Hot Topics in Health

After hearing something on the radio about BPA and plastics, I researched BPA to find out what it is and what the fuss is about.  Now I am concerned.   Plastics containing BPA are marked as #7 on the bottom of plastic bottles and have been shown to disrupte hormone function.  I'm happy that I purchased a set of Pyrex storage containers.   Here is one of the articles that I read:

http://www.ewg.org/node/20944

Infant formula: All U.S. manufacturers use BPA-based lining on the metal portions of the formula containers. Tests of liquid formulas by FDA and EWG show that BPA leaches into the formula, and EWG calculates that some infant's daily exposures can exceed the toxic doses in animal studies. Choose powdered formula which is more diluted with water, or buy liquid formula in plastic containers.

Studies show canned foods are a predominant source of daily BPA exposure in our lives. Food and drink cans are lined with a BPA-containing plastic. Beverages appear to contain less BPA residues, while canned pasta and soups contain the highest levels. EWG found that the worst foods tested put pregnant women and formula-fed infants within an unacceptable margin of safety to levels that cause harmful effects in laboratory animals. Typical exposures are within a 10 to 100-fold range of the effects that cause harm in a laboratory setting.

Certain plastics are made with BPA and leaches at low levels into food or liquids. Leaching from plastic baby bottles and food containers appears to happen at a much lower level than found in canned foods and baby formula. Nevertheless it is good to take simple precautions.

BPA is found in polycarbonate plastic food containers often marked on the bottom with the letters "PC" recycling label #7. Not all #7 labeled products are polycarbonate but this is a reasonable guideline for a category of plastics to avoid. Polycarbonate plastics are rigid and transparent and used for sippy cups, baby bottles, food storage, and water bottles. Some polycarbonate water bottles are marketed as 'non-leaching' for minimizing plastic taste or odor, however there is still a possibility that trace amounts of BPA will migrate from these containers, particularly if used to heat liquids.

Safer products and uses: When possible it is best to avoid #7 plastics, especially for children's food. Plastics with the recycling labels #1, #2 and #4 on the bottom are safer choices and do not contain BPA. Find baby bottles in glass versions, or those made from the safer plastics including polyamine, polypropylene and polyethylene. Soft or cloudy-colored plastic does not contain BPA. Bottles used to pump and store expressed breast milk by the brand Medela are also labeled BPA-free.

Many metal water bottles are lined with a plastic coating that contains BPA. Look for stainless steel bottles that do not have a plastic liner.

While the levels of BPA that leach from hard plastics is generally low, we recommend avoiding use of plastic containers to heat food in microwaves. Ceramic, glass, and other microwaveable dishware are good alternatives. Avoid using old and scratched plastic bottles.

I don't think they can make up their mind...

For Immediate Release
Wednesday, September 3, 2008

E-mail this page
Subscribe Contact:
Robin Mackar
919-541-0073

NTP Finalizes Report on Bisphenol A

Current human exposure to bisphenol A (BPA), a chemical used in many polycarbonate plastics and epoxy resins, is of "some concern" for effects on development of the prostate gland and brain and for behavioral effects in fetuses, infants and children, according to a final report released today by the National Toxicology Program (NTP).

The report provides the NTP�s current opinion on BPA�s potential to cause harm to human reproduction or development. The conclusions are based primarily on a broad body of research involving numerous laboratory animal studies. The report is part of a lengthy review of the scientific literature on BPA and takes into consideration public and peer review comments received on an earlier draft report. The final report is available at http://cerhr.niehs.nih.gov/chemicals/bisphenol/bisphenol.pdf.

"There remains considerable uncertainty whether the changes seen in the animal studies are directly applicable to humans, and whether they would result in clear adverse health effects," said NTP Associate Director John Bucher, Ph.D. "But we have concluded that the possibility that BPA may affect human development cannot be dismissed."

About the impact that these findings may have on consumers, CERHR Director Michael Shelby, Ph.D., said,"Unfortunately, it is very difficult to offer advice on how the public should respond to this information. More research is clearly needed to understand exactly how these findings relate to human health and development, but at this point we can�t dismiss the possibility that the effects we�re seeing in animals may occur in humans. If parents are concerned, they can make the personal choice to reduce exposures of their infants and children to BPA."

