FDA officials said they did not have enough scientific evidence to warrant such a ban.
"The next decision the FDA should make is to remove 'responsible for protecting the public health' from its mission statement," Jane Houlihan, scientist and senior vice president for research of the Environmental Working Group, said in a statement. "It's false advertising. Allowing a chemical as toxic as BPA, and linked to so many serious health problems, to remain in food means the agency has veered dangerously off course."
Sarah Doll of SaferStates said 11 states have already passed policies to restrict the use of BPA in food and beverage containers and additional policies are pending in numerous state capitols.
"The marketplace has shifted. Consider the expansion of companies like Owens-Illinois, a multinational glass company that stepped up hiring and production to meet the need for safer BPA-free glass baby bottles," said Mike Schade of the Center for Health, Environment & Justice. "Even BPA maker Sunoco changed its policy and won't even sell BPA to manufacturers whose products can expose BPA to children. Phasing out BPA is a win for our health, and a win for greener jobs and a greener economy."
BPA is a plastic used in numerous consumer products such as hard clear plastic, the lining of many metal cans and the shiny coating on cash register receipts. Studies have linked it to cancer, diabetes, obesity and hyperactivity.
Toddler uninjured after being knocked over by Obama family dog
Texas principal bans speaking Spanish, stirs controversy