    Cranberry Sauce

    You are either one of two kinds of people.  You’re the homemade cranberry kind of people, like me.  Or you’re the gelatinous can of cranberry kind who is ok with a round disc of cranberry on your plate.  Which is who I was until I tasted my grandmothers homemade cranberry sauce and I converted.  Some people can’t have Turkey day without their green bean casserole and can of cranberry.  But if you are the adventurous type and want to eliminate the need for the can of BPA cranberry here is the recipe I use every year.  Trust me its easy and delicious:

    Nana SafeMama’s Cranberry Sauce

    • 1 cup sugar
    • 1/2 cup water
    • 1/2 cup orange juice (and zest)
    • 1 package of cranberries  (looked over and washed)

    Directions: In a large saucepan, mix water, orange juice & sugar.  Stir until dissolved over medium heat.  Dump in cranberries and zest an orange into the pan.  Bring to a boil, reduce heat and then boil gently, stirring occasionally for about 10 minutes.  Remove from heat and pour into a glass bowl.  Let cool completely at room temperature, then refrigerate.  Best made the day before (says Grandma… and its actually true, plus its one less thing to do on Turkey Day).

    Need some original recipe ideas? Check out my friend at the Craving Chronicles who has some beautiful cranberry and pumpkin treats listed for Thanksgiving.  You can apply the ideas here to any of her recipes.  I really want those Orange Cranberry Rosemary  muffins!

    Have any BPA free holiday tips of your own? Share them in the comments!

    Nov

    16

    Holiday Help: Pacific Natural Foods Cream of Mushroom Soup

    Filed Under Bisphenol-A, Food Safety | 8 Comments

    Pin It

      Last year I did an article about making traditional Thanksgiving recipes a BPA Free makeover.  Many of our holiday favorites require canned ingredients to make them the foods we love during the holidays.  In my own effort to stop using all canned food items in my life (which has been really easy – I haven’t bought a can of anything in over a year) I published a few ideas to replace the required “can of mushroom soup” from green bean casseroles.  At the time, I could not find cream of mushroom soup in anything other than in a can so my solution was to a) use cream of celery, which was easier to find in a box or b) make your own.  Suggesting to someone who is hosting T-Day dinner might laugh in my face over that one.

      Pacific Natural Foods to the rescue.  They have recently release 3 new condensed  soups that can round out your recipes for the holidays or any other of your traditional favorite meals.  Their new condensed soups include Cream of Mushroom (finally!), Cream of Celery and Cream of Chicken.  Hooray!

      Bonus? They’re all USDA Certified Organic and are packaged in a BPA Free aseptic box. Now before you ask: There is a layer of aluminum, however the aluminum is not in contact with the soups (its there to protect the soup from light to eliminate the need for added preservatives) and the two inner most layers are made of polyethylene, which is a BPA Free food grade plastic. The boxes are also recyclable in some areas. I much prefer this over a can if I need to purchase prepared soups.  If you’re not comfortable with the plastic you can always make your own – no harm in that.  But in a pinch I think these are a great and healthy alternative.  Sorry, Campbells.

      In case anyone is interested, they make a great low sodium Organic Creamy Tomato Soup too – it’s my favorite!

      Nov

      3

      General Mills Muir Glen Ditching BPA in Canned Tomatoes But…

      Filed Under Articles, Bisphenol-A | 12 Comments

      Pin It

        I ran over an article at the same time that my friend from Ely Organics did on Facebook and we were questioning the accuracy of the information.  So of course we started digging around and I decided to give Muir Glen a call to get clarification.  Or at least as much clarification as a helpful customer service rep is allowed to give me.

        The article in question, published in The Independant on November 1st said (amongst other things)

        “General Mills, the US giant behind the Green Giant tinned brand, has already ditched BPA from its Muir Glen tomato range, while Campbell Soups says it has done “hundreds” of tests exploring alternatives.”

        While this is definitely good news, it’s also kind of a sweeping statement that leaves more questions than comforting answers.  A quick look at the Muir Glen website reveals a statement made by the company informing us that they will be transitioning to BPA free cans.

