"Wal-Mart is aiming for a 25 percent reduction from its U.S. stores and a 50 percent reduction from its international operations."
- why the difference? Do they have less faith in Americans to switch to a more environmentally friendly habit?

by Nicole Maestri
Reuters

NEW YORK - Wal-Mart Stores Inc said on Thursday it will cut its worldwide plastic shopping bag waste by an average of 33 percent per store by 2013, an effort the world's biggest retailer said could eliminate more than 135 million pounds of plastic waste globally.

To meet that goal, Wal-Mart stores will give out fewer bags and encourage shoppers to use reusable ones.

The announcement is part of the discount retailer's overarching goal of one day creating zero waste.

It also comes amid a global push to curb the use of plastic bags, which environmentalists say can take up to 1,000 years to disintegrate and pose threats to marine life, birds and other animals.

Earlier this year, San Francisco became the first U.S. city to outlaw non-biodegradable plastic bags from large supermarkets, and the state of California has enacted a law that requires large stores to take back plastic bags and encourage their reuse.

Wal-Mart said its stores in Mexico and the United States are introducing cheaper, affordable reusable bags. While in the United States it currently sells a reusable bag for $1, the retailer said it will begin offering a new reusable bag for 50 cents each.

To reach its goal of reducing plastic bag waste globally by 33 percent, Wal-Mart is aiming for a 25 percent reduction from its U.S. stores and a 50 percent reduction from its international operations.

FDA defends plastic linked with health risks
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR and LINDSEY TANNER
Associated Press Writers

WASHINGTON - With scientists at odds about the risks of a chemical found in plastic baby bottles, metal cans and other food packaging, the government on Tuesday gave consumers some tips on how to reduce their exposure to BPA even as it said the substance is safe.

A Food and Drug Administration advisory committee met as a major study linked bisphenol A to possible risks of heart disease and diabetes. The scientific debate could drag on for years.

"Right now, our tentative conclusion is that it's safe, so we're not recommending any change in habits," said Laura Tarantino, head of the FDA's office of food additive safety. But she acknowledged, "there are a number of things people can do to lower their exposure."

For example, consumers can avoid plastic containers imprinted with the recycling number '7,' as many of those contain BPA. Or, Tarantino said, they can avoid warming food in such containers, as heat helps to release the chemical.

More than 90 percent of Americans have traces of BPA in their bodies, but the FDA says the levels of exposure are too low to pose a health risk, even for infants and children. Other scientists, however, say BPA has been shown to affect the human body even at very low levels.

And Tuesday a study released by the Journal of the American Medical Association suggested a new concern about BPA. Using a health survey of nearly 1,500 adults, the study found that those exposed to higher amounts of BPA were more likely to report having heart disease and diabetes. Because of the possible public health implications, the results "deserve scientific follow-up," its authors said.

The study is preliminary, far from proof that the chemical caused the health problems. Two Dartmouth College analysts of medical research said it raises questions but provides no answers about whether the ubiquitous chemical is harmful.

FDA officials said they are not dismissing such findings. "We recognize the need to resolve the concerning questions that have been raised," said Tarantino, acknowledging that more research is needed. But the FDA is also arguing that the studies with rats and mice it relied on for its assessment are more thorough than some of the human research that has raised doubts.

The agency has asked an outside scientific panel for a second opinion on BPA's safety, and the medical journal article was released to coincide with the advisers' hearing. The FDA has the power to ban or limit use of BPA in food containers and medical devices.

Past animal studies have suggested reproductive and hormone-related problems from BPA. The JAMA study is the largest to examine possible BPA effects in people and the first suggesting a direct link to heart disease, said scientists Frederick vom Saal and John Peterson Myers, both longtime critics of the chemical.

Still, they said more rigorous studies are needed to confirm the results.

Vom Saal is a biological sciences professor at University of Missouri who has served as an expert witness and consultant on BPA litigation. Myers is chief scientist at Environmental Health Sciences, a Charlottesville, Va., nonprofit group. They wrote an editorial accompanying the JAMA study.

BPA is used in hardened plastics and in a wide range of consumer goods, including the lining of metal cans, eyeglass lenses and compact discs. Many scientists believe it can act like the hormone estrogen, and animal studies have linked it with breast, prostate and reproductive system problems and some cancers.

Researchers from Britain and the University of Iowa examined a U.S. government health survey of 1,455 American adults who gave urine samples in 2003-04 and reported whether they had any of several common diseases.

Participants were divided into four groups based on BPA urine amounts; more than 90 percent had detectable BPA in their urine.

