POLYCARBONATE infant milk bottles containing the toxic chemical Bisphenol-A (BPA) will be banned in Malaysia from March 1 next year.
The move is considered necessary from the health standpoint because there is, as yet, no scientific evidence to prove that BPA bottles are safe for use by high-risk groups, especially infants and children.
Health Minister Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai has urged parents and guardians to make the switch to bottles marked ‘BPA-free’ which are widely available in the local market.
He said the ban was in line with recommendations from the World Health Organisation, pointing out that the European Union (EU) had made a similar announcement to enforce the ban in June for EU-member states.
Countries that have banned use of the chemical in the manufacture of milk bottles include Germany, France, Denmark, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and New York, USA.
What actually is BPA? Scientists say it is a kind of chemical most widely used in polycarbonate to make baby bottles, sippy cups, sports bottles and other plastic containers.
BPA is the building block for polycarbonate. The latter is a translucent, shatter-proof plastic that looks like glass. As such, it increases the toughness of containers made from it, whereas receptacles without BPA-polycarbonate are softer and have a less clear and duller look.
Because of BPA’s connection to reproductive abnormalities and premature rates of puberty, many manufacturers have begun creating BPA-free products, particularly for baby bottles and other beverage containers.
According to consumer authorities, the easiest way to identify and avoid the contamination in baby milk bottles is to go for those with a BPA-free label. Another viable option is choosing bottles that are not too clear-looking since BPA is added to make the bottles look clean and clear. Those without BPA should look blur.
New research has reinforced the fact that high exposure to BPA can be detrimental to health.
In animals, the chemical has been shown to impact the male reproductive organs and interfere with male sex hormones.
In humans, exposure to BPA has been associated with male sexual dysfunction.
In the latest five-year study published in the journal Fertility and Sterility, scientists from the Kaiser Permanente Division of Research examined over 500 factory workers and discovered those with high BPA levels in their urine were up to four times more likely to have poor semen quality.
The study also found that compared with men without detectable urine BPA, those with detectable urine BPA had more than three times the risk of lowered sperm concentration and lower sperm vitality, more than four times the risk of a lower sperm count, and more than twice the risk of lower sperm motility.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) says it now has concern over the effects of BPA on infants and children but presently has little power to regulate the use of the chemical.
Regardless, the FDA will support food industry actions to remove BPA from baby milk bottles and feeding cups.
Already, some countries are not only setting bans on the use of BPA but also helping to develop BPA alternatives for use in infant formula can liners, and minimise BPA in other food can linings.
The FDA is also undertaking further research on BPA in order to address uncertainties it says exist in some BPA research.
In Malaysia, enforcement of the ban on BPA milk bottles will be made in stages and the industry is given one year to comply with the decision by making the necessary alterations to their machines and buying new raw materials.
However, consumer groups in the country are taking issue with the decision, contending that since the use of BPA milk bottles is deemed harmful to health, there is no reason to delay the ban.
Babies and growing children are especially at risk due to the large amount of toxin they are likely to ingest if the use of bottles and other containers made with BPA is allowed to go on.
In view of the scientifically proven negative impact, it stands to reason that the ban should be enforced with immediate effect as any further delay will only serve to increase the health risks and hazards posed.
There should no compromise when it comes to safeguarding public health, especially when an oversight in policy-making can adversely impact the population at large in the long run.
In matters as vital as health protection, prevention is better than cure and as contrived as it may sound, it’s still better to be safe than sorry.