We're happy that Washington has become the latest state to limit bisphenol A in certain products . That brings to five the states that have said no to the chemical, which has been linked to developmental and reproductive problems.

Why are we forced to rely on the determination and good sense of states, one by one, to act? Because while the Food and Drug Administration is  "concerned" about BPA, it's not concerned enough to actually keep it out of food and beverage containers and other plastic products.

BPA is used in the linings of cans and in polycarbonate plastic, including some sports bottles, food-storage containers, and baby bottles. It has potential links to a wide range of health effects, including an increased risk of diseases or disorders of the brain, reproductive, and immune systems.(Read our Expert Q&A and Concern over canned foods.)

Under Washington's new law, plastic containers made with BPA that are designed to hold food or beverages for children under three years old such as sippy cups and baby bottles may not be manufactured, sold, or distributed in the state. A House amendment was added to the bill to include plastic sports bottles. It's scheduled to take effect July 1, 2011, and will extend to sports bottles as of July 1, 2012.

Washington joins Connecticut, Maryland, Minnesota and Wisconsin; Chicago and Suffolk County, N.Y., have taken similar action. Bills are also pending in California, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Vermont and Washington, D.C. Canada became the first country to ban BPA use in baby bottles in 2008. Six of the largest makers of baby bottles will no longer sell bottles made with BPA. In addition, retailers such as Babies ‘R’ Us, Safeway, Target, Toys ‘R’ Us, CVS and Walmart are in the process of or have already phased out selling baby bottles with BPA, and chemical giant Sunoco announced they would restrict the sales of the controversial chemical in baby bottles and food containers for children under three.