14 ms·
Compostable fast-food packaging can emit volatile PFAS
- justinator 4y agoPFAS in dental floss: https://www.ehn.org/pfas-floss-2658203711.html https://www.ehn.org/pfas-floss-2658203711.html
- hanniabu 4y agoPFAS in many things you use every day: https://www.mamavation.com/product-investigations https://www.mamavation.com/product-investigations
- ericpauley 4y agoNot bashing the conclusion, but I seriously thought it was common knowledge that Oral B glide and equivalent products were PTFE based. It’s also annoying that people lump PTFE with other PFAS when it is pretty clearly less of an issue (note: not completely trouble free) in most cases.
- photonbeam 4y ago‘Common’? I suspect a sampling of random people on the street would approximate closer to zero
- zerocrates 4y agoIt used to be a big selling point of Glide that it's made with Teflon/Gore-Tex: it was originally made by Gore and had the Gore logo right on the package.
- justinator 4y ago>but I seriously thought it was common knowledge that Oral B glide and equivalent products were PTFE based Nope. I bought it because I absolutely hate flossing, and I absolutely need to floss, so I bought Oral B Glide as an effort to get myself to floss.
- ars 4y agoLumping PTFE with PFAS is willfully misleading people. The two might have things in common during manufacturing, but as a final product delivered to a consumer? Utterly different.
- ChancyChance 4y agoDr Tung FTW! https://drtungs.com/products/92-smart-floss.html https://drtungs.com/products/92-smart-floss.html
- tome 4y agoWhat do you mean? Dr Tung's is listed under '“Not Our Favorite” Tooth Floss Brands' and considered to contain PFAS (although there appears to be some dispute in the comments).
- ChancyChance 4y agowait what? what article are you reading? DR Tungs site says "All our floss is free of PTFE and PFAS (polyfluoroalkyl substances)."
- eikaramba 4y agothe actual source https://www.mamavation.com/beauty/toxic-pfas-dental-floss-tooth-floss.html#Not_Our_Favorite_Tooth_Floss_Brands https://www.mamavation.com/beauty/toxic-pfas-dental-floss-to...
- ChancyChance 4y agoWhat on earth are you smoking, that is NOT the actual link. That is some woo-woo garbage page. Please check this thread again. The actual FA: https://www.ehn.org/pfas-floss-2658203711.html https://www.ehn.org/pfas-floss-2658203711.html And the OP: https://cen.acs.org/environment/persistent-pollutants/Fast-food-packaging-emit-volatile/101/i11 https://cen.acs.org/environment/persistent-pollutants/Fast-f...
- EntropicBrew 4y agoIf you look at the actual FA, it cites the article from mamavation. That is literally the first link, in the FA.
- r00fus 4y agoI’ve switched to using Radius silk floss - it’s better in almost every way compared to the various brands we’ve tried. Only annoying thing is the packaging but it’s plastic free also.
- rcme 4y agoYea silk floss is really nice. Food caught between your teeth sticks better to the silk than to glide, and getting the silk between your teeth requires slightly more pressure, which feels nice to me.
- r00fus 4y agoThe glide actually cause problems with shoved food into my gums that only the dentist was able to remove later. It’s amazing when you look at this measure it says that Glide has 240k ppm (24% of entire product mass) was organic flourine!! https://www.mamavation.com/beauty/toxic-pfas-dental-floss-tooth-floss.html https://www.mamavation.com/beauty/toxic-pfas-dental-floss-to...
- ars 4y agoYah that link is a lie, and I quote: "It’s important to note that our lab is not looking for PFAS compounds directly, because it’s simply impossible to look for all of them." "levels of organic fluorine, a marker for PFAS" - yah, that's basically an outright lie. Flourine is also a marker for Teflon (PTFE) which is 100% not a problem. This is junk science taken to it's ultimate level.
- rgrieselhuber 4y agohttps://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/mar/13/toxic-forever-chemicals-pfas-toilet-paper https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/mar/13/toxic-fo... This is worth noting as well.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- hbarka 4y agoGetting a TOTO bidet is a life-changer. We have running water and flushable toilets but we still dry smear?
