The Fair Packaging and Labeling Act of 1967 called for most household consumer goods to have labels detailing their contents, manufacturers' information and the content's net quantity. This stopped manufacturers from using deceptive language to push their products and helped people make informed purchasing decisions.

For example, people with allergic reactions to peanuts can look through the ingredients list for peanuts or peanut derivatives. Those with high cholesterol can read the labels to determine if certain products affect cholesterol levels.

But what if the threat comes from the packaging itself?

A chemical used for soft drink bottles, metal can linings and other plastic products has lately been causing a stir due to its link to potential health dangers, particularly for infants using plastic baby bottles or those who were fed milk that was packaged in plastic-lined cans, U.S. News & World Report says.

A recent study published by the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) found that people with the highest amount of bisphenol A (BPA) in their urine had nearly three times the risk of heart disease and 2.4 times the odds of diabetes as those who had the lowest levels.

The JAMA research was based on 1,455 adults aged 18 to 74. More than 90 percent had detectable BPA in their urine. No one had BPA levels higher than the currently established "safe" level, Dr. David Melzer, co-author of the study and epidemiologist at the University of Exeter, tells the Associated Press.

"BPA levels that are slightly elevated but still just one-fifth the safe dose limit established by the Food and Drug Administration trigger an alarming release of insulin in the pancreatic cells of mice — and higher levels lead to pre-diabetes or insulin resistance," Frederick vom Saal, a biologist at the University of Missouri and long-time critic of the chemical, tells U.S. News & World Report.

An earlier laboratory experiment with human fat tissue published in Environmental Health Perspectives found that BPA suppresses levels of the hormone adiponectin that protects people from heart attacks and diabetes.

The government's National Toxicology Program also recently concluded that there's enough evidence to express "some concern" over BPA's detrimental effects on an infant's brain, the AP reports.

Despite these recent findings, the FDA and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) both agreed that the BPA levels in food packaging were safe. The EFSA, in regards to the reaction of mice to BPA, noted that "people metabolize and excrete BPA far more quickly than rodents. Because of these differences, people at all life stages are not at risk from exposure to low levels of BPA." (Source: Packaging Digest)

The FDA agreed but conceded that further research is needed, AP reports. Laura Tarantino, head of the FDA's office of food additive safety, added that the FDA is not dismissing the findings and has asked an outside panel for a second opinion on its BPA safety assessment.

Melzer proposed another reason for holding off on banning the chemical, telling U.S. News & World Report that it's possible that BPA is an "innocent bystander." People who consume loads of canned foods and soft drinks might develop heart problems or diabetes and, separately, may end up with high BPA levels from the packaging, Melzer offers.

While the debate on the potential adverse affects of BPA could drag on for years, companies like Born Free and Eden Foods have already responded to the call for BPA-free products. Born Free makes BPA-free plastic baby bottles and Eden Foods does not use plastic liners for its canned beans, U.S. News & World Report says.

Sonya Lunder, a senior analyst at the Environmental Working Group, tells U.S. News & World Report that people can limit their exposure to BPA by switching from canned goods to those packaged in glass or cardboard. Along with purchasing products labeled BPA-free, Lunder also recommends using powdered infant formula instead of liquid formula as the former contains less BPA.

The FDA also suggests avoiding plastic containers embossed with recycling number 7 and to not warm foods in such containers because heat helps release the chemical, the AP reports.

For manufacturers looking for alternative materials to those containing BPA, the International Organization for Standardization offers a guide for determining the most suitable packaging materials for protecting goods and consumers. One of its suggestions deals with how to safeguard consumers from potentially harmful effects from the packaging.

In the U.S., only the FDA can limit the use of BPA in food containers and medical devises, the AP reports. So until the FDA changes its tune regarding BPA, it's up to consumers whether or not to purchase products with BPA and up to packaging manufacturers if they will use BPA for their goods.

Resources

Fair Packaging and Labeling Act
U.S. Food and Drug Administration

Higher Urinary Levels of Chemical Used in Plastic Food and Beverage Containers Associated with Cardiovascular Disease, Diabetes
Journal of the American Medical Association, Sept. 16, 2008

Heart Disease, Diabetes Linked to Chemical in Plastics
by Deborah Kotz
U.S. News and World Report, Sept. 16, 2008

FDA Says BPA is OK Despite Concerns Raised in New Study
The Associated Press, Sept. 16, 2008

Bisphenol A at Environmentally Relevant Doses Inhibits Adiponectin Release from Human Adipose Tissue Explants and Adipocytes
Synopsis by Dr. Pete Myers
Environmental Health News, Aug. 18, 2008

Bisphenol A Deemed Safe by Prominent European Food Safety Agency
by David Bellm
Packaging Digest, July 25, 2008

ISO/IEC Guide 41:2003
International Organization for Standardization