Yet more BPA nonsense

If you've ever wondered just how much evidence has to be gathered up to put a stake through the heart of notorious junk science, what the formerly Golden State is doing with BPA can serve as a primer.

Last year, the far from chem industry friendly regulators in California decided not to put BPA on their notorious Prop 65 list. Admittedly, they had only done this after virtually every regulatory body in the civilized world had already granted the chemical a clean bill of health.

But, less than a week afterward, the fear entrepreneurs at NRDC—sensing that their golden goose was cooked—filed an amazingly amateurish petition that was enough to get the State to reconsider. Heck, what better for the elite in Sacramento to worry about as their state is rapidly headed from first to worst.

I guess that 5400 studies on BPA aren't quite enough.

Read my complete HND piece, entitled "Raising Up The BPA Boogeyman Yet Again: A Scientific Disgrace."

Comments

[GatorScientist]

But, but, but...Wikipedia says it's bad.
Who am I to believe /sarcasm off.

Thanks for the info.

Nomad, Out

[Michael Shaw]

All we can do is publicize the real science. You'd think the trade associations would be a bit more aggressive in defending themselves, but you would be wrong.