- rgrieselhuber 4y agoAgreed
- goodpoint 4y agotl;dr Toxic chemicals is toilet paper.
- nayuki 4y agoSpeaking as a complete noob here, what are some alternatives to PFAS linings? Wax? Plant-based plastics?
- tectonic 4y agoYes to both of those.
- w3454 4y agoBanana leaves
- Ekaros 4y agoI actually doubt that plant-based plastics are any better in additives than oil based ones. Wasn't there some years ago whole thing about those reusable "bamboo" polymer coffee cups. That actually they do contained not so beneficial chemicals.
- jacobsimon 4y agoDumb question but…why do humans keep using toxic chemicals for cooking and storing food? Surely we can find something edible.
- jiggywiggy 4y agoFresh food logistics are horrible. Did fresh food online for a few years. Makes things almost impossible. The smart companies try to extent the shelf life as long as possible. And make storage easy. Plastic and chemicals are great for those. Put some chemicals in that make your company profitable while the gov deems it safe? A no brainer. Only non chemical alternative is the freezer.
- tectonic 4y agoYup: https://www.consumerreports.org/health/food-contaminants/dangerous-pfas-chemicals-are-in-your-food-packaging-a3786252074/ https://www.consumerreports.org/health/food-contaminants/dan...
- anonymouskimmer 4y ago> Only non chemical alternative is the freezer. Waxes are pretty natural chemicals, even when they're refined from oil. We used to use them all the time for fresh food storage. I assume they're more expensive than fluorinated packaging though.
- olao99 4y agoBecause they're legal. We would still use asbestos and lead if it were not because of the legality question
- hanniabu 4y agoIf asbestos was introduced today I'm doubtful it'd be outlawed
- kube-system 4y agoThey’re chosen because they have other practical qualities that were desirable. Often we don’t fully realize the drawbacks of materials we use with our food until many years after they are widespread.
- tectonic 4y agoJust. Stop. Putting. Teflon. On. Everything. Figuring out what does and does not have PFAS on it to protect my family is exhausting and infuriating. I’ve emailed with manufacturers, sent stuff to labs; basically, no one seems to know how much materials like this are used on every day products.
- dangwhy 4y agocan someone recommend a pan to make eggs in the morning without sticking or having to put tons of grease.
- throwawaymaths 4y agoYou don't need tons of grease, you just need the correct technique.
- crazygringo 4y agoTo make fried eggs in a non-nonstick pan? Of course you do. You need enough so it doesn't stick. There no technique that can rescue egg stuck to a pan. The thing is, any more oil than that just stays in the pan. Fried eggs don't absorb oil. So put plenty of oil in the pan, because it won't wind up on your plate. There's zero reason to skimp, otherwise you'll just get eggs that stick.
- sosborn 4y agocast iron
- rpvnwnkl 4y agoCast iron you can scramble and end up with a clean pan afterwards. Just have to let it heat up all the way first.
- samcheng 4y agoCast iron works great for me. Another popular option is carbon steel. Both options require a bit of a learning curve as far as care/cleaning goes, but once you have a well-seasoned pan, eggs are easy. You have the added bonus of being able to put them into the oven, and you can get a much better sear than on teflon.
- tingletech 4y agohttps://archive.is/J2Wfh https://archive.is/J2Wfh
- throwaway892238 4y agoYou know, we really don't need this disposable culture. Everyone just expects to get a disposable container everywhere they go (in the West, anyway). But we don't need disposable everything. People can carry their own set of utensils, and even their own food packaging; it's not uncommon for people to bring their own tupperwares to restaurants (wrap it in a decorative cloth to be fancy). Restaurants could also give out more robust packaging that costs more, or take a deposit to encourage returns. Personally, I keep the stronger plastic chinese take-out containers. Back in the day, the disposable container was food. You'd get a portable pie (meaning a meat pie, usually) in what was called a "coffin" - basically a bread bowl or pastry shell that was mostly thrown away after you'd eaten the inside of the pie. Summer rolls and spring rolls have their own wrapper. Meat on a stick was pretty common. Rice balls could contain fish or vegetables. Samosas would have vegetable or meat fillings.
