On December 15, 2021, the European Food Safety Authority’s (EFSA) expert Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes and Processing Aids (CEP Panel) announced the results of its re-evaluation of health risks from bisphenol A (BPA; CAS 80-05-7) exposure. The CEP Panel suggests lowering the amount of BPA that can be “ingested daily over a lifetime without appreciable risk,” known as the tolerable daily intake (TDI), from 4 micrograms per kilogram of bodyweight per day (µg/kg/day) to 0.00004 µg/kg/day.
In 2015, EFSA changed the TDI of bisphenol A from 50 to 4 µg/kg/day but published an opinion that BPA at current exposure levels was not a health risk (FPF reported). Since then, the CEP Panel has systematically reviewed the scientific literature about the effects of BPA on human health (FPF reported) and concluded that BPA in fact does have negative effects at lower doses, particularly on the immune system. This has caused EFSA to change its opinion. When comparing consumer exposure to BPA and their new findings, “EFSA concludes that those with both average and high exposure to BPA in all age groups exceed the new TDI, indicating health concerns.” Bisphenol A is still widely used as a starting substance for polycarbonate plastics and epoxy resins, including for the linings within aluminum drink cans and lids of glass containers.
The CEP Panel will present the research that went into the draft opinion at a technical meeting for stakeholders on January 24, 2022. All stakeholders can comment on the findings and EFSA’s opinion until February 22, 2022.
Read More
EFSA (December 15, 2021). “Bisphenol A: EFSA draft opinion proposes lowering the tolerable daily intake.”
EFSA. “Bisphenol A.”
Douglas Fischer (December 17, 2021). “BPA use in doubt as Europe proposes vastly more protective health limits.” Environmental Health News
Matthew Rozsa (January 16, 2022). “‘We’re 15 years too late’: Endocrine-disrupting plastic additive BPA is still in everything.” Salon
Lynne Peeples (February 10, 2022). “Europe’s revolutionary BPA proposal puts more scrutiny on US regulatory inaction.” Environmental Health News
