Bisphenol A: EFSA launches full re-evaluation focussing on exposure and possible low dose effects

EFSA News Story:: The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has started work on its new risk assessment of bisphenol A (BPA), used in food contact materials

 focussing in particular on exposure of vulnerable groups. The new opinion will complement earlier scientific advice provided at the request of the European Commission. EFSA will review all the available data and scientific studies on dietary exposure published since its 2006 opinion on BPA and also take into consideration the contribution of non-dietary sources to overall exposure to BPA. Experts on EFSA’s Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF) will further evaluate uncertainties about the possible relevance to human health of some BPA-related effects observed in rodents at low dose levels. New findings from ongoing studies on low dose effects as well as on dietary and non-dietary exposure to BPA will be considered as they become available during 2012. EFSA is also convening a Colloquium of international experts to debate the most recent scientific evidence of low dose effects in toxicology and the challenges this poses for risk assessment.

At its February 2012 plenary meeting the CEF Panel proposed a co-ordinated work plan for the full re-evaluation of the human risks associated with exposure to BPA through the diet by May 2013. This initiative was taken in light of EFSA’s ongoing monitoring of scientific research on BPA and the CEF Panel’s further consideration of new scientific studies. Two multidisciplinary working groups of experts have been established to focus, respectively, on the hazard characterisation of BPA (concerning its toxicological effects) and on exposure to BPA (how and how much BPA is absorbed by the human body). To enhance EU-wide cooperation, experts from national authorities undertaking related scientific work on BPA have also been invited to contribute to the working groups.

Food Contact Material - BPA issues

 LinkedIn: E.C. is 27 countries and 1 market, whereas U.S.A. is 50 states and 1 country (1 market).
The French National Assembly has passed a bill that bans all food contact packaging containing Bisphenol A (BPA) from 2014. EFSA rejected the French bill.

The U.S. FDA agreed to rule on whether to ban BPA use in food and beverage packaging by March 31, 2012 in the District Court for the Southern district of New York (per Chicago Tribune December 7, 2011). Please take note that NRDC sued U.S. FDA in 2010 asking the court to require the agency to respond to 2008 NRDC filed a petition.

Questions:
- Do you think EFSA can ask the French National Assembly to nullify this bill?
- Do you think U.S. FDA can simply walk away ignoring this issue?
- What will happen if either one of them agrees to ban BPA use in food contact packaging



Randall Ehrsam, MA CHENG like this
23 comments • Jump to most recent comments

Follow Michael
Michael Watkins • In my view, FDA is comfortable with the safety of packaging using BPA based materials in contact with food and beverages. Proof of this is found on the FDA website:

“Studies employing standardized toxicity tests used globally for regulatory decision making thus far have supported the safety of current low levels of human exposure to BPA.”

“FDA is not recommending that families change the use of infant formula or foods, as the benefit of a stable source of good nutrition outweighs the potential risk from BPA exposure.”

The National Toxicology Program (NTP) Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction, part of the National Institutes of Health, completed a review of BPA in September 2008. Included in this review was the plethora of non-standardized toxicity studies. They use five different terms to describe its level of concern about the different effects of chemicals: negligible concern, minimal concern, some concern, concern, and serious concern. They expressed “some concern for effects on the brain, behavior, and prostate gland in fetuses, infants, and children at current human expo­sures to bisphenol A and “minimal concern for effects on the mammary gland and an earlier age for puberty for females in fetuses, infants, and children at current human exposures to bisphenol A” and “negligible concern” for other outcomes. According to FDA:

“Overall, the current literature cannot yet be fully inter­preted for biological or experimental consis­tency or for relevance to human health. Part of the difficulty for evaluating consistency lies in reconciling findings of different studies that use different experimental designs and different specific behavioral tests to measure the same dimension of behavior.”

Under pressure by NTP, FDA agreed to do additional testing. This testing is underway, and to date, no results have been found to support changing the current FDA position.

FDA has announced it will make a final ruling by March 31, 2012, on whether bisphenol A (BPA) should be banned from use in packaging for food and drinks.