The NTP, an interagency federal research program at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), part of the National Institutes of Health, uses a five-level scale ranging from negligible to serious, with "some concern" being the midpoint.
Chart showing NTP Conclusions on BPA.
NTP conclusions regarding the possibilities that human development
or reproduction might be affected by exposure to bisphenol A.

"We are expressing this level of concern because we see developmental changes occurring in some animal studies at BPA exposure levels similar to those experienced by humans," Bucher said.

The report also expresses "minimal concern" that BPA exposure will affect development of the mammary gland or accelerate puberty in females. The NTP expressed "negligible concern" that exposure of pregnant woman to BPA will result in fetal or neonatal mortality, birth defects or reduced birth weight and growth in their offspring.

The NTP also expressed "negligible concern" that exposure to BPA causes reproductive effects in non-occupationally exposed adults and "minimal concern" for workers exposed to higher levels in occupational settings.

"The literature on experimental animal studies is large and filled with many conflicting findings. There are a number of remaining uncertainties in the scientific information on BPA," said Bucher. The report discusses many of the uncertainties, including the very limited data from studies in humans and the difficulty in relating the often subtle developmental endpoints in animal studies to human health risks.

The NTP Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction (CERHR) conducted the BPA evaluation. The CERHR follows a formal process for review and evaluation of nominated chemicals that includes convening panels of scientific experts to review the world�s scientific literature on the chemical being studied and a peer review process, as well as numerous opportunities for public input. For a summary of the NTP evaluation of BPA, please see http://www.niehs.nih.gov/news/media/questions/sya-bpa.cfm#4.

CERHR publishes monographs that assess the evidence that environmental chemicals, physical substances, or mixtures cause adverse effects on reproduction and development and provide opinion on whether these substances are hazardous for humans. Other agencies, such as the US Food and Drug Administration, apply this science in carrying out their regulatory responsibilities and in accordance with their statutory authority.

Last month, FDA released a"Draft Assessment of Bisphenol A for Use in Food Contact Applications� for peer review and public comment, available at http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/08/briefing/2008-0038b1_01_02_FDA%20BPA%20Draft%20Assessment.pdf. The FDA will hold a public meeting of its BPA subcommittee of the FDA Science Board on September 16 to discuss this FDA draft assessment.

"We are pleased to see the finalization of the NTP report," noted Frank Torti, M.D., M.P.H., Principal Deputy Commissioner and Chief Scientist at the FDA."The FDA will consider this final report in our role as a regulatory agency and joins NTP in the call for additional research in this important area. "Reporters interested in speaking to FDA about this issue, may contact the FDA press office at 301-827-6242.

NIEHS supports research to understand the effects of the environment on human health and is part of NIH. For more information on environmental health topics, please visit our website at http://www.niehs.nih.gov.

The National Toxicology Program (NTP) is an interagency program established in 1978. The program was created as a cooperative effort to coordinate toxicology testing programs within the federal government, strengthen the science base in toxicology, develop and validate improved testing methods, and provide information about potentially toxic chemicals to health, regulatory, and research agencies, scientific and medical communities, and the public. The NTP is headquartered at the NIEHS. For more information about the NTP, visit http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) — The Nation's Medical Research Agency — includes 27 Institutes and Centers and is a component of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. It is the primary federal agency for conducting and supporting basic, clinical and translational medical research, and it investigates the causes, treatments, and cures for both common and rare diseases. For more information about NIH and its programs, visit www.nih.gov.

http://www.nih.gov/news/health/sep2008/niehs-03.htm.

What causes concern for me is what I read about BPA possibly disturbing the endocrine system.  I've been doing a lot of research on hormone imbalance and everything I have read talks about plastics and BPA and their adverse effect on the endocrine system.  I know it is virtually impossible to eliminate these toxins but at least exposure can be reduced.

We seem to keep going back and forth on this -- safe, not-safe.

Just to muddy the waters a bit more  : ) .....

