advertisement
SEARCH
Subscribe with Feedburner
SafeMama Sponsors
Fellow Safe Mamas
Grab Our Badge!
Missions We Support
Apr
12
FDA Re-evaluating Triclosan
Filed Under Chemicals, Healthy Home, Product Safety | 1 Comment
- King Nut Companies
- Hy-Vee Inc. : Peanut Butter Cookies, Monster Cookies, Peanut Butter Reese’s Pieces Cookies, Peanut Butter Chocolate Chip Cookies, Lunchbox Reese’s Pieces Cookies, Lunchbox Peanut Butter Cookies, People Chow Party Mix and Assorted Truffle Fudge.
- Kellogg Company: Including some Austin® Quality Foods, Keebler®and Famous Amos®
- Perry’s Ice Cream Company: Includes some Wegmans
- McKee Foods Corporation: (Little Debbie)
- Ralcorp Frozen Bakery Products, Inc (Walmart Brands)
- The South Bend Chocolate Company
- Cliff Bar
- Abbott Nutrition includeing ZonePerfect and Nutirpals
- Kroger Ice Cream
- Hain Celestial Group Inc – Earth’s Best Organic Formula
- Privately held PBM Nutritionals (store brand formulas)
- Mead Johnsons Enfamil LIPIL with Iron: 2 tests read 0.137ppm and 0.14ppm
- Nestle’s Good Start Supreme Infant Formula with Iron: 3 tests with an average of 0.247ppm
Last Thursday the FDA updated their website regarding Triclosan and whether it should be a safety concern. Since Triclosan was last evaluated by the FDA it had “no harmful effects” on humans and they deemed it safe. However, new research has popped up that suggests that Triclosan can alter hormone regulation as well as make bacteria resistant to antibiotics.
Tricosan is found in a lot of household products like toothpaste, soaps, cutting boards, shower curtains, clothing as an additive to make an item or product bacteria resistant. The FDA isn’t suggesting anyone stop using products containing Triclosan but in a very non-alarmist way they are trying to educate people on how to look for it and avoid it. Read the FDA try to cover their butt right on FDA.gov:
Triclosan is not currently known to be hazardous to humans. But several scientific studies have come out since the last time FDA reviewed this ingredient that merit further review.
Animal studies have shown that triclosan alters hormone regulation. However, data showing effects in animals don’t always predict effects in humans. Other studies in bacteria have raised the possibility that triclosan contributes to making bacteria resistant to antibiotics.
In light of these studies, FDA is engaged in an ongoing scientific and regulatory review of this ingredient. FDA does not have sufficient safety evidence to recommend changing consumer use of products that contain triclosan at this time.
Of course, they wont publish their findings until Spring of 2011 so you can either avoid it or wait until the FDA releases another wishy washy statement about a chemical that is not really beneficial to humans or the environment.
Jan
18
FDA Warns Against Salmonella Outbreak in Peanut Butter Products
Filed Under Food Safety, Product Recalls | Comments Off
(Updated 1-20-09) Just a heads up to our fellow SafeParents regarding the recent slew of recalls and announcements regarding a Salmonella Typhimurium outbreak in the U.S. Some of you may have heard it already but this was relatively new news to me so I thought I’d share just in case.
Sample results from a plant owned by Peanut Corporation of America (PCA) located in Georgia have been targeted as one source of the contamination. The plant manufactures peanut butter and peanut paste, a concentrated product consisting of ground, roasted peanuts.. many of which are sold to other companies for use as ingredients in other products. The products they think are affected were manufactured after July 1, 2008.
“Because identification of products subject to recall is continuing, the FDA urges consumers to postpone eating commercially-prepared or manufactured peanut butter-containing products and institutionally-served peanut butter until further information becomes available about which products may be affected. Efforts to specifically identify those products are ongoing.”
So far the list of companies recalling their peanut butter products are:
To keep watch on the list of companies and products recalled in this case visit the FDA Website for updated information.
Jan
13
Getting The Lead Out (of vitamins this time)
Filed Under Food Safety, Product Safety | Comments Off
By now you’ve probably seen around your favorite green blogs, that the FDA had gotten wind of lead in various vitamins and supplements. They tested 324 different brands for levels of lead as well as levels of exposure to lead. What is this report trying to say? That the levels of lead in vitamins are safe? Though, it’s hard to decipher from the report, this is what I can gather, and that conclusion doesn’t make us happy.
How do I personally feel about this? It’s absolutely disturbing to me.
We had gotten some questions awhile back regarding vitamins and supplements and the answer still remains the same. First and foremost, talk with your pediatrician before administering any supplement, period. Most pediatricians will tell you that they’d prefer for your child gets his nutrients through food. And most of the time, that suffices perfectly fine and they don’t really need vitamins at their age. But, what if they do? There kids out there that might just be really picky eaters. Maybe your child is on the spectrum and all they’ll drink is water and all they’ll eat is processed chicken nuggets in the form of a star. This isn’t out of the ordinary. Maybe your child has a metabolic disorder and has to take supplements in order to survive. I know we give our son a few different things for focus and mental balance. Neither of the supplements we give him are listed, but that doesn’t mean anything. It means that it probably just wasn’t tested. And that’s even more disturbing to me. Especially given all of the problems we’ve worked to overcome with our son over the last year.
So what do we recommend?
This is one of those situations where I wish we had a clear cut answer for you. In a lot of cases, organic and natural vitamins are less regulated, therefore have the potential to not be as “green” or contain as much of a vitamin as they tout. A lot of conventional vitamins are synthetic, which can also pose their own dangers. Nature Mom has a great article on that subject. If your particular brand wasn’t tested, you can obtain a lead testing kit at your local hardware store. I’m not sure about accuracy, but it may be worth a shot. Unfortunately, knowing what we know about the FDA, they’ve said that the levels are safe, and by now have probably washed their hands of it. Based on our experiences with the whole BPA fiasco, I don’t see things changing anytime soon.
Dec
17
FDA to continue to study BPA
Filed Under Articles, Bisphenol-A | Comments Off
After a year of nothing but controversy for the FDA regarding it’s (in)decision about BPA, they’ve stated that while they won’t change their decision about its safety, they will continue to “study” the chemical over the next several years:
The FDA has maintained that BPA is safe, relying largely on two studies that were funded by the chemical industry.
In October, the FDA was faulted by its own panel of independent science advisers, who said the agency’s position on BPA was scientifically flawed. The panel said the agency should revisit its assessment and take into account the studies it had ignored.
Yesterday, Laura Tarantino, director of the FDA’s Office of Food Additive Safety, said the FDA will respond to that recommendation by performing additional analysis. She said she did not know if it would last months or years.
“I can’t tell you when we will finalize this,” she said. “There is a lot of work.” [full article]
Is it me, or does it smell a bit like the FDA is stalling? I don’t think we’ve made it a secret that we distrust the FDA and its inability to look out for the safety of the public. From BPA to melamine in formula, I think I know where the American public stands. It’s behind the coporation giving the biggest donation in order to skew the results their way.
The FDA might maintain the safety of BPA, but plenty of independent studies show otherwise, and we will continue to promote alternatives and spread the word about the dangers of BPA. Thankfully, a lot of companies are following suit and giving the customers what they want, and that’s safer products to feed our children with.
Nov
29
FDA Updates Melamine Investigation
Filed Under melamine | Comments Off
The news swirling around Melamine in US Baby Formula has ceraintly caused an uproar. Is there? Isn’t there? Some say yes, some claim no. Either way the FDA has updated their statement on safe levels of melamine content. From their website:
November 28, 2008: FDA’s ongoing investigation continues to show that the domestic supply of infant formula is safe and that consumers can continue using U.S. manufactured infant formulas. FDA has concluded that levels of melamine alone or cyanuric acid alone, at or below 1 part per million (ppm) in infant formula do not raise public health concerns. …
The FDA has been collecting and analyzing samples of domestically manufactured infant formula for the presence of melamine and melamine-related compounds. To date, FDA tests have found extremely low levels of melamine in one infant formula sample and extremely low levels of cyanuric acid in another. The levels were so low (well below 1 ppm) that they do not pose a health risk to infants
The FDA also advises parents to not stop feeding their children formula:
Parents using infant formula should continue using U.S. manufactured infant formula. Switching away from using one of these infant formulas to alternate diets or home-made formulas could result in infants not receiving the complete nutrition required for proper growth and development.
The FDA is publishing the test results (or at least they are working on it) here where it looks like some are turning up negative for melamine content.
Keep up with the FDA and their position on testing for melamine and the results on their website.