In my view, BPA will not be banned by FDA. However, in the unlikely event that it is, we can close down can plants and ramp up production in glass jar and bottle plants.
3 months ago• Like• Reply privately• Flag as inappropriate 1

Follow Nick (Wai-ho)
Nick (Wai-ho) Tang • Dear Michael

Please note that glass jar and bottle require a cap (metal or plastic). Metal cap (lug cap, PT cap or CT cap) requires coating of plate. Besides BPA, there are BADGE, BFDGE and NOGE to deal with too. On top of this complication, sealing compound has other critical areas to deal with too. They are all Food Contact Materials (In the U.S., it is named as Food Contact Substance).

We should not forget PET, PP.....containers with plastic cap. They are FCM or FCS. The 1935/2004/EC framework has complicated the issues vis-a-vis U.S. FDA GRAS.

Goosh...supplying and buying food packaging material used to be lot of fun. Not any more nowadays, food packaging people are to read and prepare a lot of documents and certification.
3 months ago• Like

Follow Michael
Michael Watkins • Closures for bottles and jars do not necessarily require epoxy coatings. So BPA, BADGE, etc. may be avoided by using jars and bottles. Of course, alternative materials used for closures can also cause chemicals to migrate into food or beverages, as well. Avoiding epoxy could simply trade one problem for another.

You bring up BADGE as well. I thought that the BADGE issue had been addressed several times. In 2004, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) reported that:

“…the Panel concluded that BADGE and its chlorohydrins (BADGE.2HCl, BADGE.HCl and BADGE.H2O.HCl) do not raise concern for carcinogenicity and genotoxicity in vivo, respectively.

On the basis of the available experimental data, a Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) can be established for BADGE and its hydrolysis products. Considering the No-Observed-Adverse-Effect-Level (NOAEL) of 15 mg/kg b.w./day derived from the oral chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study in the rat with BADGE, and applying an uncertainty factor of 100, a TDI of 0.15 mg/kg b.w. can be established for BADGE. As BADGE is rapidly and extensively metabolised in vivo into the corresponding mono- and bis-diol derivatives BADGE.H2O and BADGE.2H2O, the Panel includes these in the TDI.

For the BADGE chlorohydrins BADGE.2HCl, BADGE.HCl, BADGE.HCl.H2O, in view of the lack of genotoxicity in vivo, the Panel considers that the current restriction of 1 mg/kg of food remains appropriate.”

So I thought this issue had been resolved. Most current concern seems to be on BPA migrating into foods and beverages. I would be curious to know if you or others in this group see BADGE or BADGE derivatives (specifically alpha glycols and chlorohydrins) to be of significant concern anywhere now. Thanks.
3 months ago• Like1

Follow Pramod
Pramod Desai • Traditionally an epoxy phenolic lacquer topped with an organosol are used for lug cap interiors in order to provide chemical resistance to acidic pickles and to anchor the PVC plastisols. Each of the three - ep lacquer, organosol and plastisol or under cloud. Are there any established alternatives? I understand a non-PVC plastisol has been established but I do not know if it is in commercial use.
3 months ago• Like

Follow Nick (Wai-ho)
Nick (Wai-ho) Tang • Thank you for the detail information regarding BADGE matters relating to FCM. It is stated in Directive 1895/2005/EC. BFDGE and NOGE are banned while BADGE is still permissible to be used. This issue is resolved.

Coating of plates for lug cap manufacturing and can is very different. Depending on the pH
of the product packed in glass and the cap size used, the coating (FCM) varies from 1-coat system, 2-coats to as much as 3-coats. BADGE is still in used. BPA has not not the issue as almost all coating used do not carry BPA (as far as I know).

You Everybody should be concerned on OML 10 mg/dm2 of all FCM. All FCM manufacturers, particularly the FCM administrators, are required to track the EC directives on FCM/OML/SML matters and U.S. FDA announcement regarding FCS (Food Contact Substances) that relates to their FCM manufactures and continue to update and to follow the rules. We, the packaging veterans, should keep on highlighting the FCM matters to the new food processing and packaging in-comers, whether they are in the purchasing, manufacturing, sales and marketing – both buyer and seller side.