Plastics chemical might promote breast cancer

_________________________________________________

Health, Diet & Fitness Boards | About our Boards | Tech Updates  | Customer  Support


    

IMHO, stay away from BPA. I have been following this for a while. What originally caused concern was a while back a janitor at a research facility cleaned rat cages with a scrub brush. This cages contained BPA. The end result was a huge drop in fertility within a matter of weeks. I couldn't find my link to this. But, I do have this letter below. Anyway, BPA is in so many things it is hard to stay totally away from it. Cans, juice and milk containers, disposible cups, microwave oven dishes and popcorn bags, some childrens dental sealants, water supply pipes to name a few. And because it leaches, it is getting into our water supply! It is pretty scary. And if this is a worry for you, check out this. Plague of Plastic Chokes the Seas http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/la-me-ocean2aug02,0,5274274,full.story

Ms. Cynthia (her last name was objectionable) LOL
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Proposition 65 Implementation
P.O. Box 401
1001 I Street, 19th Floor
Sacramento, CA 95812-4010

Dear Ms. O:

The Environmental Working Group (EWG) strongly supports the Office of
Environmental Health Hazard Assessment’s (OEHHA) request for a priority review
of Bisphenol A (BPA). Over the last decade, a growing body of science has
provided substantial evidence of the developmental and reproductive toxicity of
BPA in lab animals at low, environmentally relevant doses and has demonstrated
widespread exposures among the public. In addition, many of the diseases and
health conditions linked to BPA in animal studies are common among the US
population. This gives us great concern that BPA exposures for pregnant women
and children may pose significant health risks.

In particular, the following finding on BPA toxicity and human exposures
demonstrate why this priority review of this chemical by OEHHA is so important
and relevant:

* Developmental and reproductive toxicity of BPA is demonstrated in
multiple animal studies
* Studies demonstrate widespread exposure to BPA among the public at levels
that have been shown to cause adverse effects in numerous lab studies
* Health effects linked to BPA in lab studies are common among the public
* A recent federal Center for the Evaluation of Risk to Human Reproduction
(CERHR) review of BPA contains fundamental errors that support the need for an
independent review by OEHHA; and
* Findings of an independent BPA expert panel, including their concerns
about potential adverse effects in humans, support the need for priority review
by OEHHA

Each of these points is detailed further below:

Developmental and Reproductive Toxicity: In the last decade, numerous animal
studies have shown that exposure to BPA results in developmental and
reproductive toxicity in exposed animals and their offspring. In 1993, OEHHA
published a list of criteria that need to be met in order for a chemical to be
listed as a reproductive toxin (OEHHA 1993). Earlier this year, OEHHA compiled a
list of 63 studies that meet these established criteria for developmental or
reproductive toxicity from BPA exposure (OEHHA 2007). These studies reported
toxic effects that included:

* persistent changes to breast tissue that predispose cells to
carcinogenesis in the offspring of exposed animals
* neurobehavioral changes in offspring of exposed animals
* germ cell damage in offspring of exposed animals
* persistent changes to prostate tissue that predispose cells to
carcinogenesis in the offspring of exposed animals; and
* adverse effects on fertility and reproductive system of exposed animals

OEHHA had also outlined in the 1993 document that “effects should occur
in multiple studies or multiple species for a substance to be recommended for
listing”; the 63 studies that OEHHA reviewed confirms the reproducibility of
findings that illustrate the low dose toxicity of this chemical.

Widespread Exposure: We want to call your attention to a very recent
publication in Environmental Health Perspectives in which the national Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) detected BPA in 93% of people age 6 and

older. CDC tested the urine of 2,517 people who are representative of the US
population for BPA and found children ages 6 and older had higher concentrations
than adolescents, who in turn had higher concentrations than adults. Women,
non-Hispanic blacks, and lower income adults were also sub-groups with higher
concentrations (Calafat et al 2007). Because BPA has a short half-life in the
body, this study confirms daily, sustained exposures among the general public.

In addition, BPA has also been found in breast milk, amniotic fluid, and cord
blood, indicating exposure to the developing fetus and neonates (CERHR 2006).
The widespread exposure demonstrated by these studies is consistent with the
many sources of exposure to BPA from a variety of consumer products. BPA ranks
in the top two percent of high production volume chemicals in the US, with
annual production exceeding a billion pounds per year. It is used as plasticizer
in a variety of commonly used consumer products and is so ubiquitous that it
pollutes not only people but also rivers, estuaries, sediment, and house dust.