        “Muir Glen has been working diligently with our can suppliers to develop and test alternative linings that do not use BPA, and we have successfully identified and tested an alternative that has proven safe and viable in our processing of tomatoes. We are transitioning to cans with liners that do not use BPA as we are canning this year’s tomato harvest.”

        Great! But…. still, we’re left with the following questions: Are they on the shelves now? If not how will I know? When will the new cans BE on the shelves? and the million dollar question “What is the new lining made of?”  What if it ends up being worse than BPA?  Once upon a time BPA was “safe and viable” We know where that got us. So I called and here’s what I found out:

        The 411: According to customer service rep I spoke to, who was quite helpful told me that the new harvest of tomatoes will be packaged in the new BPA Free lined cans.  The new BPA free canned tomatoes are not yet on the shelves.  They will also not be labelled BPA Free.  I asked “How will customers know which ones are which?”  He told me they will eventually be given a date of production and that all cans made after that date will be packaged in the BPA free cans.  As of right now they do not have that date of production available. The rep recommended I call back in February to obtain a date of production.

        I also inquired about the new lining and all he was able to tell me was that it was a BPA Free non-epoxy lining.  Not entirely helpful but it was all he knew for now. I worry that a new lining will just lead to the same situation all over again that we have now with BPA.  What is it? How did they test it? This is what keeps me up at night.  I’m weird like that.

        I was a little surprised when he asked me if I would like the cans to be labeled BPA Free.  I practically screamed YES into his ear and he said he would pass that information along to the company.  Hopefully is enough of us ask for it, that might actually happen and it will catch wind with other canned food makers.

        Mar

        29

        2010 Infant Formula Cheat Sheet

        Filed Under ** Cheat Sheets!, Food Safety, Product Safety | 9 Comments

        Pin It

          This one was really hard to write.   It was a bit of phone calling, a lot of digging and a lot of reading. I had no real intention of doing a baby formula cheat sheet but Healthy Child Healthy World asked me to help out and then I became so engrossed in it that I compiled all this information.  So I’m going to share it with you. I want to preface this by saying I am a big supporter of breastfeeding.  I breastfed both my children, but I know people use or supplement with formula… that’s just the way it is and I do not judge anyone for the choices they make.  Now let’s brush up on what I was looking for:

          BPA in Packaging:  Back when I began this site, there was BPA in practically everything and before any real big buzz started.  My first phone calls to Enfamil in November of 2007 went something along the lines of “There is BPA in the can lining and its approved by the FDA so don’t worry your pretty little head over it.” As time went on an the news and research piled up, companies started to investigate BPA free packaging to cover their butts.  I’m happy to report that the majority of powdered baby formula is now packaged in BPA Free packaging.

          DHA/ARA: The majority of formula on the market, including organic, contains added DHA and ARA for brain and eye development.  Most of the formula companies use a DHA product from a company called Martek BioScience (life DHA – you can see the logo on most formula labels).  The controversy, if you can call it that, is that the method of extraction uses hexane, acid and bleach to extract the oils.  All the companies I spoke to that use life DHA told me that it’s the “only FDA approved method of DHA extraction” and that there are no detectable levels of hexane in the formula.  Only one company that we found uses an alternative method of DHA extraction, and that’s Nature’s One.  Their DHA and  ARA are derived from egg phospholipids using a water process. (Please not that Nature’s One does not put DHA/ARA supplements in their formulas.  It comes as a separate powder parents may add themselves) Nature’s One says this method is also FDA approved.

          Added Carbohydrate: I didn’t get into specifics of every brand but when I learned that Similac Organic uses Organic Sugar Cane (sucrose) as opposed to Organic Lactose, I wanted to check and see what other brands used. In Europe they instituted a ban on sucrose in infant formula due to its link to childhood obesity (except for babies with allergies). The European Union adopted the new rules based on the recommendations of the Scientific Committee on Food, which found that sucrose provided no real nutritional benefits, and could bring about a fatal metabolic disorder, and contribute to overfeeding. The FDA does not  regulate what sugars can be used (or how much per serving), as long as they are safe. I’m not saying Similac Organic is a bad choice, but if you are concerned about the use of sucrose I looked into what other brands used for easy comparison.  Every other brand I looked into uses Organic Lactose or Lactose. You will have to consult with your pediatrician on this one.