FCM is becoming part of the food when and after it is packed? Don’t you agree?
3 months ago• Like

Follow Nick (Wai-ho)
Nick (Wai-ho) Tang • Dear Pramod

Yes, there is. It is called "Pano Blue". It looks like a "ring-lined TPE" lug cap. Hope to see that it is "polyester" and the coating is also "polyester". Personally, I am glad that will come out in mass scale and will benfit the "Vacuum Packed in Glass" sector of food packaging and FCM.

I don't have enough information. Let us find together.
3 months ago• Like

Follow Pramod
Pramod Desai • Dear Wai-ho, Nick Tang thanks for the info. But are you referring to Pano caps which are distinct from Lug caps. Anyway, for low pH pickles, the base coat of an epoxy-phenolic lacquer will be a must. Or has a polyester replaced this EP family of lacquers for chemical resistance too? And what about pvc plastisols? Kindly advise.
3 months ago• Like

Follow Nick (Wai-ho)
Nick (Wai-ho) Tang • Pano makes lug caps too. Their latest award "Pano Blue" cap is a step version of lug cap possibly a 63 mm size. I don’t understand why blue colour. Believe this is polyester TPE on polyester coating (laminated). I have to find out. This is new and requires market experience.

Are you food packers packing mango chutney or are you supplying lug caps to food companies packing this product. This product, my experience, is very corrosive. If you are a lug cap producer, you may want to work with Hoba PPG and ask them for their 3-coat system. If you are WCEA India licensee , you know the spec already.

Please be careful when selecting plastisol - sealing compound:- ADC (Azodicarbonamide), Phthalate, 2-EHA, possibly ESBO (there is no concern yet).

Mango Chutney is an exporting item to Europe in millions of packages. Well, you and/or your customer may have to go through rounds of cap and package analysis by outside institute to certify non presence of the banned ingredients as well as passing the FCM (coating and plastisol) Overall Migration Limit test.
3 months ago• Like1

Follow Drs. Rogier
Drs. Rogier van Duin NPDP • Substitution of the epoxy-phenolic basecoat by a polyester based lacquer is possible nowadays. For this there are two obstacles, price of polyester is higher than epoxy and intercoat adhesion of the PVC organosol. We at Diostyl Coatings have several options.
3 months ago• Like2

Follow Nick (Wai-ho)
Nick (Wai-ho) Tang • Drs. Rogier

Are your options PVC? Almost most (or all) of the lug cap manufactrurers are into PVC, polyester system is not economical to change at the moment because of the economical scale of using. Personally, I don't see the immediate move from PVC into polyester. Nor it will within a near 2 years' time. It takesd longer than 2-3 years for the polyester system to gain market experience. This will allow PVC system to adjust and adopt into the complete complaince.

What is more important now is the OML for the FCM for lug cap (coating and plastisol "sealing compound") - 20 dm2/kg. Do you, at Diostyl Coatings, have these including plastisol "sealing compound"? Please let all the lug cap manufacturers in the world note your achievement. Orders willfly in quickly.
3 months ago• Like

Follow Nick (Wai-ho)
Nick (Wai-ho) Tang • There are, at least, two world renowned and reputable coating manufacturers that can supply BPA-free coating for food cans. Do it right the first time for this time and be the first one to take off while everybody is waiting EFSA or U.S. FDA decision.
1 month ago• Like

Follow Nick (Wai-ho)
Nick (Wai-ho) Tang • Forbes Magazine March 5 reported Campbell Soup is phasing out BPA and is using BPA alternatives for their soup cans. What does this mean? Do you think competitors will simply sit and wait? What do you think U.S. FDA will decide this month on BPA? What do you think EFSA will say?
1 month ago• Like

Follow Randy
Randy Ross • Our company supplies soup cans for a number of large packers of soup. Through a co pack agreement some of our cans are used with the Campbell’s products and we do engage them from time to time. Campbell’s will begin what I believe will be a 2 to 4 year transition in can coatings. While the industry has 40 years experience with epoxy liners, the new liners are still maturing. Some soup ingredients can be quite a challenge, that said, over time, and at additional expense the industry will move to Poly, Vinyl or Acrylic liners depending on the products packed. In the mean time Campbell’s will introduce a high end line of soups in pouches to pacify the non science panic mongers.
1 month ago• Like