Nov
27
US Formula Makers Say Products are Melamine Free
Filed Under Articles, melamine, Product Safety | Comments Off
Well this is weird… first the FDA says they found trace amounts of melamine in their tests of 77 US formula samples including those from Mead Johnson, the makers of Enfamil. But now they say “The FDA has confirmed with Mead Johnson that melamine was not found in any of our products they tested”. Hmm. People panicked over the FDA’s claims to traces of melamine in leading brands but in an effort to squelch consumer worries companies are saying their in-house testing finds no traces at all.
Companies coming forward claiming their own testing shows no melamine content:
Abbott Nutrition, Nestle uSA, and Solus Products were not reached for comment on the FDA’s findings reported yesterday. The FDA said the low level of melamine (and melamine byproducts) posed no risk, but reports of the finding caused alarm among parents. None of this is sitting well with us. We’ll keep up with the news in the meantime…
Source: Reuters
Learn More: What is Melamine – A Crash Course
Nov
26
Melamine Found in US Baby Formula
Filed Under Green Mama, melamine, Product Safety | Comments Off
Oh boy. Well, I’ve have had my head firmly up my butt this week with Thanksgiving around the corner but apparently there is good reason to pull it out. News reports swirled yesterday and today regarding Melamine detection in US made baby formula. Since the news that melamine was found in baby formula in China, the US Government (FDA) began quietly testing US brands of baby formula for melamine.
In China, melamine was being intentionally dumped into watered-down milk to trick food quality tests into showing higher protein levels. In this case, the melamine detected was probably not intentional but the result of food packaging or the process plants. The levels that were found in China’s formula were around 2,500 parts per million. In the tests done in the US the results were between 0.137ppm – .247ppm.
The FDA tested 77 infant formula samples and found trace amounts of melamine in the following baby formulas:
The FDA did tests on Abbott Laboratories brands including Similac but none was detected in the 18 samples. However an Abbot spokesman said some in-house tests did find trace amounts though which brands were not specified.
McBean (Abbott spokesman) did say the detections were at levels far below the health limits set by all countries in the world, including Taiwan, where the limit is 0.05 parts per million.
“We’re talking about trace amounts right here, and you know there’s a lot of scientific bodies out there that say low levels of melamine are always present in certain types of foods,” said McBean.
Trace amounts are said to not be enough to cause problems (melamine exposure can cause kidney stones and other problems) in infants at these trace amounts. However, FDA critics think there should be no safe level of melamine contamination and that any formula with ANY amount of melamine should be recalled immediately.
Dr. Jerome Paulson, an associate professor of pediatrics at Children’s National Medical Center in Washington, D.C., said he didn’t think the FDA’s decision was unreasonable. He added, however, that the agency should research the impacts of long-term, low-dose exposure, “and not just assume it’s safe, and then 15 years from now find out that it’s not.”
Read more: Associated Press: FDA finds traces of melamine in US infant formula
What Should I Do? These are trace amounts of Melamine detected and the FDA is standing firm that there is no danger involved like the China scare. FDA scientists conclude there is a very low risk. But there is that word again… risk. We encourage our readers to call your formula makers regarding this latest news and find out what their position is on the subject. Unfortunately, we don’t know for sure what brands are free of any trace melamine contamination. We only know what the FDA has stated thus far regarding any need to worry: Here is the current stance from the FDA regarding Melamine.
Currently, the trace amounts detected are below any level of concern according to the FDA, so it is important you not stop feeding your baby formula. Talk to your pediatrician about changing brands if you really feel it’s necessary and check back with us as the information develops. We’ll keep you as posted as we can!
Oct
29
FDA Ignored Evidence of Harm Regarding BPA Ruling
Filed Under Articles, Bisphenol-A | Comments Off
From the Washington Post today:
In a highly critical report to be released today, the panel of scientists from government and academia said the FDA did not take into consideration scores of studies that have linked bisphenol A (BPA) to prostate cancer, diabetes and other health problems in animals when it completed a draft risk assessment of the chemical last month. The panel said the FDA didn’t use enough infant formula samples and didn’t adequately account for variations among the samples.
Taking those studies into consideration, the panel concluded, the FDA’s margin of safety is “inadequate”. The panel is part of the Science Board, a committee of advisers to the FDA commissioner, and was set up to review the FDA’s risk assessment of BPA.
I can’t even begin to express my utter frustration with the current state of Bisphenol-a in food packaging and baby products and this just solidifies the fact that this chemical has no business being near our food and that the FDA didn’t take real scientific evidence into consideration when they carelessly said it was safe.
Canada just recently declared BPA a dangerous toxin and has banned its use in childrens products.
