We've been looking for first-person accounts at the goings-on at the FDA's open meeting on Tuesday regarding their reaffirmation of the safety of Bisphenol-A. Sarah Janssen, a scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council, testified at the hearing and summarized some of her thoughts on the event on NRDC's Switchboard blog. A few particulars caught our eye:

If this were a pre-market hearing to approve the use of BPA as a food additive, FDA would have a hard time saying BPA was safe. The vast majority of evidence suggests that even everyday levels of exposure to BPA can be associated with a number of different health issues.

We don't know yet how the committee will respond to all the testimony they heard yesterday. But it is clear that FDA is under intense pressure to make a very quick decision on finalizing this. We don't know where that pressure is coming from or what is motivating it but it is concerning that FDA is not taking the time to thoroughly review all the science.

You can read the rest of her commentary here, or download a PDF of the testimony she gave at the hearing here. Each speaker was allowed three minutes; based on her figure of 20 public commentators, that means the FDA was inconvenienced for roughly an hour listening to scientists and public health experts speaking out against their decision, in addition to the "expert panel" from which they had solicited feedback.

"A margin of safety exists that is adequate to protect consumers, including infants and children, at the current levels of exposure," FDA scientist Laura Tarantino told them at the hearing.

ZRecs front page teaser photo by Cindy Funk, shared via Flickr.