Follow Drs. Rogier
Drs. Rogier van Duin NPDP • Why go for vinyl or acrylic if polyesters have the future? Acrylics might be associated with taste differences. And Vinyls coatings release hydrochloric acids. And if you want to go green, some raw materials for polyesters now are from renewable sources.
1 month ago• Like

Follow Randy
Randy Ross • I would agree that vinyls have their issues, but all the non epoxy's do. If you look, vinyl is being used in hot filled tomato's quite extensively. Poly's have issues with some of the input ingredents, so at the moment you will find all three being used.
1 month ago• Like

Follow John
John Greenwald • Any alternate coating (to epoxy) for food has to be carefully considered in regard to potential future concerns regarding all ingredients and by-products. BPA has been extensively tested and found safe to use by all major global regulatory agencies. Yet the drum beat for removal continues. I predict attention will soon shift to whatever new coating type becomes popular. There exists a considerable fear of chemicals in the general population.
1 month ago• Like

Follow Randy
Randy Ross • Mr. Greenwals speaks the truth. We may be jumping out of the frying pan, but into ?
1 month ago• Like

Follow Michael
Michael Watkins • Randy,
Twenty years ago, vinyls were "evil" with dioxin scares in Europe, etc. Coke and others had significant programs to remove vinyls from all beverage cans. Now we will see vinyls in food cans? I always thought vinyls were unjustly maligned - and I was not in the vinyl business. Will the industry now ignore the anti-vinyl propaganda of the 1990s? Thanks.
1 month ago• Like

Follow John
John Greenwald • Vinyl coatings did get a bad rap, largely due to the liver cancer in vinyl polymer plants caused by HUGE exposure to vinyl chloride monomer. That said, vinyls still have environmental issues due to high organic solvent content and HCl emissions. Epoxies can and largely have been converted to water-borne which benefits cost and environmental issues. Acrylics will have limited use due to high flavor issues with residual monomers and polyesters will degrade under common food processing and storage conditions.
1 month ago• Like

Follow Alan
Alan Randall • John's comments regarding vinyl, epoxy and acrylic technologies are right on target. It appears that in addition to being "green", any chemical products or chemical by-products identified, by any of the number of extraction requirements globally, will need to be considered. We may be simply moving from one "forest" of (extraction) peaks to a totally unknown forest of peaks. For each peak identified the standardized toxicity tests used globally for regulatory decision will need to be performed. Any carcinogenicity and genotoxicity or similar issue will need to be identified. This is in addition all of the flavor, pack test and other performance testing required to introduce a new coating to the market. The amount of time needed to bring a new coating to this market will increase substantially. Epoxy and vinyl technologies offer a lot of technical advantages and have been well studied. If the public fear of BPA containing materials does drive the industry to new technologies, based on the amount of environmental and performance testing required, what form will the future food or beverage container take?

Food Contact Material - BPA issues

LinkedIn:

Food Contact Material - BPA issues
E.C. is 27 countries and 1 market, whereas U.S.A. is 50 states and 1 country (1 market).
The French National Assembly has passed a bill that bans all food contact packaging containing Bisphenol A (BPA) from 2014. EFSA rejected the French bill.

The U.S. FDA agreed to rule on whether to ban BPA use in food and beverage packaging by March 31, 2012 in the District Court for the Southern district of New York (per Chicago Tribune December 7, 2011). Please take note that NRDC sued U.S. FDA in 2010 asking the court to require the agency to respond to 2008 NRDC filed a petition.

Questions:
- Do you think EFSA can ask the French National Assembly to nullify this bill?
- Do you think U.S. FDA can simply walk away ignoring this issue?
- What will happen if either one of them agrees to ban BPA use in food contact packaging




John's comments regarding vinyl, epoxy and acrylic technologies are right on target. It appears that in addition to being "green", any chemical products or chemical by-products identified, by any of the number of extraction requirements globally, will need to be considered. We may be simply moving from one "forest" of (extraction) peaks to a totally unknown forest of peaks. For each peak identified the standardized toxicity tests used globally for regulatory decision will need to be performed. Any carcinogenicity and genotoxicity or similar issue will need to be identified. This is in addition all of the flavor, pack test and other performance testing required to introduce a new coating to the market. The amount of time needed to bring a new coating to this market will increase substantially. Epoxy and vinyl technologies offer a lot of technical advantages and have been well studied. If the public fear of BPA containing materials does drive the industry to new technologies, based on the amount of environmental and performance testing required, what form will the future food or beverage container take?

