BPA is still used widely. BPB is sometimes used as a substitute but it’s probably just as bad.
I generally don't take or touch receipts if I can avoid it, but I don't treat them like they're radioactive. The dose makes the poison, and I haven't figured out how to completely eliminate them and still function in society.
Using hand sanitizer increases the absorption rate of BPA and other chemicals by a factor of 100 or more - https://www.newsweek.com/hand-sanitizer-speed-absorption-bpa...
https://www.digitalcheck.com/receipts-thermal-ink-costs/ > There’s one other small difference that’s become important in the battle between thermal and ink: the use of company logos on receipts. As it turns out, this is a key factor in the cost of paper, and tips the break-even point in favor of thermal if you want your receipts to have a distinctive look. Ordinarily, plain receipt paper can be had for as little as 40 cents per 150-foot roll, while thermal paper comes in longer rolls (220 or 230 feet) that cost around 80 cents – so you get 25-30% more paper for your dollar with the standard variety.
This might be another reason why companies use it. No receipt, no warranty associated costs.
We usually photograph such receipts so that we can print them if needed. But it's annoying.
Example study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4927604/
Because my consumer-grade fingertips don't run mass spec, I'm going to continue not touching receipts as much as possible. Hopefully some people who read this have a connection to a company that issues printed receipts.