A total of 79 had heart attacks, chest pain or other types of cardiovascular disease and 136 had diabetes. There were more than twice as many people with heart disease or diabetes in the highest BPA group than in the lowest BPA group. The study showed no connection between BPA and other ailments, including cancer.

No one in the study had BPA urine amounts showing higher than recommended exposure levels, said co-author Dr. David Melzer, a University of Exeter researcher.

Drs. Lisa Schwartz and Steven Woloshin of the Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice said the study presents no clear information about what might have caused participants' heart disease and diabetes.

"Measuring who has disease and high BPA levels at a single point in time cannot tell you which comes first," Schwartz said.

The study authors acknowledge that it's impossible to rule out that people who already have heart disease or diabetes are somehow more vulnerable to having BPA show up in their urine.

The American Chemistry Council, an industry trade group, said the study is flawed, has substantial limitations and proves nothing.

But Dr. Ana Soto of Tufts University said the study raises enough concerns to warrant government action to limit BPA exposure.

"We shouldn't wait until further studies are done in order to act in protecting humans," said Soto, who has called for more restrictions in the past.

An earlier lab experiment with human fat tissue found that BPA can interfere with a hormone involved in protecting against diabetes, heart disease and obesity. That study appeared online last month in Environmental Health Perspectives, a monthly journal published by the National Institutes of Health.

One of the FDA's outside advisers was skeptical of the JAMA study. "For diabetes, I really don't see it," said Dr. Garret FitzGerald of the University of Pennsylvania. As for a link to heart disease, FitzGerald questioned why the JAMA study did not also find high blood pressure problems in the people exposed to higher amounts of BPA.

Toxicology experts from another government agency have studied BPA and recently completed their own report. They found no strong evidence of health hazards from BPA, but unlike the FDA, said there was "some concern" about possible effects on the brain in fetuses, infants and children.

Several states are considering restricting BPA use, some manufacturers have begun promoting BPA-free baby bottles, and some stores are phasing out baby products containing the chemical. The European Union has said BPA-containing products are safe, but Canada's government has proposed banning the sale of baby bottles with BPA as a precaution.

The FDA advisory panel is expected to make its recommendations to the FDA late next month.

The Associated Press

Bisphenol A, or BPA, a chemical used in consumer goods, was the subject of a federal safety hearing Tuesday where new preliminary research suggested it might be linked to a higher risk of heart disease and diabetes.

BPA is used in lightweight, durable plastics. Products include some baby bottles, sippy cups and reusable food and drink containers, such as reusable sports water bottles and Tupperware, compact discs, DVDs, eyeglass lenses and sports safety goggles and helmets.

Most recyclable, single-use plastic bottles, such as those made for soft drinks and bottled water, don't contain BPA.

Some manufacturers are phasing out BPA in some products and Tupperware's Web site says it does not use BPA in children's products sold in the United States and Canada.

BPA is also in epoxy resins used to make paints, adhesives and canned food liners.

Animal studies have linked BPA with breast, prostate and reproductive system abnormalities and some cancers, but experts disagree on whether it poses health risks for humans.

Government toxicology scientists say that to reduce exposure, people can avoid non-recyclable plastic containers that have the number 7 on the bottom; avoid using these plastics in the microwave, and don't wash them in the dishwasher with harsh detergents.

Sources:

National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences:

http://www.niehs.nih.gov/news/media/questions/sya-bpa.cfm

American Chemistry Council: http://www.americanchemistry.com

By Will Dunham
Reuters

WASHINGTON – The Food and Drug Administration this week reopens the debate over a chemical used in many plastic products -- including baby bottles -- amid mixed messages on its safety from the U.S. government.

An FDA panel of outside experts on Tuesday was set to review the agency's draft report issued last month saying that bisphenol A, or BPA, is safe. Critics argue the FDA has ignored strong evidence in animal studies that BPA is harmful.

Government toxicologists at the U.S. National Institutes of Health on September 3 reiterated their view that BPA presents "some concern" for harmful effects on development of the prostate and brain and for behavioral changes in fetuses, infants and children.

BPA is used to make polycarbonate plastic, a clear shatter-resistant material in products ranging from baby and water bottles to sports safety equipment and medical devices.

It also is used to make durable epoxy resins used as the coating in most food and beverage cans and in dental fillings.

People can consume BPA when it leaches out of plastic into liquid such as baby formula, water or food inside a container.

Environmental and consumer safety groups say studies show the chemical can interfere with how the body absorbs the hormone estrogen, which is key to the development of young bodies.

