The magazine Råd och Rön tested 16 pacifiers from different brands, finding traces of bisphenol A in seven of them. Multiple reports indicate that the seven pacifiers where bisphenol A was found also had 'BPA-free' labeling in the test. Among the pacifiers in the test that contained bisphenol were major brands such as Esska and NUK, though the specific brands beyond these two have not been disclosed.
Bisphenol A has been banned in baby bottles and baby food containers across the entire EU since 2011, but not in pacifiers. Some countries, such as France and Austria, have chosen to ban the substance in pacifiers as well. According to Göteborgs-Posten, Carl-Gustaf Bornehag, a professor in public health science researching hormone-disrupting chemicals, described bisphenol A as one of the most studied molecules with good knowledge about its risks. He also stated that he does not know why bisphenol A was not also banned in pacifiers in the EU, adding that we really do not want this substance in products that small children suck on.
Bisphenol A is one of the most studied molecules we have and we have good knowledge about the risks with it. That was why the industry eventually agreed to phase it out.
Many companies have started marketing their products as 'BPA-free' since bisphenol A was banned. According to Carl-Gustaf Bornehag, the industry eventually agreed to phase out bisphenol A. It remains unclear how the pacifiers with bisphenol A obtained 'BPA-free' labeling, and what actions, if any, authorities or companies are taking in response to these findings.
Carl-Gustaf Bornehag believes that the cumulative exposure must also be considered. According to Göteborgs-Posten, he described the problem with such molecules found in many products as everyone contributing to cumulative exposure while claiming their product has insignificant levels, noting it does not come only from the pacifier but also from other sources. The exact measured levels of bisphenol A found in the pacifiers have not been specified, and the cumulative exposure risk from pacifiers combined with other sources is not detailed in the reports.
I actually do not know why it was not also banned in pacifiers here. We really do not want this substance in products that small children suck on.
According to Göteborgs-Posten, Carl-Gustaf Bornehag described that he would absolutely remove the pacifiers immediately as a private person based on a precautionary principle, but not as a researcher. He does not have support that the individual exposure from a pacifier would be harmful, but he thinks the overall picture from research gives reason to be cautious. This personal versus professional stance highlights the nuanced risk assessment surrounding low-level exposures.
The measured levels in the test are low, and it cannot be said that the pacifiers pose a danger to children, according to multiple reports. Uncertainties persist regarding which specific brands other than Esska and NUK had bisphenol A in their pacifiers, and the regulatory gaps leave parents with limited assurance about product safety.
The problem with such molecules that are found in so many products is that everyone can say 'in my product it is so little that it has no significance,' but everyone contributes to the cumulative exposure. It does not come only from the pacifier, but also from other sources.
I would absolutely remove the pacifiers immediately. But that is based on a precautionary principle as a private person, I am not saying that as a researcher. I do not have support that the individual exposure from a pacifier would be harmful, but I think the overall picture from research gives reason to be cautious.