The New York Times published an editorial article yesterday stating that The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has reported of a conflict of interest between the FDA and a committee that was used to evaluate the safety of bisphenol-A, or BPA.
“The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported over the weekend that the chairman of the advisory panel sifting through the evidence leads a research center that recently received a $5 million donation from an outspoken critic of government regulation who believes BPA is “perfectly safe.” The donor also says he told the panel chairman so in several conversations.”
“The article reported that Charles Gelman, a retired manufacturer of medical equipment, had made the donation to the University of Michigan’s Risk Science Center, which is co-directed by Martin Philbert, a professor of toxicology. Dr. Philbert sits on the F.D.A.’s Science Board and heads up the board’s subcommittee that will help advise the agency on whether BPA is safe enough to use in food containers. According to the newspaper, Dr. Philbert did not disclose the donation to the F.D.A. When informed of the donation, a high F.D.A. official looked into the matter and said he was satisfied that there was no conflict of interest because Dr. Philbert’s salary was not being paid through the donation. That is an incredibly narrow definition of what might constitute a conflict.”
Like I’ve said before, as long as their are other alternatives, I’m going to play it safe and continue to avoid BPA.
I’m with you on this one.