          Fluoride: Whether you are pro-or anti- fluoride, there are some who may not know that it is present in infant formula.  So now there is fluoride in your water, in your infant formula and you’ve possibly got the kid on fluoride drops and you’re kid could be at risk of fluorosis? The Journal of American Dental Association recommends breastmilk of course, but for those using formula, they recommend using ready-made (we disagree due to the BPA content of some of the packaging). Their secondary recommendation for powdered formula is to use fluoride free or low fluoride water (purified, demineralized, deionized or distilled, as well as reverse-osmosis filtered water). The JADA published some test results last October of fluoride levels in popular infant formulas.  I picked out the numbers for you so you may cross reference on our spreadsheet yourself.  But you can download the report here as well to see the full report: Assessing a Potential Risk Factor for Enamel Fluorosis: A Preliminary Evaluation of Fluoride Content in Infant Formulas (PDF).  Optimal fluoride level in drinking water is 0.7 to 1.2 parts per million. (I should mention that I learned a lot about fluoride and about the JADA report from SAFBaby.com.  They have a great deal of thoughtful and thorough information so please check them out.)

          Perchlorate: Also known as rocket fuel. Stories broke on the news last April that trace amounts of rocket fuel was detected in infant formulas. The CDC tested formula for perchlorate because of concerns that it can damage thyroid function. The did 3 tests on a sampling of baby formula brands including Enfamil, Similac,  Publix and Kroger brands. To sum it up, formulas with lactose tested highest (Similac topping the results with the highest detected).  You can see the full range of results in the CDC’s document: CDC: Table of Perchlorate Levels in Powdered Infant Formula (PDF). Let it not be said that perchlorate is found in just about everything, including breastmilk.  So unfortunately there is no way to avoid it all together.  Natures One offers this information regarding perchlorate in their formula.

          Now that you know all this (aside from hating me for bringing it up) you can take a look at this information in our cheat sheet which makes this all more at-a-glance. Healthy Child Healthy World will be publishing some pocket shoppers guides too which I’ll link up when they are ready to go.

          DOWNLOAD IT! (PDF) (Last updated: April 3, 2010)

          Quick SafeMama™ Formula Feeding Recommendations

          • Choose Powdered over liquid (BPA in can lining)
          • Choose organic formulas over non-organic (pesticides and hormones in cow’s milk)
          • Use spring/distilled or filtered water for preparing formula
          • Choose glass, silicone, BPA-Free bottles
          • Do not microwave water or formula in plastic (It’s not recommended to microwave formula at all – heating water in glass is ok)
          • Wash plastic bottles with mild detergent by hand to prevent leaching over time, replace when they become worn

          *Disclaimer: I feel I should remind you that it’s important to discuss this information and any dietary changes you plan to make with your Pediatrician before doing so.  We always recommend breastfeeding when and if possible for the first 12 months.Additionally, if you have any concerns or questions about any of the formula we mention, feel free to call the company and ask them.  They were all relatively helpful.

          Mar

          9

          Batter Blaster Organic Pancake Batter: BPA in Packaging?

          Filed Under Bisphenol-A, Food Safety | 11 Comments

          Pin It

            My husband came home from a grocery shopping trip not long ago and he had a look of total excitement and triumph on his face.  “Look what I found!” he said as he handed me a whipped cream can looking item.  It was the new Batter Blaster that I keep hearing about. At first glance I thought “What a cool idea!” and truthfully, it is a pretty cool concept. Organic batter in a can? Yes please!  But of course, the SafeMama in me wasn’t totally convinced that the can that held this precious certified organic product was BPA free.  So I set out to find the answer.

            I checked their website first and while their product information tells us the can is totally recyclable (although I’m told you have to check with your local recycling center to see whether you can actually recycle it on your area) but there was no mention of BPA.  This always is a red flag for me.  Typically, companies who offer organic food or safer products have a BPA free logo or address it in their FAQ’s because who wouldn’t want to leverage that angle? Its marketing…. if its BPA Free (by accident or otherwise) you want people to know.  Since it was missing from an easy access place like their company website I had a feeling I wasnt going to be pleasantly surprised.

            However, I did speak to a company representative and my question “Does the can contain BPA?” was answered.  The answer? Yes, and No.

            According to Batter Blaster, the cans they were using did contain BPA in the epoxy lining of the metal interior.  No surprise there. Of course they assured me it was within FDA regulation limits and was well below the allowable BPA content.  You know that isn’t good enough for SafeMama.  BPA Free or I don’t buy it.  BUT, Batter Blaster recently changed their cans to a BPA Free one.  So all the new Batter Blaster’s coming into stores are in the new BPA Free steel cans.  Hooray!  But hold on a minute…

            My next question was “Ok so are there still cans in stores right now in the old BPA containing packaging?“  The answer that I concluded from our conversation was Yes.  Batter Blaster rolled out their new BPA Free packaging but they are still selling the older style cans (I can assume until they run out of it).  I asked how I would be able to tell the difference and Batter Blaster told me that the older cans look like the ones featured on their website (See the homepage).

            • The old package/can  has a “lip” or a “rim” near the top (See inset).  The newer packaging does not and appears more streamlined.
            • Batter Blaster told me that the cans only have a shelf life of a few months so anything marked with an expiration date of April 2010 or later would be in the new BPA Free  packaging.

            So I pulled out the can my husband brought home and flipped it over.  April 2010.  But it was in an old style can with the rim she described.  So perhaps a better gauge will be the new style of packaging (which I cannot find a photo of but will post if I see one).

            Right now the Batter Blasters in my local store all have the BPA style packaging so I can only assume that these have not been sold out enough to warrant ordering in the new packaged cans yet, despite the April 2010 expiration dates.  So I may wait a while before I purchase it again.

            Update: Here is a photo of what the new BPA Free packaging looks like:

            Thanks Schmedley for pointing me to it.

            Nov

            5

            Consumer Reports Tests Find BPA in Canned Soups, Juice, and More

            Filed Under Bisphenol-A, Food Safety | 3 Comments

            Pin It

              Here we go … BPA in the news again.  I have been wanting to post something about this since I saw it on the evening news the other night.  Consumer Reports just published new findings (but none of it is really news to us) about levels of BPA in canned food.  We knew it was there but how much?  As we know, BPA is not only found in hard plastic but as a component of the epoxy lining in canned food, soda cans, juice cans, baby formula and glass jar lids to name a few.   From the new study:

              Canned Del Monte Fresh Cut Green Beans Blue Lake had the highest amount of BPA for a single sample in Consumer Reports tests, with levels ranging from 35.9 parts per billion (ppb) to 191 ppb. Progresso Vegetable Soup BPA levels ranged from 67 to 134 ppb. Campbell’s Condensed Chicken Noodle Soup had BPA levels ranging from 54.5 to 102 ppb.

              Average amounts in tested products varied widely. In most items tested, such as canned corn, chili, tomato sauce, and corned beef, BPA levels ranged from trace amounts to about 32 ppb.

              Given the significance of BPA exposure for infants and young children, Consumer Reports tested samples of Similac Advance Infant Formula and Nestle Juicy Juice All Natural 100% Apple Juice. The findings revealed:

              Similac liquid concentrate in a can averaged 9 ppb of BPA, but there was no measurable level in the powdered version.

              Nestle Juicy Juice in a can averaged 9.7 ppb of BPA, but there were no measurable levels in the samples of the same product packaged in juice boxes.

              I was surprised to hear that Similac’s powdered formula came back with no measurable levels of BPA, though it’s unclear to me at this point what type of packaging the powdered version was in.  Similac has a new plastic container made of polypropylene but there is a questionable foil seal on the inside that Similac would not comment on whether it had BPA or not (I’m guessing yes or else they would probably have said so).