- waboremo 4y agoI thought this was where we were heading with the explosion of popularity with food trucks since they often provide so much quantity of food in "food container" like a burrito, but instead delivery took off.
- red-iron-pine 3y agoTook off because of COVID. And is dying back because COVID is waning and the associated fees for UberEats or Skip are insane.
- ClumsyPilot 4y agowe cam have a country-wide system of reusable packaging that you can get from any takeaway, abd can return to any takeawatly for a refund
- 542458 4y agoI somewhat agree, but it's probably more complex than that - We have a country-wide system of reusable aluminum and glass containers that can be returned for refund and a significant portion of the population can't be bothered and just chucks them in the trash (or worse, the gutter). Lots of people don't respond to incentives well.
- uejfiweun 4y agoLooking at a lot of what you folks posted, it seems like PFAS are in just about everything, and there's no realistic way to avoid them without an absurd amount of effort. And they are unlikely to be regulated soon. So realistically, what's going to happen to people? We're all inevitably going to accumulate a bunch of PFAS, so what exactly can I expect for the future of my health?
- amelius 4y agoPerhaps Darwin will kick in.
- agtech_andy 4y agoThe reality is that US regulatory agencies have been extremely permissive for many years. Many other nations piggy back on their findings. We need a massive increase in enforcement. What we will see with cheaper and more available testing is that PFAS are everywhere. It is hard to find waterways or soils, even in remote areas, that are not contaminated. It is really tragic and the extent of the pollution can make you crazy.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- jiggywiggy 4y agoIt will cause things to move much slower. But I'm thinking we are at the point where we need to move to burden of proof to being safe instead of it being unsafe.
- chiefalchemist 4y agoThat's the root problem. It's "release first" maybe ask questions later. Imagine if food or drug - which also end up in your body - were done the same way. But even if individual chemicals are proven to be safe, there's the issue of combining with other chemicals in the wild. In the case of these containers...I grew up when the local takeout (e.g., Chinese) used paper containers. We survived. These newer "high tech" solutions are silly.
- gtop3 4y agoI don't think proof is the right word. It's impossible to prove something is safe.
- tfourb 4y agoOf course you can proof the safety of a chemical compound for human consumption (at least to the best of current technical abilities and within an acceptable margin of error). This is done for i.e. drugs thousands of times each year. Yes it costs money and time, but that is about the only serious objection. You could also go to a risk based model, where the burden of proof for groups of chemical compounds shifts based on experience with similar compounds, potential environmental impact, local and global measurements, etc.
- steponlego 4y agoWe’ll yeah they have to spray cancer poison on the stuff so it’s water and grease resistant. Wax is way too expensive, especially beeswax which wouldn’t have this issue. You ever wonder what the ingredients are in a paper straw? Don’t look it up. You won’t like it.
- janosdebugs 4y agoSo, when you order from the average restaurant, you get a meal made of pre-portioned frozen ingredients containing sometimes questionable substances and you also get poisoned by the packaging. And the restaurant industry is complaining. Makes sense. (If you are a German-speaker, ZDFbesseresser is a worthwhile channel to watch. We basically all but stopped going to or ordering from restaurants.)
- beebeepka 4y agoWe're not big on ordering food, or take out in general, but I've been thinking about just providing our own metal/glass containers instead of wasting aluminium and paper. My wife is against it. I think she finds this idea embarrassing but I don't care.
- dwater 4y agoPlastic use in commercial kitchens is pretty high too. Taking boiling hot food and putting plastic wrap over it or putting it in a plastic container is pretty common. With sous vide the food is cooked inside a brand new plastic bag. The only way to avoid it is to be fanatical.
- beebeepka 4y agoOnly speculating but something tells me mineral water is often bottled while it's at still hot. I didn't know what sous vide is. According to the wiki article, containers are either plastic or glass. It boggles the mind. Why would anyone cook in a plastic container
- simmerup 4y agoI imagine because it’s easier. The plastic doesn’t soak up as much of the heat and is easier to shift around and takes up less space
- arthur2e5 4y agoSous vide is long waterbath at around 55 C or lower. Not a typical plastic safety issue temperature. Cooking in plastic (or any "original package") has a food safety point in restaurants. Keeping it sealed until the outside is sterilized reduces possible contamination. Immersion also makes for easier and faster heating.
