Bisphenol A (BPA) is the monomer used to manufacture polycarbonate plastic, the resin lining of cans, and other products, with global capacity in excess of 6.4 billion lb/year. Because the ester bonds in these BPA-based polymers are subject to hydrolysis, leaching of BPA has led to widespread human exposure. A recent report prepared by the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis and funded by the American Plastics Council concluded that evidence for low-dose effects of BPA is weak on the basis of a review of only 19 studies; the report was issued after a delay of 2.5 years. A current comprehensive review of the literature reveals that the opposite is true. As of December 2004, there were 115 published in vivo studies concerning low-dose effects of BPA, and 94 of these report significant effects. In 31 publications with vertebrate and invertebrate animals, significant effects occurred below the predicted “safe” or reference dose of 50 μg/kg/day BPA. An estrogenic mode of action of BPA is confirmed by in vitro experiments, which describe disruption of cell function at 10−12 M or 0.23 ppt. Nonetheless, chemical manufacturers continue to discount these published findings because no industry-funded studies have reported significant effects of low doses of BPA, although > 90% of government-funded studies have reported significant effects. Some industry-funded studies have ignored the results of positive controls, and many studies reporting no significant effects used a strain of rat that is inappropriate for the study of estrogenic responses. We propose that a new risk assessment for BPA is needed based on a) the extensive new literature reporting adverse effects in animals at doses below the current reference dose; b) the high rate of leaching of BPA from food and beverage containers, leading to widespread human exposure; c) reports that the median BPA level in human blood and tissues, including in human fetal blood, is higher than the level that causes adverse effects in mice; and d) recent epidemiologic evidence that BPA is related to disease in women.

This document is a summary statement of the outcome from the meeting: ???Bisphenol A: An Examination of the Relevance of Ecological, In vitro and Laboratory Animal Studies for Assessing Risks to Human Health??? sponsored by both the NIEHS and NIDCR at NIH/DHHS, as well as the US-EPA and Commonweal on the estrogenic environmental chemical bisphenol A (BPA, 2,2-bis(4-hydroxyphenyl)propane; CAS# 80-05-7). The meeting was held in Chapel Hill, NC, 28???30 November 2006 due to concerns about the potential for a relationship between BPA and negative trends in human health that have occurred in recent decades. Examples include increases in abnormal penile/urethra development in males, early sexual maturation in females, an increase in neurobehavioral problems such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and autism, an increase in childhood and adult obesity and type 2 diabetes, a regional decrease in sperm count, and an increase in hormonally mediated cancers, such as prostate and breast cancers. Concern has been elevated by published studies reporting a relationship between treatment with ???low doses??? of BPA and many of theses negative health outcomes in experimental studies in laboratory animals as well as in vitro studies identifying plausible molecular mechanisms that could mediate such effects. Importantly, much evidence suggests that these adverse effects are occurring in animals within the range of exposure to BPA of the typical human living in a developed country, where virtually everyone has measurable blood, tissue and urine levels of BPA that exceed the levels produced by doses used in the ???low dose??? animal experiments

Exposure of human fetuses to man-made estrogenic chemicals can occur through several sources. For example, fetal exposure to ethinylestradiol occurs because each year ≈3% of women taking oral contraceptives become pregnant. Exposure to the estrogenic chemical bisphenol A occurs through food and beverages because of significant leaching from polycarbonate plastic products and the lining of cans. We fed pregnant CD-1 mice ethinylestradiol (0.1 μg/kg per day) and bisphenol A (10 μg/kg per day), which are doses below the range of exposure by pregnant women. In male mouse fetuses, both ethinylestradiol and bisphenol A produced an increase in the number and size of dorsolateral prostate ducts and an overall increase in prostate duct volume. Histochemical staining of sections with antibodies to proliferating cell nuclear antigen and mouse keratin 5 indicated that these increases were due to a marked increase in proliferation of basal epithelial cells located in the primary ducts. The urethra was malformed in the colliculus region and was significantly constricted where it enters the bladder, which could contribute to urine flow disorders. These effects were identical to those caused by a similar dose (0.1 μg/kg per day) of the estrogenic drug diethylstilbestrol (DES), a known human developmental teratogen and carcinogen. In contrast, a 2,000-fold higher DES dose completely inhibited dorsolateral prostate duct formation, revealing opposite effects of high and low doses of estrogen. Acceleration in the rate of proliferation of prostate epithelium during fetal life by small amounts of estrogenic chemicals could permanently disrupt cellular control systems and predispose the prostate to disease in adulthood.

In 1997, the first in vivo bisphenol A (BPA) study by endocrinologists reported that feeding BPA to pregnant mice induced adverse reproductive effects in male offspring at the low dose of 2 µg/kg/day. Since then, thousands of studies have reported adverse effects in animals administered low doses of BPA. Despite more than 100 epidemiological studies suggesting associations between BPA and disease/dysfunction also reported in animal studies, regulatory agencies continue to assert that BPA exposures are safe. To address this disagreement, the CLARITY-BPA study was designed to evaluate traditional endpoints of toxicity and modern hypothesis-driven, disease-relevant outcomes in the same set of animals. A wide range of adverse effects was reported in both the toxicity and the mechanistic endpoints at the lowest dose tested (2.5 µg/kg/day), leading independent experts to call for the lowest observed adverse effect level (LOAEL) to be dropped 20 000-fold from the current outdated LOAEL of 50 000 µg/kg/day. Despite criticism by members of the Endocrine Society that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s assumptions violate basic principles of endocrinology, the FDA rejected all low-dose data as not biologically plausible. Their decisions rely on 4 incorrect assumptions: dose responses must be monotonic, there exists a threshold below which there are no effects, both sexes must respond similarly, and only toxicological guideline studies are valid. This review details more than 20 years of BPA studies and addresses the divide that exists between regulatory approaches and endocrine science. Ultimately, CLARITY-BPA has shed light on why traditional methods of evaluating toxicity are insufficient to evaluate endocrine disrupting chemicals.