BPA to be looked at in REACH

ECHA Press Release BPA, which has long been a concern because of its ability to disrupt hormone systems, is due to be evaluated by Germany in 2012.

In the draft list it was identified by its systematic name 4,4'-isopropylidenediphenol.

Member states will receive €50,000 per substance and have 12 months to complete their assessments. After that they may conclude there are no risks or issue legally binding requests for more information.

The evaluation list is not a blacklist signalling automatic regulatory action. Chemicals on it have been chosen according to criteria drawn up by ECHA, including extent of exposure and possible health or environmental risks.

LinkedIn discussion of FDA and EFSA positions and likely outcomes

Food Contact Material - BPA issues
E.C. is 27 countries and 1 market, whereas U.S.A. is 50 states and 1 country (1 market).
The French National Assembly has passed a bill that bans all food contact packaging containing Bisphenol A (BPA) from 2014. EFSA rejected the French bill.

The U.S. FDA agreed to rule on whether to ban BPA use in food and beverage packaging by March 31, 2012 in the District Court for the Southern district of New York (per Chicago Tribune December 7, 2011). Please take note that NRDC sued U.S. FDA in 2010 asking the court to require the agency to respond to 2008 NRDC filed a petition.

Questions:
- Do you think EFSA can ask the French National Assembly to nullify this bill?
- Do you think U.S. FDA can simply walk away ignoring this issue?
- What will happen if either one of them agrees to ban BPA use in food contact packaging .
2 months ago
Like CommentFollow Flag More
Randall Ehrsam likes this
11 comments

Follow Michael
Michael Watkins • In my view, FDA is comfortable with the safety of packaging using BPA based materials in contact with food and beverages. Proof of this is found on the FDA website:

“Studies employing standardized toxicity tests used globally for regulatory decision making thus far have supported the safety of current low levels of human exposure to BPA.”

“FDA is not recommending that families change the use of infant formula or foods, as the benefit of a stable source of good nutrition outweighs the potential risk from BPA exposure.”

The National Toxicology Program (NTP) Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction, part of the National Institutes of Health, completed a review of BPA in September 2008. Included in this review was the plethora of non-standardized toxicity studies. They use five different terms to describe its level of concern about the different effects of chemicals: negligible concern, minimal concern, some concern, concern, and serious concern. They expressed “some concern for effects on the brain, behavior, and prostate gland in fetuses, infants, and children at current human expo­sures to bisphenol A and “minimal concern for effects on the mammary gland and an earlier age for puberty for females in fetuses, infants, and children at current human exposures to bisphenol A” and “negligible concern” for other outcomes. According to FDA:

“Overall, the current literature cannot yet be fully inter­preted for biological or experimental consis­tency or for relevance to human health. Part of the difficulty for evaluating consistency lies in reconciling findings of different studies that use different experimental designs and different specific behavioral tests to measure the same dimension of behavior.”

Under pressure by NTP, FDA agreed to do additional testing. This testing is underway, and to date, no results have been found to support changing the current FDA position.

FDA has announced it will make a final ruling by March 31, 2012, on whether bisphenol A (BPA) should be banned from use in packaging for food and drinks.

In my view, BPA will not be banned by FDA. However, in the unlikely event that it is, we can close down can plants and ramp up production in glass jar and bottle plants.
2 months ago• Like1

Follow Nick (Wai-ho)
Nick (Wai-ho) Tang • Dear Michael

Please note that glass jar and bottle require a cap (metal or plastic). Metal cap (lug cap, PT cap or CT cap) requires coating of plate. Besides BPA, there are BADGE, BFDGE and NOGE to deal with too. On top of this complication, sealing compound has other critical areas to deal with too. They are all Food Contact Materials (In the U.S., it is named as Food Contact Substance).

We should not forget PET, PP.....containers with plastic cap. They are FCM or FCS. The 1935/2004/EC framework has complicated the issues vis-a-vis U.S. FDA GRAS.

