California's state legislature claims to be progressive, its newest governor does as well. Taking a stand against science is usually the way to go for people who wrap themselves in such a flag, and San Francisco Assemblyman Philip Y. Ting knows his base. San Francisco is a city that tried to ban Happy Meals and golf, its metropolitan area led the developed world in vaccine denial, a situation that got so bad the state had to pass a law to force parents there to protect children. So he invoked BPA for his receipts bill. BPA is a common plasticizer used for 70 years that became the target of environmental groups a decade ago.
“Most people don’t know that these receipts contain BPA. In fact I was shocked to hear that,” he said. “It’s really commonly, wide-held knowledge that BPA is toxic, and something really that we shouldn’t be touching. So to think that every time I’m getting a receipt I have to touch BPA … seems to be not only irresponsible but also very dangerous.”
"Commonly, wide-held knowledge that BPA is toxic" and we can't touch paper receipts? Where is that common knowledge? No science body in the world agrees with him. He simply accepts a claim by an activist group that claims BPA is linked to “serious health problems, including numerous types of cancer, diabetes, and reproductive issues.”
So is organic food. That is the problem with statistics. Any time you have two curves going the same way, you can use the phrase "linked to", and BPA can be found almost anywhere in trace levels by now.
Like every other chemical can be found. In modern times we can detect anything in anything. That is why sketchy activist groups promote fearmongering about weedkillers "detectable" in breast milk or Chromium-6 in water. Only the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, headed by legendary anti-chemical statistical scaremonger Dr. Linda Birnbaum, can mobilize even tepid concern over correlation to BPA, and only because it is her job to promote statistics over toxicology, biology, and chemistry. You know, actual science.
The dose makes the poison. Even the presence of a pathogen does not equal pathology, or we'd have been extinct long ago. BPA does not bioaccumulate well and unless you personally handle 60,000 receipts per day, you can't possibly get enough BPA to get within 1/12,000th the estrogen of actual estrogen. You know, the endocrine disruptor our body naturally produces.
Just get rid of paper receipts because they are annoying and a digital receipt that can't be lost is better. Don't fabricate nonsense about science and pretend you care about health.
- Trace Chemicals Detectable On Cell Phones Are Not Targeting Women, Or Anyone Else
- BPA Is Everywhere, Except Where It’s Not
- Small Study Claims Trace Prenatal BPA Exposure Causes Depression In Boys
- If You Are Scared Of BPA, JAMA Will Make You Happy
- Will Holding Thermal Printer Paper Really Send Your BPA Levels Soaring?