Read the article on WashingtonPost.com
Oct
16
FDA Investigating Donation to Scientist Heading BPA Advisory Panel
Filed Under Articles, Bisphenol-A | Comments Off
I’ve come down with another miserable cold so I am really behind on a couple things I meant to post this week. This might not be new news for some because I’ve seen it around but I thought it was worthy of mentioning here too. And then I’m going back to the couch to wallow in my stuffed up achiness.
The FDA Wouldn’t Take Bribes Would They? HA
I got an alert in my email a few days about a possible “scandal” involving the FDA and An Bisphenol-a advocate Charles Gelman, a medical supply manufacturer. Apparently Mr Gelman made a sizable donation to the University of Michigan’s Risk Science Center in the sum of $5 Million. The acting director of The Universtiy of Michigan’s Risk Science Center is Martin Philbert who also happens to be the head of the FDA advisory panel that is supposed to deliver an independent risk assessment of BPA. Interesting!
Gelman says that Bisphenol-a is perfectly safe and is only being questioned “because worries about the chemical were being exaggerated by ‘mothers’ groups and others who don’t know the science.“ Does that include the National Toxicology Program, The Universtiy of Cincinnati, and the Journal of the American Medical Asoociation too? They’re a bunch of moms who don’t know the science? Ok.
Federal officials are investigating. We’ll see…
Sources: JS Online, Associated Press
Sep
16
FDA Continues to Back BPA Safety
Filed Under Bisphenol-A | Comments Off
This is getting old. The FDA met today to revisit the safety status of Bisphenol-a in consumer products. I am not shocked that they still back it’s safety, although they do admit that more research is needed. So the FDA says keep on exposing yourself to it and hopefully your kids don’t develop fertility or metabolic problems.
“A margin of safety exists that is adequate to protect consumers, including infants and children, at the current levels of exposure,” Laura Tarantino, a senior Food and Drug Administration scientist, told an expert panel that has been asked for a second opinion on the agency’s assessment of BPA.
Gee, thanks for keeping an eye out for us. Coincidentally, today another study was released to coincide with the FDA’s reassessment linking BPA to heart disease, diabetes and liver problems. The study, done by The Journal of the American Medical Association “shows that higher urinary concentrations of BPA were associated with an increased prevalence of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and liver-enzyme abnormalities.” (Source: JAMA)
More and more evidence builds regarding the effects of Bisphenol-a on humans, the list of effects building to a ridiculous number of potential ailments and long term diseases including but not limited to: reproductive damage, metabolic disorders, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, liver problems, high blood pressure, infertility, low sperm counts, possibly linked to breast cancer … the list goes on and on. The FDA says you’ll be fine though… so keep buying those canned goods! (Please detect my sarcasm.)
Source Articles: USA Today, The New York Times, Journal of American Medical Association
advertisement
Latest CPSC Childrens Products and Toy Recalls
- Bumbleride Recalls Indie & Indie Twin Strollers Due to Fall Hazard
- Weeplay Kids Recalls Infant Bodysuits Due to Choking Hazard
- Infant Rattles Recalled by Lee Carter Co. Due to Choking Hazard
- Mexican Wrestling Action Figures Recalled by Lee Carter Co. Due to Violation of Lead Paint Standard
- Chariot Carriers Recalls Child Bicycle Trailers and Conversion Kits Due to Injury Hazard
Car Seat Recalls
Latest FDA Recalls
- North American Rescue, LLC Announces A Follow-Up to the Recall of Crickit Convenience Kits Because of Possible Health Risk Related to Nationwide Recall of Triad Povidone Iodine Prep Pads
- Healthy People Co. Issues a Voluntary Recall of Specific Lots of the Dietary Supplements Found to Contain Undeclared Drug Ingredients
- Nest Collective Voluntarily Recalls Select Revolution Foods Jammy Sammy - Strawberry Jam & Peanut Butter Snack Size Sandwich Bars Due to a Labeling Error (Undeclared Peanut on Inner Wrapper)
Latest Recalls in Canada
- Seymour Custom Solvent recalled over labelling
- Kids eyeglass cases recalled because of lead levels
- GUND board books pose choking hazard
Safer States Action Alerts
- 28 states to consider toxic chemicals legislation in 2012
- Report round-up: Toxic chemicals in hidden places
- Obesity: What do chemicals have to do with it?
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
NetwrkBlog
Google+
Pinterest
