On December 27, 2024, Plasticlist, a consumer-led research project launched by entrepreneur and investor Nat Friedman, published its final report outlining its process and results. The study involved collecting and analyzing 705 samples from 296 distinct food products, which were tested by an external laboratory, with all results publicly accessible.
The authors explicitly disclaim that while they consulted with scientists, they themselves are not experts in this topic and invite others to replicate their results. “Consider this a snapshot of our raw test results, suitable as a starting point and inspiration for further work,” the introduction reads. Each sample was tested for 18 different plastic-related chemicals, including eleven phthalates, three bisphenols, and four phthalate substitutes. The tested products, collected from the Bay Area in California, encompassed a wide variety of items such as fast food, beverages, dairy products, produce, snack bars, baby foods, and coffee from numerous brands.
The results indicated that 86% of the food samples contained detectable levels of plastic-related chemicals. At least one of the 18 chemicals was found in all tested baby foods, prenatal supplements, human breast milk, yogurt, and ice cream. Plastic chemicals were also present in products from major brands, including Starbucks and Coca-Cola, as well as in premium and organic products like raw milk, farm-fresh beef, and 22 organic foods. Notably, less-processed foods contained fewer chemicals than highly processed ones (FPF reported), and bottled water, whether in glass or plastic, showed similar levels of chemical content. Additionally, hot food stored in takeout containers for 45 minutes exhibited 34% higher levels of plastic chemicals compared to the same dishes served fresh at restaurants.
Phthalates were detected in 73% of the products tested, phthalate substitutes in 73%, and bisphenols in 22%. Among the chemicals, di-2-ethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP, CAS 117-81-7) and di-2-ethylhexyl terephthalate (DEHT, CAS 6422-86-2) were the most frequently detected, appearing in approximately 70% of samples each, followed by dibutyl phthalate (DBP, CAS 84-74-2), found in 50% of samples (FPF reported). Importantly, 22 products contained bisphenol A (BPA, CAS 80-05-7) levels that exceeded the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) intake limits, with excesses ranging from 450% to over 32,000% of the recommended threshold for a 70 kg individual (FPF reported). Two bottled water samples also exceeded the FDA limit for DEHP by 217% and 183%, respectively.
While 24 samples exceeded established safety limits for various chemicals, the majority of samples fell below the limits set by regulatory bodies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and EFSA. However, the researchers question whether the existing regulatory limits are appropriate (FPF reported, here and here). They highlighted that many regulatory thresholds are based on over 20 years old data that may not reflect current scientific understanding. For example, the EPA’s safety limit for DEHP in 2024 relies on research from 1953. Additionally, while diisobutyl phthalate (DIBP, CAS 84-69-5) has been banned in children’s toys and childcare products by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission and in food-contact items by the EU, no safe daily exposure limit for DIBP has been established by the FDA, EPA, or EFSA, according to the authors (FPF reported). The authors further emphasized the growing body of evidence indicating that some endocrine-disrupting chemicals can exert effects at low doses and that mixture toxicity remains an underexplored area. This adds further uncertainty to the adequacy of current regulatory frameworks.
In summarizing their findings, the researchers stated: “We began this project searching for a ‘smoking gun’ study that conclusively proved the dangers of these chemicals in humans at the levels we are consuming them. We didn’t find that. However, we’ve emerged from this project with the view that current safety limits for plastic chemicals could be materially wrong. The limits set by different agencies contradict each other, many of them haven’t been revised in decades despite advances in science, and real-world scenarios like chemical mixtures are understudied.”
Reference
Plasticlist (December 27, 2024) “Plasticlist report.”
