Jerome Taylor: Mothers confused by mixed messages on BPA risks
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Many mothers who are concerned about the presence of BPA in baby bottles are confused about the evidence and would like clearer guidance from the Government.
Following The Independent's revelations earlier this week that a number of high street retailers, including Boots and Mothercare, were continuing to sell off old-stock baby bottles that contain BPA, internet forums have been filled with discussions over what mothers should do.
Many have expressed concern that Britain is not taking a preventive stance on the controversial chemical like those taken by health authorities in Canada and Denmark.
One blogger writing on the Mumsnet website under the name "Crumpette" compared the BPA debate to the earlier debate over smoking. "For years people believed smoking was safe and now it has been banned in public places," she said. "It's time to make a change for your children and grandchildren... unless people wake up nothing will be done and everyone could end up very unwell indeed."
She added: "The reason Britain has not done much about it is because lobbying companies are frequently employed to influence politicians and pressure/petitioning to your MP is sadly one of the only ways to be heard."
Others took a different stance. "I agree that anything that might be toxic to our babies should be avoided if possible and I even bought glass bottles for ds [darling son]," said one mother, writing as "Liath". "But when I looked into it myself I couldn't find anything that would convince me there was a really serious risk."
Sally Ruffell, co-founder of the Netmums website, said: "My message to mothers is to not panic.
"The science on BPA is still unclear and people should buy whatever makes them feel comfortable. Part of the problem is that BPA-free baby bottles tend to be more expensive than the versions that do contain the chemical. It may be that they're more expensive to produce but I think a lot of mothers are frustrated that they have to pay more to be on the safe side. It's also rather odd that all the manufacturers insist that BPA is safe and yet they're all bringing out BPA-free bottles anyway."
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments