At a glance
| Chemical family | Bisphenol — diphenylmethane analog of BPA |
| CAS number | 620-92-8 |
| Classification | Not currently IARC-classified; under regulatory review |
| Where you encounter it | Epoxy resins, can linings, dental sealants, some "BPA-free" plastics, lacquers, varnishes, indoor dust |
| Sleep micro environment relevance | Detected in indoor dust at increasing frequencies; transfer from skin contact and food contact materials to bedding via sweat |
| Activated carbon capture | High — bisphenols generally adsorb well on activated carbon and β-cyclodextrin host-guest polymers |
Regulatory & certification status
Where BPF stands across the major regulatory systems and the certifications a bedroom product might carry. Each row links to the governing instrument; where a jurisdiction has no specific measure, that is stated plainly rather than left blank.
| European Union | Not on the REACH SVHC Candidate List. ECHA proposed bisphenol F (4,4'-dihydroxydiphenylmethane / 4,4'-methylenediphenol, CAS 620-92-8) for SVHC identification in September 2025, but the BPF proposal was WITHDRAWN before the Member State Committee meeting (the other substances in that batch proceeded; BPF did not) and its status in ECHA's Registry of SVHC Intentions is 'withdrawn'. BPF is not on the Authorisation List (Annex XIV) and is not individually restricted under Annex XVII. A harmonised CLP classification as reproductive toxicant Category 1B has been recommended by ECHA's Committee for Risk Assessment (RAC) but is NOT yet adopted into Annex VI of CLP; because the EU ban on hazardous bisphenols in food-contact materials (Regulation (EU) 2024/3190) applies only to bisphenols carrying a harmonised Annex VI Cat 1A/1B CMR or Cat 1 endocrine-disruptor classification, it does not yet capture BPF. BPF is among the 34 bisphenols ECHA and the Member States identified as warranting group restriction. Regulatory — ECHA |
| United States | Bisphenol F (CAS 620-92-8) is NOT on the California Proposition 65 list. Among bisphenols, only bisphenol A (80-05-7) and bisphenol S (80-09-1) are currently listed for reproductive/developmental toxicity. BPF is a p,p'-bisphenol (the 4,4'-isomer), and on 21 October 2025 OEHHA announced its intent to have the Developmental and Reproductive Toxicant Identification Committee REVIEW the class of p,p'-bisphenols for possible Proposition 65 listing — a review, not a listing. No federal TSCA risk evaluation, prioritization, or risk-management action specific to bisphenol F was identified. Regulatory — OEHHA |
| Canada | Bisphenol F is captured within the Health Canada/ECCC Chemicals Management Plan initiative on bisphenol A structural analogues and functional alternatives (BPA SAFAs): a technical consultation on a proposed subgrouping was published in December 2020 and a CEPA section 71 information-gathering notice was issued in the Canada Gazette in November 2021. There is NO final screening assessment and NO CEPA Schedule 1 (toxic substances) conclusion specific to bisphenol F. (Note: BPA itself was assessed as toxic and added to Schedule 1 in 2008; that conclusion does not extend to BPF.) No PMRA/pesticide status applies. Regulatory — Government of Canada |
| Australia | No dedicated AICIS (or legacy NICNAS/IMAP) risk assessment, evaluation statement, or restriction specific to bisphenol F (CAS 620-92-8) was identified. AICIS has assessed related materials (e.g. BPA-based epoxy resins and BPA (meth)acrylates) but not BPF as a standalone substance. Regulatory — AICIS |
| United Kingdom | No GB-specific UK REACH restriction and no GB mandatory classification and labelling (GB MCL) entry specific to bisphenol F (CAS 620-92-8) was identified. GB CLP largely carries over the retained EU baseline, so Great Britain currently mirrors the EU position in which a Repr. 1B harmonised classification for BPF has been proposed but not yet adopted. Regulatory — HSE |
| International | The IARC Monographs Advisory Group's report on priorities for 2025-2029 lists bisphenol S and bisphenol F together (entry 161; CAS Nos 80-09-1 and 620-92-8) as a HIGH-priority recommendation for future evaluation ('ready for evaluation within 2.5 years') and states they 'have not previously been evaluated by the IARC Monographs programme' — so no IARC carcinogen Group has been assigned to BPF. No Stockholm Convention (POPs) or Minamata Convention determination applies. Regulatory — IARC |
| Certifications | CertiPUR-US: not specifically addressed — its criteria target polyurethane-foam content and emissions, whereas BPF is an epoxy-resin and thermal-paper monomer not used as a PU-foam constituent, so it is outside the program's stated scope. OEKO-TEX Standard 100: bisphenols are restricted as endocrine-disrupting residues on textiles, and the BPA limit was tightened to 10 mg/kg effective 1 April 2025; a distinct numeric limit naming bisphenol F could not be confirmed from the published criteria. GREENGUARD/GREENGUARD Gold: a low-VOC chamber-emissions certification that does not screen specifically for a low-volatility bisphenol monomer like BPF. Industry — OEKO-TEX · CertiPUR-US |
| The 72-hour test window | Largely missed. Bisphenol F is a low-volatility solid monomer (molecular weight 200.23 g/mol, very low vapour pressure) that behaves as a semi-volatile/migrating additive rather than off-gassing, so a short ~72-hour VOC chamber test does not reliably capture it; it is better detected by migration or dust/contact analysis. Inferred — from the compound's volatility/emission profile versus the VOC focus of short chamber tests |
What it is
Bisphenol F (4,4'-methylenediphenol, also written as 4,4'-dihydroxydiphenylmethane) is structurally the simplest of the bisphenol family — two phenol rings linked by a single methylene group. It is used primarily as an intermediate in epoxy resin manufacture, particularly for applications where BPA's bulkier structure presents engineering limitations. Dental sealants, food can linings, electronic resin coatings, and protective coatings on metal surfaces all use BPF-based resins.
The 2023 Zhu et al. review of endocrine-disrupting chemicals in indoor dust documented BPF among the bisphenols showing increasing detection frequencies, paralleling the BPS pattern as BPA-restricted markets adopted replacements. Peer-reviewed
How it gets to the bedroom
From food contact materials and "BPA-free" plastics
The same substitution pattern that introduced BPS into "BPA-free" products also introduced BPF, particularly in applications where the slightly different chemistry of BPF provides processing advantages. Can linings, food container coatings, and some polysulfone plastics use BPF.
From dental materials
BPF-based resins appear in some dental sealants and composite filling materials. Recent dental work can be a measurable exposure source, with elevated urinary BPF biomarkers documented in patients in the days following composite restorations.
From house dust
BPF concentrations in indoor dust have increased in surveys conducted over the past decade as BPA restrictions drove substitution. The 2022 Rasmussen et al. Canadian House Dust Study and the 2023 Zhu review both flagged this rising trend. Peer-reviewed
From your own sweat
The Genuis 2012 sweat excretion finding for BPA — detection in 16/20 participants, often in the absence of detectable urine or blood concentrations — has not been directly replicated for BPF, but the structural and physicochemical similarity supports the same excretion pathway. Inferred from Genuis 2012 BPA data
What the research says
Documented health effects
BPF shows endocrine activity comparable to BPA in laboratory studies — estrogen receptor binding, androgen receptor effects, and developmental effects in animal models. The Rochester & Bolden 2015 systematic review compared the hormonal activity of BPS and BPF directly to BPA and concluded the substitutes are not safer; Eladak et al. 2015 in Fertility & Sterility argued that BPS and BPF are not safe alternatives. The 2022 Wiklund & Beronius systematic evaluation applied formal evidence-evaluation methodology to BPF endocrine disruption specifically. Peer-reviewed
The 2025 Hayasaka et al. ECHO Program analysis found bisphenols as a class associated with elevated preterm birth and SGA risk. Peer-reviewed The 2024 Yuan et al. transplacental transfer analysis included BPF among the bisphenols detected in paired maternal and cord serum. Peer-reviewed
The 2023 Cunha et al. systematic review of EDCs and autistic traits in offspring included BPF among the bisphenols examined; the findings were inconclusive at the systematic-review level given the limited number of studies. Peer-reviewed
Open questions
The cumulative exposure to the bisphenol mixture (BPA + BPS + BPF + BADGE + others) and its health implications has been less studied than single-compound exposure. The substitution pattern means real-world exposure is to combinations, not individual compounds. Speculation
What helps reduce exposure
Tier 1 — Most effective. Choose glass, stainless steel, or polyethylene/polypropylene over polysulfone or epoxy-coated plastics. Choose dental restoration materials without bisphenol resin where alternatives exist (porcelain, gold, ceramic alternatives are non-bisphenol options to discuss with a dentist).