              What’s most alarming is that products boasting BPA Free on the label tested with measurable amounts of BPA.  Alarming, but not so surprising. Even items in alternative packaging came back with BPA levels.  Even Eden’s baked beans, which we though were BPA Free came back with a very low level of BPA.

              We tested two products that their manufacturers claimed were packaged in BPA-free cans and found the chemical in both of the foods. Although tests of the inside of the cans found that the liners were not epoxy-based, Vital Choice’s tuna in “BPA-free” cans was found to contain an average of 20 ppb of BPA and Eden Baked Beans averaged 1 ppb.

              It’s unclear at this point what levels are safe and what aren’t (though my preference would be for NO safe levels):

              “The findings are noteworthy because they indicate the extent of potential exposure,” said Dr. Urvashi Rangan, Director of Technical Policy, at Consumers Union, nonprofit publisher of Consumer Reports. “Children eating multiple servings per day of canned foods with BPA levels comparable to the ones we found in some tested products could get a dose of BPA near levels that have caused adverse effects in several animal studies. The lack of any safety margin between the levels that cause harm in animals and those that people could potentially ingest from canned foods has been inadequately addressed by the FDA to date.”

              The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is soon expected to announce the findings of its most recent reassessment of the safety of BPA.

              Read all about it: Consumer Reports Study (use the links on the left side to read the details of the study and the results.

              Aug

              28

              Your SIGG Bottle May Contain BPA

              Filed Under Bisphenol-A, Product Safety | Comments Off

              Pin It

                siggIt’s come to light that some older models of SIGG reusable aluminum water bottles contain BPA in the epoxy lining inside the bottle.  As you may already know, the lining on the interior of SIGG’s has been questioned for some time and many skeptics thought that the epoxy may contain BPA… turns out they were right.  The SIGG company “took to heart” the controversy over BPA and went to work on a new lining that was BPA free.  However there were many SIGG bottles on the market since they developed their new lining, called EcoCare. 

                Any SIGG Bottle on the market prior to August 2008 has the old epoxy lining, and should BPA be a concern to you then you should replace it with an alternative or a new SIGG with their new EcoCare lining. This inclides the kiddies!   SIGG still maintains that their older models are still “safe” but they spent a lot of money on changing it.  I’d advise anyone with an older SIGG to check it against their website and contact them about a replacement.  They aren’t doing a voluntary recall but we saw a letter from the company on The Consumerist stating they would be handling replacements.

                Needless to say, we’re disappointed after having supported them in the past that they weren’t forthcoming in the beginning about their materials.  We recommend you try some other alternatives to SIGG reusable bottles as there are many great ones on the market.  We adore the ThinkSport, Thermos Intak and the Klean Kanteen but there are a ton to choose from.  Check out The Soft Landing for a huge selection of reusable water bottles.

                Jun

                25

                Bisphenol-A: How Much Evidence Do We Need?

                Filed Under Articles, Bisphenol-A, Chemicals | Comments Off

                Pin It

                  soda-canI was going to let this slide but I’ve heard the same few phrases a few times and now I’m thoroughly annoyed.  These phrases include things like “activist hysteria” and “BPA has been around for 60 years, don’t you think the FDA would have taken notice if it was harmful?” and “activists in the blogosphere are creating unnecessary concern” and my favorite “There is no evidence that BPA in consumer products ever harmed a child or adult.”

                  Oh, really? That’s twice today I’ve read articles stating that there is no scientific evidence that BPA can harm anyone and that “activists” are just creating unnecessary hype.  Let’s review some of this non-existent scientific evidence shall we?

                  And the list goes on and on…  If that’s not enough scientific evidence that Bisphenol-A needs to be re-evaluated for safety than I don’t know what people like Ms. Whelan from Forbes Magazine or Dr Gilbert Ross of the American Council on Science and Health who seems to think there “isn’t a shred of scientific or medical sense in the proposed ban of bisphenol-A“  needs to hear in order to consider that perhaps just because something has been in use for 60 years doesn’t mean that there aren’t underlying effects that people are experiencing in their normal lives that may have been caused or enhanced by over-exposure to chemicals in our daily lives. Could they be right?  Maybe!  And I hope they are… I wish I could be that confident that chemical makers and the FDA had my best interest at heart.  I wish I could just blindly trust the way they do.  I’d probably sleep better at night if I could just leave my health and safety up to other people rather than opening my eyes to what’s going on around me.