The NIH's National Toxicology Program, or NTP, became the first U.S. government agency to embrace health concerns regarding BPA. It followed up this draft report with a final report this month reiterating the concerns.

The FDA said the meeting would focus on these worries.

"FDA concludes that an adequate margin of safety exists for BPA at current levels of exposure from food contact uses, for infants and adults," the FDA said in its draft report.

The agency said its findings were based on "a full examination of data considered pivotal to the relevant exposure levels associated with food contact substances."

The European Union's top food safety body said in July the amount of BPA found in baby bottles cannot harm human health.

"Many common consumer products that contribute to healthier and safer lives are based on plastics and resins made from bisphenol A, which has a 50-year safety track record," the American Chemistry Council industry group said in a statement.

Critics have argued the FDA's views are based principally on industry-funded studies clearing the chemical even though many other studies have raised health concerns.

"We have serious concerns about FDA's risk assessment for bisphenol A," Sonya Lunder of the Environmental Working Group advocacy organization said in a telephone interview.

"I am hopeful the agency will begin to listen to the large amount of scientific evidence from independent scientists about the consequences of bisphenol A, particularly on children's health, and weigh that very heavily against industry-supported science that has been informing their decisions," said Elizabeth Hitchcock of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group.

Some leading retailers plan to stop selling products made with BPA and some manufacturers say they will phase it out.

Democratic U.S. senators in April introduced a bill to ban BPA in children's products. Canada's government in April decided BPA was harmful to infants and toddlers and announced plans to ban some products.

U.S. states including California, Maryland, Minnesota and Michigan are considering bills to ban or restrict BPA in children's products.

Montgomery County will financially underwrite a free tire collection for residents.
This is the third year for the program.
Unlike last year when the county held two tire collections, there will only be one this year.
This collection is scheduled for Sept. 13, from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. at the Whitemarsh Township Public Works Facility property at 2015 Joshua Road.
Unlike the county's household hazardous waste program, the tire-recycling program is limited to county residents only.
A maximum of four tires per vehicle will be allowed. No commercial tires will be accepted.
The commissioners in 2006 initiated the idea to hold a tire recycling program, explaining they were tired of seeing old discarded tires along the county's roads, streams and other waterways. At the same time, they said they were concerned about the tires serving as breeding areas for mosquitoes that have the potential for carrying the West Nile virus.

By Deborah Zabarenko

Environment Correspondent
Reuters

WASHINGTON - A fire retardant chemical used in electronics, toys and furniture has been detected in children's blood at triple the levels found in their mothers, the Environmental Working Group reported on Thursday.

In a small pilot study of 20 families, the non-profit environmental group tested blood samples from mothers and their young children -- ages 18 months to four years -- for the presence of PBDEs, a hormone-disrupting chemical.

In 19 of the 20 families, concentrations of PBDEs were typically three times as high in children as in their mothers, said Sonya Lunder, the study's author. One child had six times the level of the chemical that was detected in her mother.

"To us, this raises concerns that kids live very differently in the same environment than their parents do and those kid-like behaviors put them at risk for contaminant exposure," Lunder said in a telephone interview.

Lunder said young children are exposed to more of these substances because they play by putting their hands and other household items in their mouths after touching furniture or appliances that contain PBDEs. They also eat more and drink more, proportionally, than their mothers do, and food and drink can contain these chemicals, she said.

PBDEs, or polybrominated diphenyl ethers, are hormone-disrupting pollutants that build up in the blood and tissues. Two forms of PBDEs are no longer made in the United States but are still present in items in U.S. homes, the study said.

The largest volume of PBDEs are in electronics in a form called Deca, which is banned in European electronics and in some U.S. states, according to the study.

The study cited peer-reviewed tests that showed a single dose of PBDEs given to mice on a single day when their brains were growing rapidly can cause permanent behavior changes, including hyperactivity.

Lunder said there have been numerous studies of the toxic effects of fire retardants on adults, but few on how these substances affect children.

A spokesman for the Bromine Science and Environment Forum, a trade group, took issue with the environment group's study, saying that even the highest levels of PBDEs detected were relatively low, and that Deca was barely found in the children.

"Flame retardants save actual human lives, and no illness, ailment or harm to any human anywhere has ever been reported as a result of exposure to Deca, even among those who work producing the material," the spokesman, John Kyte, said in an e-mail.

Kyte said the flame retardant manufacturers group supported monitoring and analysis of "potential concerns" raised by the environmental group's study.