New York Times opinion columnist Nick Kristof is at it again. Despite pleas, even from people inclined to like the New York Times and people inclined to side with him politically, he refuses to talk about science a little less or at least learn a little more.

He is shrieking about BPA again, notes Trevor Butterworth at Forbes.com. 
Kristof claims to be reading the “peer-reviewed” research, it appears that he only reads that produced by a very, very small group of scientists – all on the farthest reaches of the environmental left. He applies no statistical or experimental criticism to these studies: they always “really” find what they claim to have found; and he seems unaware of the many non-industry funded studies or regulatory agency assessments that contradict them.
In other words, he knows the NYT audience and caters to it.  Given their political proclivity, it is no surprise to find they are anti-science about, well, everything.  Except global warming and evolution, that is.  To most of science media, those are the only two 'controversies' they can find - not the commonality of the voters who are anti-vaccine, anti-GMO, anti-BPA, anti-medical research and pro-ghosts, astrology and UFOs.
 There is a consensus that the cluelessness of journalists like Kristof has not just wildly distorted the actual scientific evidence on BPA, it is contributing to a more general and broader assault on scientific integrity.
That was always the danger in making science a political tool for the left.  If science media alarmists contend that 50% of a country is wrong if they have a different world view, it was only a matter of time before the crackpots on the other side were going to be shown wrong as well.

And this is turning out to be the Decade of Left-Wing Anti-Science beliefs.

Why Nick Kristof's Scientific Illiteracy Threatens Us All by Trevor Butterworth