Well-meaning laws sometimes backfire. It's especially true when they are passed in reaction to media frenzies driven by ideology, not science. That's what's happening in the US and Europe, where advocacy groups are raising new alarms about bisphenol A (aka BPA), a controversial plastic component used to prevent spoilage in myriad products, including containers, dental sealants, and epoxy linings.

After an extensive review of some 5000 studies, the German toxicologists reaffirmed the scientific consensus that BPA is safe when used even by the most vulnerable populations—young children and pregnant women.

Tom Friedman wishes America could be more like China. Specifically, he wishes we could adopt their authoritarian style in pursuit of the so-called green revolution and clean energy.

Finding plasticizers in dust is neither surprising nor necessarily a cause for alarm. Evidence that phthalates cause harm in humans is scientifically thin, and campaigners never directly address that hypothesis.

At The Chronicle of Higher Education, “journalistic standards” are of the double kind. And incivility is a firing offense — unless you’re criticizing a conservative, in which case nasty smears are all the rage

Does the campaign against plastic bags make environmental sense?

The traditional, thin plastic bag, though increasingly demonized and taxed, has better environmental performance and is likely to be considerably safer for human health than alternatives.

At this AEI conference, experts addressed the potential regulation of BPA, a chemical used in plastic and other common products.