Earlier this year, EWG spearheaded a study in which an independent laboratory
tested 97 cans of name-brand fruit, vegetables, soda, and other commonly eaten
canned foods for the presence of BPA (EWG 2007a).
Canned foods represent a major source of exposure to BPA for the general
public and Japanese manufacturers voluntarily decreased the use of the chemical
in their products beginning in 1997 for the benefit of their customers
(Matsumoto 2003).

EWG’s tests found the following:

* BPA was detected in 56% of samples
* Of all foods tested, chicken soup, infant formula, and ravioli had BPA
levels of highest concern. Just one to three servings of foods with these
concentrations could expose a pregnant woman or child to BPA at levels that
caused serious adverse effects in animal tests (2.0 ug/kg/day linked to
permanent damage of the reproductive system and aggressive behavior- Nagel et al
1997, Kawai et al 2003)
* For women of childbearing age who routinely eat canned food, chronic
exposure levels throughout pregnancy can exceed safe doses. For example, the BPA
dose for one-quarter of all women eating 2 servings of canned food daily would
fall within a margin of safety of 10 from levels linked to increases in
anogenital distance in both genders and early puberty in studies of in utero
exposures (2.4 ug/kg/day- Howdeshell et al 1999, Honma et al 2002)

EWG also included tests of liquid infant formula in this study and combined
this information with FDA tests of liquid infant formula in 1996 (EWG 2007b).
EWG analysis of these results revealed the following:

* One of every 16 infants fed ready-to-eat canned formula would be exposed
to BPA at doses exceeding those that altered testosterone levels, affected
neurodevelopment, and caused other permanent damage to male and female
reproductive systems (2.4 ug/kg/day- Howdeshell et al 1999, Honma et al 2002)
* At the highest BPA levels found in formula (17 parts per billion), nearly
two-thirds of all infants fed ready-to-eat formula would be exposed above doses
that proved harmful in animal tests (2.4 ug/kg/day- Howdeshell et al 1999, Honma
et al 2002)

This EWG study provides the most comprehensive U.S. based examination of BPA in
canned food available and confirms widespread contamination of these foods by
BPA. Because of its ubiquity in foods that are commonly eaten by the public,
this study provides strong evidence that significant numbers of pregnant women,
formula fed infants, and young children may be exposed to BPA on a daily basis
at levels that have been found to be harmful in lab animals.

The current reference dose for BPA of 50 ug/kg/day was derived from traditional
toxicological studies and does not take into account the large body of work from
the last ten years that shows that BPA is biologically active at much lower
doses (vom Saal and Hughes 2005). In fact, there are many studies that show harm
to lab animals at BPA doses that are well below the reference dose (Nagel et al
1997, Kawai et al 2003, Howdeshell et al 1999, Honma et al 2002). The low doses
that have been found to be harmful to animals are similar to levels that are
found in people.

BPA and Human Health Trends: BPA has been linked to a variety of medical
conditions that are prevalent and taking a major toll on our collective health.
Diseases like breast cancer, prostate cancer, polycystic ovarian syndrome, and
insulin resistance have all been associated with BPA exposure in lab studies
(vom Saal and Hughes 2005, Maffini 2006). In many of these studies, exposure
occurs in utero and these conditions develop in exposed offspring long after
birth. Many of the adverse health effects of BPA arise from its ability to mimic
estrogen. What is most worrisome about these studies is that the doses of BPA
that are being used are extremely low and in the range of the levels that have
been found in people.

A few studies have reported on potential effects of exposure to BPA in humans.
OEHHA’s study summary of BPA included a study in which Japanese scientists
found that women with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) had higher serum levels
of BPA relative to women with normal ovarian function, and that there were
positive correlations between BPA concentrations and androgen levels (Takeuchi
et al 2006). Polycystic ovarian syndrome is one of the most common causes of
female infertility in the U.S. and affects 5 to 10% of American women.

Another study of women with a history of recurrent miscarriages found they had
higher serum BPA levels when compared with women with normal pregnancies,
leading the authors of the study to conclude that "exposure to bisphenol A is
associated with recurrent miscarriage" (Sugiura-Ogasawara et al. 2005).
Recurrent miscarriages affect one percent of American couples trying to conceive
(Rai 2006).