                  It’s hard to tell why John Smith developed Diabetes at the age of 60.  Could it be BPA? Maybe, maybe not.  But as a consumer and a parent and a human being… I don’t want risks from chemicals to up my chances of developing health problems later in life.  Nor do I want to expose my kids to something that *might* create reproductive problems for them in the future. MAYBE is not good enough for me.

                  Those of us who write about and talk about pushing for this change are not trying to be alarmist, or to just have something to be hysterical about.  We’ve read the studies, we’ve looked at the research and we’ve wondered “what if”.  We also have recognized that living without overexposure to BPA in our lives is 100% possible.  Does that mean less money for companies who rely on BPA? Sure.  Do I care? No.

                  Living with blind faith that “regulators” are protecting me and everything I touch is safe for my health and my family is just not something I will ever do.

                  Jun

                  9

                  Coke and Del Monte Plot to Deceive Consumers about BPA

                  Filed Under Bisphenol-A | Comments Off

                  Pin It

                    soda-canI wrote last week about the meetings manufacturers had regarding the public view of BPA.  Since then the meeting notes we’re leaked to the Internet and many of us were fuming that companies like Coca Cola and Del Monte were discussing using scare tactics and a pregnant woman role model to change our perception of BPA (which is found in the lining of most canned goods and soda).

                    As consumers, we’re entitled to know truths about what our food is exposed to and since BPA has come into the spotlight we’ve seen study after study showing potentially harmful effects of exposure.  I won’t list it all out here again but we’re not naive to BPA anymore and finding out that companies would rather spend money on deceiving us than to take advantage of an opportunity to use an alternative (which is already in effect in Japan so don’t give me that “there is no other option” baloney) is a real testament to how big companies view its consumers: As a bunch of people who are too stupid to know better.  Well … we’re not. And we want to tell you so.

                    The Environmental Working Group has launched a new effort to help those who want to express their disgust to companies entertaining the idea of deceiving consumers about BPA.  Visit the EWG for phone numbers to Coke and Del Monte so you can tell them yourself.

                    Coca-Cola: 1-800-GET-COKE, then press 2
                    Del Monte: 1-800-543-3090

                    You can express your disgust about their unethical ideas to deceive consumers any way you like really, but the EWG has a sample script in case you’re not sure how to approach it.

                    “”Hello, My name is ______________. I’m shocked and disappointed in your unethical approach to business when it comes to BPA – placing profits ahead of my family’s health and using fear tactics to placate consumers about a clearly dangerous chemical. The BPA needs to go – NOW. Thank you.”

                    Visit the EWG website and tell them about your calls… they want to know how Coca Cola and Del Monte are reacting to consumer feedback regarding this matter.

                    If you’re not planning on participating, remember the impact we had on BPA in baby products.  Everywhere you go baby items say BPA Free now and it wasn’t like that just a year ago.  We as consumers and parents have made a difference.. with every phone call, letter or blog entry.  We are more powerful than you think.

                    May

                    31

                    Manufacturers Who Use BPA are Getting Scared

                    Filed Under Articles, Bisphenol-A | 4 Comments

                    Pin It

                      soda-canThere’s been a bevy of articles floating around this week about meetings being held by manufacturers of cans and soda products.  They’re concerned because of the public concerns regarding Bisphenol-A (BPA).  Including the makers of Coca-Cola and Campbell.  If you aren’t already aware, soda cans as well as the majority of canned food is lined with BPA – a hormone disrupting chemical that has a bevy of independent university studies showing harmful effects.