Goosh...supplying and buying food packaging material used to be lot of fun. Not any more nowadays, food packaging people are to read and prepare a lot of documents and certification.
2 months ago• Like

Follow Michael
Michael Watkins • Closures for bottles and jars do not necessarily require epoxy coatings. So BPA, BADGE, etc. may be avoided by using jars and bottles. Of course, alternative materials used for closures can also cause chemicals to migrate into food or beverages, as well. Avoiding epoxy could simply trade one problem for another.

You bring up BADGE as well. I thought that the BADGE issue had been addressed several times. In 2004, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) reported that:

“…the Panel concluded that BADGE and its chlorohydrins (BADGE.2HCl, BADGE.HCl and BADGE.H2O.HCl) do not raise concern for carcinogenicity and genotoxicity in vivo, respectively.

On the basis of the available experimental data, a Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) can be established for BADGE and its hydrolysis products. Considering the No-Observed-Adverse-Effect-Level (NOAEL) of 15 mg/kg b.w./day derived from the oral chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study in the rat with BADGE, and applying an uncertainty factor of 100, a TDI of 0.15 mg/kg b.w. can be established for BADGE. As BADGE is rapidly and extensively metabolised in vivo into the corresponding mono- and bis-diol derivatives BADGE.H2O and BADGE.2H2O, the Panel includes these in the TDI.

For the BADGE chlorohydrins BADGE.2HCl, BADGE.HCl, BADGE.HCl.H2O, in view of the lack of genotoxicity in vivo, the Panel considers that the current restriction of 1 mg/kg of food remains appropriate.”

So I thought this issue had been resolved. Most current concern seems to be on BPA migrating into foods and beverages. I would be curious to know if you or others in this group see BADGE or BADGE derivatives (specifically alpha glycols and chlorohydrins) to be of significant concern anywhere now. Thanks.
2 months ago• Like1

Follow Pramod
Pramod Desai • Traditionally an epoxy phenolic lacquer topped with an organosol are used for lug cap interiors in order to provide chemical resistance to acidic pickles and to anchor the PVC plastisols. Each of the three - ep lacquer, organosol and plastisol or under cloud. Are there any established alternatives? I understand a non-PVC plastisol has been established but I do not know if it is in commercial use.
2 months ago• Like

Follow Nick (Wai-ho)
Nick (Wai-ho) Tang • Thank you for the detail information regarding BADGE matters relating to FCM. It is stated in Directive 1895/2005/EC. BFDGE and NOGE are banned while BADGE is still permissible to be used. This issue is resolved.

Coating of plates for lug cap manufacturing and can is very different. Depending on the pH
of the product packed in glass and the cap size used, the coating (FCM) varies from 1-coat system, 2-coats to as much as 3-coats. BADGE is still in used. BPA has not not the issue as almost all coating used do not carry BPA (as far as I know).

You Everybody should be concerned on OML 10 mg/dm2 of all FCM. All FCM manufacturers, particularly the FCM administrators, are required to track the EC directives on FCM/OML/SML matters and U.S. FDA announcement regarding FCS (Food Contact Substances) that relates to their FCM manufactures and continue to update and to follow the rules. We, the packaging veterans, should keep on highlighting the FCM matters to the new food processing and packaging in-comers, whether they are in the purchasing, manufacturing, sales and marketing – both buyer and seller side.

FCM is becoming part of the food when and after it is packed? Don’t you agree?
1 month ago• Like

Follow Nick (Wai-ho)
Nick (Wai-ho) Tang • Dear Pramod

Yes, there is. It is called "Pano Blue". It looks like a "ring-lined TPE" lug cap. Hope to see that it is "polyester" and the coating is also "polyester". Personally, I am glad that will come out in mass scale and will benfit the "Vacuum Packed in Glass" sector of food packaging and FCM.