OEHHA’s study summary did not include a study of men with occupational
exposure to plastics that contain BPA that found that they had decreased
secretion of follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) when compared with men without
occupational exposure to epoxy resins (Hanaoka et al 2002). FSH is critical to
sperm formation. Abnormal secretion of this hormone in men can result in reduced
sperm concentration and infertility.

Federal Review Flawed: The recent review of BPA by the federal CERHR found
“some concern” with respect to neural and behavior effects from in utero
exposure but disregarded the substantial number of studies linking fetal
exposure to BPA to breast and prostate cancers and reproductive problems. This
review had been plagued by many issues, including charges leveled by the House
Oversight and Government Reform Committee of the potential conflict of interest
on the part of the subcontractor that conducted the initial literature search
and prepared the first draft. The subcontractor, Sciences International, was
subsequently fired but the document they prepared continued to be used by the
expert panel. It should also be noted that the CERHR panel lacked BPA experts
and their final draft was found to contain significant numbers of errors of
omission and fact upon review by scientists with BPA expertise (Vandenberg et al
2007).

This failure on the part of the federal panel to make a decision that is fully
protective of public health, in addition to the fundamentally flawed process by
which they reached their decision, underscores the need for a fair and unbiased
reassessment of the public health risks posed by this chemical. OEHHA is in a
position to make just such an assessment.

BPA Experts Release Consensus Statement: In August of this year, a group of 38
independent scientists who research BPA toxicity released a consensus statement
in which they concluded that BPA represents a clear risk to human health (vom
Saal et al 2007). This group of scientists published a series of four articles
in the journal Reproductive Toxicology that outlined their conclusions drawn
from their review of over 700 scientific articles related to BPA. In this
consensus statement, these scientists wrote:

“The wide range of adverse effects of low doses of BPA in laboratory animals
exposed both during development and in adulthood is a great cause for concern
with regard to the potential for similar adverse effects in humans. Recent
trends in human disease relate to adverse effects observed in experimental
animals exposed to low doses of BPA.”

Given the flaws in the process that lead to the federal CERHR decision on BPA,
OEHHA has an opportunity to reevaluate the reproductive and developmental
toxicity of this chemical in a fair and unbiased way that takes into account the
substantial body of work that has been published over the last decade. We hope
that OEHHA can quickly address the pressing public health issues posed by
widespread human exposures to this chemical that has demonstrated extremely low
dose toxicity in scores of laboratory studies.

Environmental Working Group strongly supports OEHHA’s decision to prioritize
a review of BPA under Prop 65 as a reproductive toxicant.

Sincerely,

Anila Jacob, M.D., M.P.H.
Senior Scientist
Environmental Working Group.

References

Barrett JR. 2006. Fertile grounds of inquiry: environmental effects on human
reproduction. Environmental Health Perspectives 114(11): A644-49.

Calafat AM, Ye X, Wong L-Y, Reidy JA, Needham LL. 2007. Exposure of the US
population to Bisphenol A and 4-tertiary-octylphenol: 2003-2004. Environmental
Health Perspectives Advance Copy, Online 24 October 2007
http://www.ehponline.org/members/2007/10753/10753.pdf [2] .

CERHR (2006). “Draft NTP-CERHR report on the reproductive and developmental
toxicity of Bisphenol A.” Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human
Reproduction, NTP-CERHR. Available at
http://cerhr.niehs.nih.gov/chemicals/bisphenol/Bisphenol_A_Draft_Report [3]
.pdf .

EWG (Environmental Working Group) 2007. Bisphenol A: Toxic Plastics Chemical in
Canned Food. Available online at http://www.ewg.org/reports/bisphenola [4].

Hanaoka T, Kawamura N, Hara K, Tsugane S. 2002. Urinary Bisphenol A and plasma
hormone concentrations in male workers exposed to Bisphenol A and mixed organic
solvents. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 59(9): 625-28.

Honma S, Suzuki A, Buchanan DL, Katsu Y, Watanabe H, Iguchi T. 2002. Low dose
effect of in utero exposure to bisphenol A and iethylstilbestrol on female mouse
reproduction. Reproductive Toxicology. 16:117-22.

Howdeshell, K, AK Hotchkiss, KA Thayer, JG Vandenbergh and FS vom Saal. 1999.
Plastic bisphenol A speeds growth and puberty. Nature 401: 762- 764.

