By Sarah Schmidt, Canwest News Service

TTAWA — Consumer groups on Tuesday ramped up their campaign to shame food and beverage companies to take a hormone-disrupting chemical linked to breast and prostate cancer out of their packaging by outing their business plans.

The survey of 20 publicly trade companies with products for sale in Canada, by U.S. shareholder groups As You Sow and Green Century Capital Management and released in Canada by Environmental Defence, found that all but four have failed to develop safer alternatives — and only one company has begun using a substitute.

“No single company that responded stands out as a clear leader in addressing the risks of BPA (bisphenol A). None of the companies presented clear plans for phasing out BPA from all applications for which alternatives exist,” the report, titled Seeking Safety Packaging, states.

The report highlights some positive first steps, though.

Hain Celestial, makers of Rice Dream and Soy Dream, Heinz and Nestle received the top grades, ranging from C to D+. These companies are researching and testing alternatives to BPA and are planning to phase out the chemical, but only Hain Celestial has a firm time frame.

The report highlights Heinz as the only company surveyed currently using an alternative to BPA in some of its tins, specifically for its baby food can lacquers.

Kellogg, General Mills, PepsiCo and ConAgra were each assigned a D (Kellogg) or a D- (the remaining three); all are exploring alternatives, but any phase-out of the estrogen-mimicking chemical is not imminent, the report notes.

Campbell, Coca Cola, Kraft, Hershey, J.M. Smucker, McCormick and Del Monte each received a failing grade — either because they failed to indicate that they were making any effort in this area besides monitoring the industry or made only passing references to their efforts to identify safe alternatives.

Six companies did not respond to the survey before the deadline, and flunked on the question of transparency. They include Unilever, Chiquita, Dean Foods, Hormel, Sara Lee and SYSCO.

The report comes as pressure builds for the food and beverage industry to follow the lead of the manufacturers of polycarbonate baby bottles and water bottles. After widespread consumer pressure — and a pending ban of BPA in baby bottles in Canada coming into effect later this year — makers of hard plastic bottles have switched to BPA-free products.

They include Nalgene and Philips Avent.

“One segment of BPA users has learned their lesson, and unfortunately, the tin-can manufacturers haven’t learned a darn thing,” said Rick Smith, executive director of Environmental Defence. “The lesson is when there’s an easy alternative available, consumers won’t tolerate any level of a known hormone disrupting chemical in their food and drink packaging.”

Health Canada said “uncertainty” raised in some studies about the possible detrimental health effects on babies when exposed to “low levels”‘ of the chemical warranted the drastic action on baby bottles. The first step to the ban was listing the chemical as a toxic substance.

Citing new research linking exposure to the chemical, even at low doses, to birth and development defects, breast and prostate cancer, heart disease and diabetes, Smith said it’s time Health Canada takes the next step.

“This report clearly highlights the need for the federal government to set another international precedent by removing BPA from all food and beverage containers,” said Smith, co-author of the forthcoming book Slow Death by Rubber Duck: How the Toxic Chemistry of Everyday Life Affects Our Health. “Companies on their own are obviously not doing enough to ensure that Canadian adults and children, who are most susceptible to BPA’s effects, are not exposed to this harmful chemical.”

Unilever, for one, isn’t moved to change its business practices.

In a statement, spokesman John Coyne said that while the company uses the lowest possible level of BPA in its can liners, “the best science available indicates that BPA found in (food) packaging materials, used to ensure product quality and safety, presents no concern to any portion of the population at current levels of exposure,” including infants and children.

In a statement, a spokesman for Heinz, which has eliminated BPA from its baby-food can lacquers, said he’s pleased his company’s efforts were acknowledged in the report.

“Heinz is pleased to be recognized for our leadership in moving to alternative materials that are BPA-free,” said Michael Mullen.

He added, though, that he disagrees with the authors of the report about the safety of the chemical. “Although scientific bodies worldwide have concluded that minute levels of BPA are safe, Heinz is proactively exploring alternatives to BPA in response to consumer opinion.”

Schmidt, Sarah. “Companies should get BPA out of packaging: Groups.” Canwest News Service. Calgary Herald. Web. 30 Aug. 2009. <http://www.calgaryherald.com/health/Companies+should+packaging+Groups/1519284/story.html>.

This entry was posted on Sunday, August 30th, 2009 at 6:45 pm and is filed under Avent Products, BPA Articles, BPA-Free Baby Bottles, BPA-Free Breast Flow Bottles, BPA-Free Breast Pumps, BPA-Free Pacifiers, BPA-Free Sterilizers, BPA-Free Water Bottles, Dr. Brown's Products, Nalgene Products. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.