I don't have enough information. Let us find together.
1 month ago• Like

Follow Pramod
Pramod Desai • Dear Wai-ho, Nick Tang thanks for the info. But are you referring to Pano caps which are distinct from Lug caps. Anyway, for low pH pickles, the base coat of an epoxy-phenolic lacquer will be a must. Or has a polyester replaced this EP family of lacquers for chemical resistance too? And what about pvc plastisols? Kindly advise.
1 month ago• Like

Follow Nick (Wai-ho)
Nick (Wai-ho) Tang • Pano makes lug caps too. Their latest award "Pano Blue" cap is a step version of lug cap possibly a 63 mm size. I don’t understand why blue colour. Believe this is polyester TPE on polyester coating (laminated). I have to find out. This is new and requires market experience.

Are you food packers packing mango chutney or are you supplying lug caps to food companies packing this product. This product, my experience, is very corrosive. If you are a lug cap producer, you may want to work with Hoba PPG and ask them for their 3-coat system. If you are WCEA India licensee , you know the spec already.

Please be careful when selecting plastisol - sealing compound:- ADC (Azodicarbonamide), Phthalate, 2-EHA, possibly ESBO (there is no concern yet).

Mango Chutney is an exporting item to Europe in millions of packages. Well, you and/or your customer may have to go through rounds of cap and package analysis by outside institute to certify non presence of the banned ingredients as well as passing the FCM (coating and plastisol) Overall Migration Limit test.
1 month ago• Like1

Follow Drs. Rogier
Drs. Rogier van Duin NPDP • Substitution of the epoxy-phenolic basecoat by a polyester based lacquer is possible nowadays. For this there are two obstacles, price of polyester is higher than epoxy and intercoat adhesion of the PVC organosol. We at Diostyl Coatings have several options.
1 month ago• Like2

Follow Nick (Wai-ho)
Nick (Wai-ho) Tang • Drs. Rogier

Are your options PVC? Almost most (or all) of the lug cap manufactrurers are into PVC, polyester system is not economical to change at the moment because of the economical scale of using. Personally, I don't see the immediate move from PVC into polyester. Nor it will within a near 2 years' time. It takesd longer than 2-3 years for the polyester system to gain market experience. This will allow PVC system to adjust and adopt into the complete complaince.

What is more important now is the OML for the FCM for lug cap (coating and plastisol "sealing compound") - 20 dm2/kg. Do you, at Diostyl Coatings, have these including plastisol "sealing compound"? Please let all the lug cap manufacturers in the world note your achievement. Orders willfly in quickly.
1 month ago• Like

Follow Nick (Wai-ho)
Nick (Wai-ho) Tang • There are, at least, two world renowned and reputable coating manufacturers that can supply BPA-free coating for food cans. Do it right the first time for this time and be the first one to take off while everybody is waiting EFSA or U.S. FDA decision.

FDA to make final ruling on Bisphenol A | CanTech International

CanTech International: The US Food and Drug Administration will make a final decision on whether or not the use of Bisphenol A (BPA) in packaging for food and drinks should be banned at the end of March.

The group has committed to decide by 31 March, 2012. After a three-year delay, the agency agreed to address the use of the chemical as part of a settlement reached today (Friday 9 December) with the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).

The agreement, approved by US District Judge Barbara Jones in New York, said the FDA must issue a final decision, not a tentative response.

DIY science: should you try this at home?

The Guardian: Deeb lives in a small Massachusetts town called Marlborough. He's retired, in his mid-70s, and although he's lived in the US almost all his life, he still has a strong Syrian accent, which gets stronger as he becomes more incensed down the phone.

Three years ago, on 5 August 2008, a policeman happened to be driving past Deeb's house. "He saw smoke billowing from the air conditioner in an upstairs room, so he called the fire department." Deeb speaks in short, exact phrases, as if he considers our conversation to be like a chemical experiment, requiring complete precision.

A plug had shorted in the bedroom. The fire department put out the fire, glanced into the basement and immediately called for emergency reinforcements.

"The whole fire department came," Victor says. "The FBI. Even the CIA was here. It couldn't have been any more crazy. They went into the sewer system to see if I was dumping anything down the toilet."

What they had found in the basement was 100 bottles of chemicals. None was hazardous. There was nothing poisonous. "I was working on a coating for the inside of beverage cans containing no Bisphenol A," Deeb says.

