“Where are all the sick people who used plastics all their lives?”

It’s sad, but it’s that simple.
We ingest AT LEAST 1,000 times more natural carcinogens daily than man-made chemicals. That’s why NIH is approaching BPA cautiously as there is more important carcinogens to look at.

But if you want to go along with this line of thinking, shouldn’t we prioritize which is the worse carcinogen and work on banning that first? Let’s start with smoking, alcohol, coffee, and then coke. Those have much deadlier effects than BPA (especially when tested on mice!).

Rusty,
About your “Our Stolen Future website” reference--- only uses anecdotal evidence about humans and shows only scientific evidence on rats. You can’t correlate rats/mice with humans. The correlation factor is all over the map; it could be 1,000,000; it could be 1.

Don’t worry about stepping on toes. This is actually good questions that should be brought up <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />. And that’s why NIH has been studying it for a while.

-Barry