America has one of the safest food supplies in the world. This is due in large part to our use of plastics to transport and store the wide variety of products that fill our grocery stores. Preserving fruits, vegetables, meats and other foods in plastic prevents waste and reduces our risk of exposure to food-borne pathogens that can wreak havoc on our health.
This is excellent news to any reasonable observer. Nobody could object to an abundant and safe food supply, right? Not exactly. As it turns out, Consumer Reports (CR) does just that. While most of us see plastic as a practical food-safety technology, CR views the material as a serious threat “linked to a long list of health concerns.”
As is their wont, CR is again ignoring inconvenient evidence and misleading consumers who mistakenly trust them.
Fabricated health concerns in WaPo
In a recent piece for the Washington Post, CR’s director of health and food content Lauren Friedman urges readers to reduce their “exposure to plastics in food (and everywhere else).” Friedman’s advice is based on the spurious claim that chemicals in plastic containers, specifically a class of plasticizers called phthalates, cause “endocrine disruption,” one of the environmental movement’s perennial (but long-debunked) bogeymen.
FDA refutes activist speculation
As we have reported several times, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has twice dismissed these speculative concerns about phthalates based on a thorough review of all the available evidence. Concerned that Ms. Friedman omitted this important point from her story – given that CR has previously acknowledged the FDA’s analysis – Kevin Ott with the Flexible Vinyl Alliance reached out to her directly, urging that she report all the facts. His email is reproduced below:
Speak no evil
Friedman’s response was telling. Instead of correcting her coverage, she pleaded the Fifth and tasked CR’s public relations team with responding. Nothing says, “I value honesty” like silence.
Consumer Reports declares that it “works side by side with consumers for truth, transparency, and fairness in the marketplace.” That’s a laudable sentiment. But given Friedman’s misleading story and non-response to constructive criticism, it seems that Consumer Reports is merely paying lip service to those ideals. The simple fact is that you can’t work with consumers for truth in the marketplace if you refuse to tell them the truth in the first place.