BPA, he explains, is standard in beverage can coatings. The problem is that it can seep into the drink and play havoc with our hormones, causing men to grow breasts and girls as young as seven to have periods. Back in 2008, he says, "there were few references in the media to the negative effect of BPA. Currently, there is a deluge of articles. So my desire to eliminate BPA was ahead of its time." He pauses. "I spent an enormous amount of time with the authorities, trying to explain what I was working on, but they had no perception. No concept."

And so he watched as they hauled away all the chemicals and test tubes in a truck. "I had a box full of files and notes and comments," he says. "Twenty years' work. They hired two PhD chemists to go through the box, looking for confirmation that there were hazardous materials in the basement. When they couldn't find anything, they left the box out in the rain. It destroyed all my notes. Twenty years of my life and work and efforts to help others down the drain."

"When they realised their mistake, I presume they apologised and paid you a settlement," I say.

"The opposite!" he says. "They're suing me for the cost of emptying my basement."

Belgium aims to ban BPA in food containers for young children

ChemSec: Since March 2011 the use of Bisphenol A (BPA) in baby bottles has been banned throughout the EU. The Belgian senate is now following Denmark and going a step further than EU legislation by proposing a national ban on BPA in all food contact materials aimed at children under three years.

The new law is proposed to enter into force on 1 January 2013, however it must first be approved by the Belgian lower house.
BPA is an endocrine disruptor, which even at low doses has been linked to health effects such as cancer, obesity, and fertility problems. It is one of the world's most widely manufactured chemicals, mainly used in plastic materials.

BPA can leach out of products we come in contact with every day, such as cash receipts and food tin cans. BPA has also been reported to leach into drinking water after water pipes have been restored by relining with an epoxy coating containing BPA.

FDA to make final ruling on Bisphenol A

CanTech International: The US Food and Drug Administration will make a final decision on whether or not the use of Bisphenol A (BPA) in packaging for food and drinks should be banned at the end of March.

The group has committed to decide by 31 March, 2012. After a three-year delay, the agency agreed to address the use of the chemical as part of a settlement reached today (Friday 9 December) with the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).

The agreement, approved by US District Judge Barbara Jones in New York, said the FDA must issue a final decision, not a tentative response.

Potentially harmful BPA still present in canned foods

FOOD Magazine: Research conducted by the Breast Cancer Fund has found harmful levels of Bisphenol A (BPA) in a number of popular canned products.

The study by the US organization found many of the canned goods commonly used over Thanksgiving and Christmas, including gravy, carnation milk, corn, beans and cranberry sauce, contain potentially damaging levels of BPA.

“Single servings of almost half of the products tested had levels of BPA comparable to levels that laboratory studies have linked to adverse health effects,” the report said.

Jeanne Rizzo, president and chief executive of the Breast Cancer Fund said families should be able to feel safe when eating festive meals.

"How many more Thanksgivings will families have to worry about this uninvited guest before manufacturers finally decide to take it out of cans?”

Beyond BPA: We need to get tough on toxics

The Globe and Mail: In 2006, the Harper government introduced the Chemicals Management Plan, saying it was going to get “tough on toxics.” But recent research finds that, even though it added BPA to the list of toxic substances, the chemical’s still turning up in foods that Canadians commonly consume. Even though we know it leaches into foods such as tomato soup, it continues to be used as an additive in the linings of tin cans.

The critical flaw in our law is that finding a substance “toxic” doesn’t automatically mean the government must actually restrict its use. It “may” regulate, as it did by prohibiting BPA in baby bottles, but it may also choose to keep the substance on the market for economic reasons, or to avoid stigmatizing a particular company’s product.

Canned soup and BPA: a toxic hazard

timeforwellness.org: A tin of canned soup a day could increase your bisphenol A (BPA) levels by 20%. BPA exposure has been linked to obesity, heart disease and diabetes.

A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that when some 75 adults ate fresh soup for 5 days 77% tested positive for BPA, but after 5 days of canned soup 100% tested positive for the chemical. On average urinary BPA levels rose by 20% after the canned soup versus fresh.

The investigators were reportedly shocked at the increase in BPA after the canned soup. Commenting on the findings researcher Karin Michaels said: "The magnitude of the rise in urinary BPA we observed after just one serving of soup was unexpected and may be of concern among individuals who regularly consume foods from cans or drink several canned beverages daily.”

Also reported in FoodConsumer.org