In an announcement [1] yesterday, Canada became the first country in the world to ban biphesnol A (BPA) in baby bottles, adding it to the toxic substance list.
The plan implements a 6-month program by the government to consult with scientists and experts. The sale, importation, and advertising of BPA bottles can now be controlled by the Minister of Health. But the substance is so commonly used in manufacturing, that many suggest [2] eradicating it will be a challenge.
The European Union and the U.S. FDA have looked into the risks of BPA, but have not moved to ban it yet. The EU recently said [3]it’s still safe, and the U.S. has moved towards a voluntary ban [4].
BPA is alleged to pose a number of health risks to adults as well, including increased risk for breast cancer, prostate cancer and diabetes.
Earlier this year four Ohio families launched a lawsuit [5] against manufacturers of BPA baby bottles, claiming they knew the risk but failed to disclose it to consumers. Congressional hearings followed in the U.S., and possibly initiated the move here in Canada.
- Should litigation be the impetus for government regulation of toxic substances?
- At what point does a risk become so well-known that it translates into a manufacturer’s duty to inform consumers?
- And when there are multiple manufacturers that could be held liable, but none easily identified, should this responsibility be in the private or public realm?
All questions to think about as legal and policy issues surrounding BPA are fully fleshed out in the future.