Jakubowicz DJ, Iuorno MJ, Jakubowicz S, Roberts KA, Nestler JE. 2002.
Effects of metformin on early pregnancy loss in the polycystic ovary syndrome.
Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 87(2): 524-9.

Kawai K, Takehiro N, Nishikata H, Aou S, Takii M, Kubo C. 2003. Aggressive
behavior and serum testosterone concentration during the maturation process of
male mice: The effects of fetal exposure to bisphenol A. Environmental Health
Perspectives. 111:175-8.

Maffini MV, Rubin BS, Sonnenschein C, Soto AM. 2006. Endocrine disruptors and
reproductive health: the case of Bisphenol A. Molecular and Cellular
Endocrinology 254-255:179-86.

Matsumoto A, Kitagawa K, Isse T, Oyama T, Foureman GL, Morita M, Kawamoto T.
2003. Bisphenol A levels in human urine. Environmental Health Perspectives
111(1): 101-4.

Nagel S. C., vom Saal, F. S., Thayer, K. A., Dhar, M. G., Boechler, M. and
Welshons, W. V. Relative Binding Affinity-Serum Modified Access (RBASMA) Assay
Predicts the Relative In Vivo Bioactivity of the Xenoestrogens Bisphenol A and
Octylphenol. Environmental Health Perspectives 1997; 105: 70-76.

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 1993. Criteria for
recommending chemicals for listing as “known to the state to cause
reproductive toxicity”. Available at:
www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/policy_procedure/pdf_zip/dartCriteriaNov1993 [5].
pdf.

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 2007. Proposed chemicals for
DART IC consideration- Bisphenol A. Available at:
http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/CRNR_notices/state_listing/prioritizatio [6]
n_notices/DARTprior090707.html#dart.

Rai R, R. L. (2006). "Recurrent Miscarriage." Lancet 368(9535): 601-11.

Sugiura-Ogasawara M, Ozaki Y, Shin-ichi S, Makino T, Suzumori K. 2005. Exposure
to Bisphenol A is associated with recurrent miscarriage. Human Reproduction
20(8): 2325-29.

Takeuchi T, Tsutsumi O, Idezuki Y, Takai Y, Taketani Y. 2004. Positive
relationship between androgen and the endocrine disruptor, Bisphenol A, in
normal women and women with ovarian dysfunction. Endocrine Journal 51(2): 165-9.

Vandenberg LN, Maffini MV, Rubin BS, Soto AM. 2007. Public Comments on
Bisphenol A Expert Panel Interim Draft Report. Available at:
http://cerhr.niehs.nih.gov/chemicals/bisphenol/pubcomm-bisphenol.html [7].

vom Saal F, Hughes C. 2005. An extensive new literature concerning lowdose
effects of Bisphenol A shows the need for a new risk assessment. Environmental
Health Perspectives 113(8): 926-33.

vom Saal F, et al. 2007. Chapel Hill Bisphenol A Expert Panel Consensus
Statement: Integration of mechanisms, effects in animals, and potential to
impact human health at current levels of exposures. Reproductive Toxicoloty
24(2): 131-8.

Wozniak AL, Bulayeva NN, Watson CS. 2005. Xenoestrogens at picomolar
concentrations trigger membrane estrogen receptor-alpha-medicated Ca2+ fluxes
and prolactin release in GH3/B6 pituitary tumor cells. Environmental Health
Perspectives 113(4): 431-9.

[1] http://www.ewg.org/files/BPACommentsforOEHHA.pdf
[2] http://www.ehponline.org/members/2007/10753/10753.pdf
[3] http://cerhr.niehs.nih.gov/chemicals/bisphenol/Bisphenol_A_Draft_Report
[4] http://www.ewg.org/reports/bisphenola
[5] http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/policy_procedure/pdf_zip/dartCriteriaNov1993
[6] http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/CRNR_notices/state_listing/prioritizatio
[7] http://cerhr.niehs.nih.gov/chemicals/bisphenol/pubcomm-bisphenol.html

BREAK THE CHAINS

SHOP INDEPENDANT STORES AND FROM LOCAL ARTISTS AND CRAFTPERSONS!

 

A good friend will come and bail you out of jail...BUT, a true friend will be sitting next to you saying, "Damn...that was fun!"