« Cherry bombs at the CBC | Main | More language hysteria »

The politics of dangerous substances

Canada today becomes the first nation on the planet to declare the plastics precursor Bisphenol A a dangerous substance. I’ve no doubt it’s a wise step. Studies show BSA triggers gene responses in female breast tissue consistent with aggressive tumor growth.
Health Canada, moving with uncharacteristic speed and decisiveness, is saying it will weigh the consequences of any decision to ban the use of the chemical where leaching might pose a problem.
That includes polycarbonate plastic items we’ve already heard about — baby bottles and sippy cups, water bottles. etc.
But it also includes the resins used to coat metal cans to prevent foods from coming into contact with the metal. There’s heat in the canning process, one of the risk factors in the release of Bisphenol A. At what level? We don’t know. All we know is that one study has shown a very low level of this chemical appears to trigger the carcinogenic gene expression in healthy breast tissue.
It would be easy to challenge Health Minister Tony Clement’s decision by comparing Ottawa’s speed-of-light decision compared to, say its response to the risks of tobacco. Governments spend millions on smoking-cessation programs and millions more on battling the tobacco industry, but continue to permit the legal sale of a drug they know to cause a multitude of fatal diseases.
The difference between BSA and tobacco is that tobacco use is a personal choice, whereas almost everything that comes from a can comes into contact with a BSA coating. It kind of limits personal choices, doesn’t it?

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


 
 
 
© Copyright - 940MONTREAL.COM 2007