Bisphenol A in the headlines

In recent weeks (April 2008) there has been a blitz of articles about the risks of bisphenol A, prompted by a report from the National Institutes of Health.
Click here to read the NIH press release on the report; you can download the full text of the report (a PDF file that runs 69 pages) by clicking at the link of the top-right hand corner of the press release.

If you have already read chapter 5 of Boys Adrift, nothing in the report will come as a surprise. There was nothing new in the report. More precisely: what was new in this report was not what the report said, but who said it. This is the first time that any agency of the US federal government has published an official report expressing concern about the health risks of bisphenol A. As the Washington Post observed in a front page article published April 27 2008, more than one hundred peer-reviewed scholarly articles had already documented health concerns about bisphenol A, particularly for children; but until now, federal agencies -- particularly the FDA and the Environmental Protection Agency -- had relied on just two studies, both funded by the chemical industry, playing down the risks of bisphenol A.

The quantity of media attention devoted to this topic has been remarkable. Unfortunately, most of these reporters don't seem to know much about this issue. So, they have focused on the question of whether bisphenol A increases the risk of certain kinds of cancer, or whether bisphenol A may promote the onset of puberty in girls. These are valid concerns; but what has been missing from the news coverage is the effect of bisphenol A, and other endocrine disruptors, on BOYS. In chapter 5 of Boys Adrift, I cite research suggesting that these chemicals may disrupt or delay the onset of puberty in boys; more importantly, these chemicals may actually effect the developing brain in juvenile males differently than they do in females, specifically with regard to curiosity and motivation. In some studies, juvenile males exposed to these substances lost their motivation and/or their curiosity; no such negative effect was seen in the females.

I haven't seen any media reports which have even mentioned this research. Again, as I stress in the book, I think the lack of media attention regarding adverse effects on boys is NOT any kind of conspiracy. It's not deliberate. The lack of coverage comes about simply because most reporters don't know very much about the topic.

I will try to read and respond to all posts on this blog which request a response from me. If you would like to send me an e-mail directly, send your e-mail to leonardsax AT prodigy.net (type "@" in place of "AT" of course).

Hope to hear from you soon.

Leonard