Tier 2 — Worth considering. Read certifications carefully. "BPA-free" alone is insufficient; certifications that specifically address bisphenol family substitution (Made Safe, EWG Verified) are more meaningful.
Tier 3 — Larger interventions. Replace bisphenol-containing food contact materials with alternative materials. For households with chemically sensitive members, audit kitchen and bathroom products for bisphenol-containing components.
The Embr capture system addresses BPF effectively. Activated carbon and β-cyclodextrin polymers in the capture core adsorb bisphenols as a class at sleep-environment conditions, intercepting ambient and sweat-deposited residues.
What does NOT help
Microwave-safe bisphenol-containing plastics still release bisphenol. "Microwave safe" indicates thermal stability of the plastic, not absence of leachable bisphenol. Heating any bisphenol-containing plastic accelerates migration.
Switching from BPA to BPF or BPS without changing the underlying product category does not reduce bisphenol exposure. It changes which bisphenol you are exposed to.
Open research questions
- The combined effects of simultaneous BPA + BPS + BPF + BADGE exposure on endocrine endpoints have not been characterized in published human studies. Speculation
- The dose-response between bedding-deposited bisphenol mixture and overnight serum bisphenol concentrations is unmeasured.
Citations
- EPA. Bisphenol F — Regulatory review status. Regulatory
- Zhu L et al. (2023). Endocrine disrupting chemicals in indoor dust. Science of the Total Environment. Peer-reviewed
- Hayasaka M et al. (2025). Association of Prenatal Exposure to Phthalates and Phenols With Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes. O&G Open. Peer-reviewed
- Yuan K-Y et al. (2024). Comprehensive analysis of transplacental transfer of environmental pollutants. Journal of Hazardous Materials. Peer-reviewed
- Rasmussen PE et al. (2022). Canadian House Dust Study — synthetic organic contaminants. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. Peer-reviewed
- Cunha Y et al. (2023). Early-life exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals and autistic traits. Frontiers in Endocrinology. Peer-reviewed
- Genuis SJ et al. (2012). Human Excretion of Bisphenol A: Blood, Urine, and Sweat (BUS) Study. PMC3255175 Peer-reviewed — BPA-specific; BPF inferred
- Rochester JR, Bolden AL (2015). Bisphenol S and F: A Systematic Review and Comparison of the Hormonal Activity of Bisphenol A Substitutes. Environmental Health Perspectives, 123(7):643-650. DOI 10.1289/ehp.1408989 Peer-reviewed
- Eladak S, Grisin T, Moison D, Guerquin M-J, et al. (2015). A new chapter in the bisphenol A story: bisphenol S and bisphenol F are not safe alternatives to this compound. Fertility and Sterility. DOI 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.11.005 Peer-reviewed
- Wiklund L, Beronius A (2022). Systematic Evaluation of the Evidence for Identification of Endocrine Disrupting Properties of Bisphenol F. Toxicology. DOI 10.1016/j.tox.2022.153255 Peer-reviewed
Frequently asked questions
-
Is BPF safer than BPA?
The available evidence does not support this. BPF shows similar endocrine activity to BPA in laboratory studies. Like BPS, BPF was adopted as a substitute based on chemical convenience rather than safety evaluation.
-
Why do dental sealants contain bisphenols?
The epoxy resin chemistry that makes dental sealants and composite fillings durable uses bisphenols as building blocks. Some newer formulations use non-bisphenol resin systems; ask your dentist about specific product formulations if this is a concern.
-
Will an air purifier remove BPF from bedroom air?
BPF in indoor air is at very low concentrations — most BPF exposure is via dermal contact with materials and dust ingestion. Air purifiers with activated carbon address gas-phase BPF but the dominant exposure routes are not airborne.
Related compounds
This page describes documented chemistry and exposure pathways. It does not provide medical advice.
Last reviewed May 16, 2026.