By Patricia Patterson, Policy Advocacy Intern

The first time I learned about food stamps, I was six years old and starting the first grade in a new state. Our family, having just moved from Pennsylvania to North Carolina, was gradually becoming accustomed to the grocery store “giants” of the south. I formed a list in my head of all the new company names—Lowes Foods, Harris Teeter, Kroger, and Food Lion. The list sounded more like an inventory of foreign animals, set with their respective genus and species, than a compilation of grocery store names. Among the disarray of learning new street names and retail shops, I overheard my parents discussing another unfamiliar word, food stamps. I asked my father if grocers stamped our food and if the ink would get into our mouths when we ate it. Though my father laughed and assured me that we weren’t eating ink-saturated food, there were other hidden dangers in the food we purchased. We were just unaware of them at the time.

What my family, and millions of other families across the United States, didn’t know was that a dangerous chemical known as Bisphenol-A, or BPA, inhabited several packaged food and drink items, including bottled water and canned foods. This consumer ignorance was recently highlighted in a news report that aired on CBS in which reporter Steve Sbraccia discussed the hazards of purchasing canned products containing BPA. The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIH) states that “the primary source of exposure to BPA for most people is through the diet.” Presently, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) assumes that “BPA is safe at the current levels occurring in foods” and fails to consider the long-term effects of BPA on the human body. According to a study published by Environmental Health Perspectives, BPA exposure increases estrogen sensitivity in the mammary gland, demonstrating that responses to BPA are potent in pubescent phases but most potent in prenatal stages. By assessing only acute toxicity, the FDA is choosing to ignore the neurological and reproductive effects of BPA that occur over time and harm many, especially infants and children who are most sensitive to toxins.

Today, despite the persistence of environmental organizations and the public to remove BPA from numerous products, BPA persists in the lining of several canned food items found in local grocery stores. According to a study published in 2015 by the Breast Cancer Fund, over 67% of canned food products from the 192 that were tested contain BPA. Among those tested are canned items from local retailers like Kroger and Harris Teeter. 13 out of 21 cans tested from Kroger and 2 out of 6 cans tested from Harris Teeter contained BPA.

Canned products are often more cost efficient, which may be more appealing to low income consumers or consumers who receive federal aid much like my family did. In many cases, purchasing cans is more convenient to the average, time-conscious consumer who would rather buy canned beans than boil and soak dried beans overnight. Most consumers, however, unknowingly purchase canned items that may contain BPA. My grandmother, a native to Mexico, purchases cans of pickled jalapeños from a company named Conservas La Costeña, sold in local grocery stores. My mother purchases La Costeña whole black beans. In the Breast Cancer Fund’s 2015 report on BPA, 1 out of 1 of the Conservas La Costeña cans tested and 2 out of 2 of the cans tested from their parent company Vilore Foods contained BPA.

While we may not be physically consuming “ink-stained food” like I feared when I was six years old, local grocery stores such as Kroger and Harris Teeter continue to market items that contain BPA in their can linings. In a recent study conducted by the Center for Environmental Health (CEH) from January to April 2017, 252 canned items were tested for BPA across eleven states, including North Carolina, and 38% of those cans contained BPA. Of the four major retail stores tested—Kroger, Albertsons, Dollar Tree, and 99 Cents Only—24 of the 73 canned items from Kroger, approximately 33%, contained BPA. Despite a decrease of BPA found in canned items, about a 1.8% reduction since 2015, several canned products sold in local grocery stores still contain BPA, potentially triggering endocrine disruption and other health concerns.

Those most likely to purchase canned items—and, thus, those more likely to be exposed to these toxins—are low-income or fixed-income consumers. According to a 2016 survey published by the AARP Foundation, individuals aged 50 and above that purchase canned items have an average annual income of $40,000 or less. These consumers identify their chief motives for purchasing canned products as “easy/quick preparation” and “long shelf-life.” A study published by Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP) indicates that males, individuals from rural and low-income areas, and individuals aged 50 or below have higher percentages of BPA concentration in their bodies. These individuals are also more likely to not have proper health insurance providing access to a doctor for preventative treatment. In order to reduce the toxics exposure, local grocery stores such as Harris Teeter and Kroger should aim to eliminate products containing BPA from their shelves or at least include warning labels to increase consumer awareness of these hazardous products. Regardless of whether you use food stamps to purchase food, you are hyperconscious of time, or you enjoy the ease of purchasing canned items, you deserve to know what is in your food.

Click here to view Toxic Free NC’s BPA Policy Brief!

Originally published on August 4, 2016 on NC Child’s blog

By Preston Peck and Tom Vitaglione

Toxic Free and NC Child have joined with concerned parents and local health advocates to ask major retailers to stop selling canned foods packaged with toxic bisphenol A (BPA), a chemical that has been linked to many health problems for children. Federal and state authorities have declined to move quickly to require safe packaging, so we are calling on Kroger and its subsidiaries—like NC-based Harris Teeter—to eliminate BPA from its canned goods, and replace it with a safe alternative.

BPA is a dangerous synthetic chemical that disrupts the endocrine system and mimics the hormone estrogen. More than 300 animal and human studies have linked BPA exposure to a number of health problems, including breast and prostate cancer, asthma, obesity, behavioral changes and weakening of the immune system, and lowered sperm counts. For children in particular, BPA is associated with low birth weight, altered development of the brain, and attention deficit disorder.

A recent report, Buyer Beware: Toxic BPA and regrettable substitutes found in the linings of canned food, showed 62 percent of the Kroger products sampled (13 out of 21) tested positive for BPA-based epoxy resins. Of the Kroger products tested, two Harris Teeter brand cans tested positive (six Harris Teeter brand cans were tested total).

Unfortunately, seeking out products labeled “BPA free” may be another invitation to health concerns. Many retailers and national brands are phasing out BPA, but many are replacing it with harmful substitutes. For example, many cans tested for the Buyer Beware report were lined with a PVC-based polymer. These can linings are made from highly hazardous chemicals including vinyl chloride, a known human carcinogen. Meanwhile, BPS—another common replacement for BPA—can elicit endocrine effects similar to BPA.

Kroger and Harris Teeter should commit to eliminating BPA from food cans sold in their stores and establish clear timelines and benchmarks for a transition to safer alternatives. The retailers should also work with their suppliers to ensure that BPA is not replaced with dangerous chemicals. All chemicals used in can linings should be fully disclosed to ensure consumer safety. Lastly, Kroger, Harris Teeter, and other retailers should adopt a comprehensive chemical policy to safely replace other chemicals of concern in their products and packaging.

There are a few things consumers can do to protect their families until retailers commit to safer product packaging:

Vote with your pocketbook. Only purchase canned food from manufacturers and retailers that exercise complete transparency about what chemicals are used in their canned food packaging.

Avoid canned goods and eat fresh when possible. In general, food that requires less processing and packaging materials will be less-toxic. Think dried beans as opposed to canned. When eating fresh or minimally processed foods isn’t possible, choose frozen food, food stored in glass jars, or food stored in aseptic packaging—i.e. those cartons you find products like milk, soup, and chopped tomatoes in.

Learn more! For more information about can testing results and which stores and food brands are transitioning to safer alternatives, visit www.toxicfoodcans.org.

Tom Vitaglione is Senior Fellow for Health and Safety at NC Child.

Preston Peck is a Policy Advocate at Toxic Free NC