A one-sided story.

Reporter Tara Parker-Pope wrote about the benefits of dental sealants in preventing cavities in children in an October 20 New York Times article that ran in the Well section of the paper. These commonly used sealants contain bisphenol A or BPA, a chemical that mimics the actions of the female hormone estrogen. It has been associated in animal studies with altered brain development and behavior, as well as diabetes, heart diseases, breast cancer and many chronic health problems.

Although the article was informative, Ms. Parker-Pope chose to report information provided exclusively by dentists and corporations making the sealants, and supported by the American Dental Association. Ms. Parker-Pope missed the opportunity to ask the opinion of independent scientists on the real risks of BPA exposure, especially at a young age.

More importantly, Ms. Parker did not ask Dr. Seldin (a dentist and consumer adviser for the American Dental Association) what she meant when she said “the BPA issue…is so minuscule in impact that it doesn’t really warrant the attention it’s been getting.” She also missed the opportunity to ask scientists what they think about Dr. Seldin’s comments.

Lastly, if we know that for instance 1) BPA migrates from polycarbonate baby bottles when filled with warm liquids, or 2) that acidic products like tomatoes or apples increase the migration of BPA from the epoxy resin lining the cans, why wouldn’t BPA migrate from the sealants into our bodies when we eat tomatoes or apples or oranges or drink hot tea or lemonade or soft drinks? Is it true that BPA exposure from dental sealants is “negligible and temporary, lasting no more than three hours after the initial application”?

Once again, a reporter missed the opportunity to ask more pointed questions and dig deeper by offering differing viewpoints of a controversial issue.