corrected-california may require warnings on products containing chemical bpa - safe plastic drinking bottles
Clarifying that the center for scientific accountability is a non-
Paragraph 4-profit group5)
Sharon Bernstein Sacramento, California, May 8 (Reuters)-
Plastic beverage bottles, cans and other items containing chemical double phenol-A (BPA)
The compound distributed in California may soon need to be labeled as causing harm to women's reproduction.
On Thursday, the committee of scientific experts decided to include BPA on the list of chemicals known to cause harm, the latest decision in a year --
The long-standing dispute between national experts and the chemical industry says the substance is safe.
The Committee on the protection of natural resources, an environmental organization, calls the decision "an important step forward in protecting public health ". ” A non-
Profit-making organizations, which often support industry positions, say the decision highlights the "absurdity" of California law requiring disclosure of compounds known to cause harm ".
"Regulators have only stirred up more unnecessary fears about safety products," said Joseph Peron, chief science officer of the company.
Profit center of scientific responsibility. That voter-
The law passed, Proposal No. 65, establishes a system whereby chemicals found to cause developmental or reproductive impairment must be disclosed, whether they are in consumer goods, used for construction or other use.
In 2013, a chemical industry group sued the state when experts sought to disclose the damage the PBA caused to development.
Sam Delson, spokesman for the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, said the state won the case, but the industry filed an appeal and that the chemical is still not on the list as the lawsuit continues.
The product is used for, among other uses, the lining of plastic beverage bottles and some canned food containers.
Even if it was decided on Thursday that BPA belonged to the state's list of hazardous chemicals, Delson said, it would not need to be disclosed in the coming year, if any.
This depends on the second National process, under which experts must determine the extent to which chemicals are harmful to women's reproductive systems.
If the number of bottles or jars falls below this threshold, no warning is needed, he said.