                      The movement by young mothers (their bread and butter buyers) to avoid BPA is causing them some grief, and well deserved.  We all educated ourselves on the effects and are choosing to buy safer alternatives.  Because we’re smart people.   Manufacturers are going over options to change our view of BPA and to back up it’s safety.  They are considering doing one or more of the following tactics to change our view of BPA:

                      • Use scare tactics: They’ll use slogans like “Do you want access to baby food anymore?” as if we won’t be able to feed our children without exposing them to BPA.
                      • Giving consumers a false sense of control: They will highlight cost effects of choosing BPA Free products.
                      • Using a spokesperson:  Their “holy grail” spokesperson would be a pregnant woman they said.  Apparently showing us a pretty pregnant woman enjoying BPA exposed food with a smile will make us all forget the studies done by respected universities showing BPA exposure is linked to metabolic disorders, brain function, heart disease, genital abnormalities, mood disorders, diabetes….. etc etc etc.  Their plan would be to have her go around the country speaking about the benefits of BPA.  (Which are?)

                      So essentially, they want to scare you into buying products containing BPA because they don’t want to lose money.  They don’t want to bother investigating safer alternatives.  They just want things to go back to the way they were… when we all had no idea BPA existed.  Too bad we’re not so naive to be convinced by fear and a pregnant woman.  This “young mother” isn’t going to fall for it.

                      Here’s the full article about the meetings held by manufacturers in the Washington Post:

                      Kathleen M. Roberts, a lobbyist with Bergeson and Campbell for the North American Metal Packaging Alliance, which represents makers of metal cans and their customers, organized Thursday’s meeting and confirmed the accuracy of the notes. She said her members are concerned about bills pending in state legislatures as well as on Capitol Hill that would restrict or eliminate the use of BPA in metal cans. She said BPA is a safe compound that has been tarred by activist groups and that consumers do not fully appreciate its importance.

                      Oh we appreciate… we appreciate the importance of protecting the health of our families from the dangers of overused chemicals.  We also appreciate that it’s not just activists tarring our view of BPA, it’s the respected studies by top universities and organizations that are opening our eyes to what’s around us.

                      Source: Washington Post

                      From Our Fellow Moms

                      Seems this news has angered more than just us here at SafeMama and our colleagues have some really excellent points:

                      Sommer from Green and Clean Mom:  Talk to the Hand

                      “What they heck do these mom bloggers know anyhow? On one hand a company wants to use them for PR and marketing and their qualified and valued and on the other hand they’re just hysterical and not trusted.”

                      Jennifer Taggart of The Smart Mama: Ready to piss off a mom blogger? Seek a pregnant woman to consume BPA lined canned goods

                      How stupid do these industry representatives think we are? They think that if they pick the right “messaging” (which the industry will discover through at $500,000 survey of consumer perceptions and messaging), we will ignore the growing body of evidence of adverse health effects associated with BPA exposure? That we can’t separate the fact from the fiction?

                      Jenn Savedge at Mother Nature Network : Movement afoot to silence BPA concerns

                      “Instead of researching the alternatives (Japan has significantly reduced its use of BPA in many canned goods,) BPA advocates are hanging on to this sinking ship and spending their time and money to devise a strategy and public relations campaign that would silence these concerns about BPA. According to the article in the Washington Post, industry executives are weighing ideas that use financial fears and dated health information to dissuade people from choosing BPA-free packaging.”

                      Alicia of The Soft Landing: Bisphenol-a Manufacturers Switch to Fear Inducing Strategy

                      “Who are the fear mongers now? We were the ones “propagating unnecessary fear” just a few short years ago – that is until science bolstered our basis of concern.  Now the chemical industry is backed into a corner by the very people who supply the largest portion of their bank accounts – young mothers ages 21-35.”

                      Before we raised issue with BPA in baby products no one ever heard of BPA.  Now you can’t swing a dead cat in Babies R Us without sitting a product labelled BPA FREE.  We changed that, we can change this too.

                      Here’s more:

                      Next Page →

Latest CPSC Childrens Products and Toy Recalls

Car Seat Recalls

Latest FDA Recalls

Latest Recalls in Canada

Safer States Action Alerts





395256_125x125 Abes Market



Current-Special


  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • NetwrkBlog
  • Google+
  • Pinterest