Breast cancer incidence rates in the UK have increased by 84% since records began in 1971. Factors such as alcohol, genetics and weight gain are commonly pointed to, but high levels of oestrogen in a woman’s body have also been linked to an increased risk of breast cancer. Hormone replacement therapy, the contraceptive pill and having children later in life are also considered to have an impact on the likelihood of developing the disease but the government does not accept that environmental pollutants and toxic chemicals in everyday products can also be a health issue.

Since the early 1960s, when Rachel Carson published Silent Spring highlighting the health issues in wildlife caused by man-made pesticides and pollutants, scientific research has been undertaken that examines the effects of synthetic chemicals that can trigger hormonal responses and their impact on human health. These chemicals, known as endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs), can mimic the effects of the body’s own hormones, particularly the female hormone oestrogen.
One of the major chemicals in use today that possesses this mimicking effect is Bisphenol A, more commonly know as BPA. It is widely used in everyday plastics including baby and water bottles, sports equipment, medical and dental devices, dental fillings and sealants, eyeglass lenses, CDs, DVDs, and household electronics.

BPA is produced in massive quantities with estimated production at around 2 million metric tonnes a year, and of most concern is the fact that it accumulates inside us. All of us. The US Centre for Disease Control found BPA in over 90% of children and adults tested in 2003-04. It leaches into our food and drink from drinks bottles, plastic containers and from the plastic linings of tinned food, it can even pass through our skin.
The oestrogen-mimicking effect of BPA has been known about since the 1930s, and regulatory bodies - including the European Food Safety Authority - believed they had chosen safe levels of exposure for humans. However, since 1997, over a hundred studies have been conducted looking at the health effects of BPA, especially at very low doses that are environmentally relevant, i.e. at the levels adults and children would be exposed to on a daily basis.

In 2007, 38 of the world’s leading scientific experts in BPA met together to review the existing scientific information about the chemical. These scientists represented renowned academic institutions such as the US Harvard School of Public Health, University of Massachusetts, Tufts Medical School, and Brunel University in the UK. Their message was specifically aimed at government, policy makers, and the scientific community.
Their outcomes document, released as the Chapel Hill Consensus Statement stated that “Early life exposure to environmentally relevant BPA doses may result in persistent adverse effects in humans.”

Further studies from the last two years, emanating from both the US and Europe continue to raise serious questions about the safety of BPA. Not only in relation to breast cancer, but also with regard to its possible links with changes in brain function, heart problems, damage to DNA, the ovaries, and the thyroid gland. Studies from pre-2007 have also demonstrated potential links with diabetes, obesity and prostate cancer.

All this research that has been published since our 2005 Report, ‘Breast Cancer: an environmental disease’, only serves to strengthen our argument that environmental pollutants and toxic chemicals in our everyday products are linked to breast cancer.
The scientific evidence that BPA is toxic to humans continues to build and some regulatory agencies have begun to act. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced in late September 2009 that it was urgently reviewing the use of BPA.

Pointedly, the new EPA Administrator, Lisa Jackson, in her speech announcing the move stated: “advances in toxicology and analytical chemistry are revealing new pathways of exposure. There are subtle and troubling effects of chemicals on hormone systems, human reproduction, intellectual development and cognition. Every few weeks, we read about new potential threats: Bisphenol A, or BPA - a chemical that can affect brain development and has been linked to obesity and cancer - is in baby bottles.”

It seems increasingly likely that the US government will, in a matter of weeks, follow the 2008 Canadian government ban on the use of BPA in baby and infant bottles - a step that Breast Cancer UK strongly supports. We want to see BPA use banned from baby bottles throughout the UK - there are lots of alternatives that manufacturers can and are already using in the US market, where the six major baby bottle manufacturers voluntarily ended their use of BPA earlier this year, and there is no reason why the UK shouldn’t follow suit.

So far, the UK government has dismissed concerns about BPA. In response to questions posed by BCUK about BPA earlier this year, the Minister of State for Health stated in June that “the FSA [Food Standards Authority] is satisfied that there is no risk to the health of UK consumers” - a view that we and an increasing number of scientists do not accept. The moves by Canadian and the US regulators will make it even more difficult for the British government to ignore these growing concerns.

But the government, policy makers, manufacturers and retailers in the UK haven’t acted on BPA - which is why Breast Cancer UK is launching a campaign to address this as a matter of urgency. We are delighted with the support that the Green Party has given us in the past and we hope that over the coming weeks your support will continue to enable us to address this important environmental, public health issue. We launched a survey during October (Breast Cancer Awareness Month), which was our first step towards persuading the government to ban BPA in baby products.