- dbg31415 4y agoI use these, are these horrible? https://www.costco.com/snapware-pyrex-18-piece-glass-food-storage-set.product.100358145.html https://www.costco.com/snapware-pyrex-18-piece-glass-food-st... What should I use instead?
- ChancyChance 4y agoThose should be fine since they don't have teflon and teflon-related materials: they are non-BPA plastics with silicon seals. Just don't microwave plastic (There are a lot of "ifs" and "buts" around that, but it is better just to not microwave plastic and be safe.) Granted, you are still throwing away plastic once the snaps break. They also make similar types with bamboo lids and a silicone seal. (Hopefully if I'm wrong someone will shout me down with the correct answer :)
- gruez 4y agoThe title literally says "Compostable fast-food packaging can emit volatile PFAS". Your glass container with plastic lid certainly isn't compostable.
- samwillis 4y agoI believe one of the other issues with compostable packaging is when it ends up in landfill, rather than being composted. It breaks down significantly quicker than other packaging in an anaerobic environment resulting in a spike of methane emissions. Obviously, many landfills now collect and use the methane, but many don't and it contributes to greenhouse emissions. Like many innovations to go green, it's complicated and often hijacked by corporations to sell products. Compostable packaging isn't the solution, reusable packaging is!
- amluto 4y agoIf you believe the leading manufacturer in the US, they phased out PFAS in compostable bowls in 2021: https://www.worldcentric.com/leafplus/ https://www.worldcentric.com/leafplus/ I assume the new coating is some kind of polymerized plant material.
- anonuser123456 4y ago>I assume the new coating is some kind of polymerized plant material. That’s a bold assumption.
- noreiley 4y ago> Packaging manufacturers typically don’t reveal what’s in their products It seems crazy to me that they don't have to disclose this. If it's in contact with the food, it will leak into the food and then in our system. We have food ingredients listed on stickers, why not packaging materials? I can understand keeping secrets about the manufacturing process in the name of competitive capitalism, but at the end of the day the material ends up in our hands (and mouth), so we can always send it to a lab and get its composition. We could skip this whole "let's do studies to analyze what we were eating daily for all this time" if the industry had to give us the list. If they don't know either, have them do the studies before releasing the product.
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoIt's kind of ridiculous that non-disclosure allows 'trade secret' protection of ingredients when, as you say, a lab can tell us the actual ingredients and relative quantities. We should require disclosure for trade secret protection of chemically-based products. At least to the EPA or FDA. They can still keep the actual recipe and blending instructions secret.
- blondie9x 4y agoPick your poison. Micro-plastics or PFAS. All consumption has a trade off. Some are worse than others. Micro-plastics are causing major endocrine system disruption in youth. Testosterone levels and estrogen levels are getting all our of whack and causing gender related diversification issues that will grow exponentially over time with micro-plastic consumption levels increasing. I would pick PFAS.
- goodpoint 4y agoHow about neither?!
- verall 4y agoCan you expand on "gender related diversification issues"? I'm not really sure what you mean.
- smegsicle 4y agothe chemicals in the microplastics are making the kids gay
- lm28469 4y agoThanks god some people high up are not as defeatists and still fight for regulations
- phoenixreader 4y agoThere has been a lot of food packaging toxicity research news lately, for some reason. For example, just two weeks ago, "BPA-like chemical seeps from labels to food" https://www.futurity.org/bisphenol-s-bps-bpa-plastics-chemicals-food-2891442-2/ https://www.futurity.org/bisphenol-s-bps-bpa-plastics-chemic...
- modzu 4y agoif canada banned single use plastic, why doesn't that include fluoropolymers? does the legislation have a formal definition for "plastic"?
- userbinator 4y agoI believe that was only (certain uses of) polyethylene and polypropylene, which are probably the most harmless of plastics.
- carabiner 4y agoJust serve everything in banana leaves at this point.
- friend_and_foe 4y agoThat's because they were never designed to be enviroentally friendly. They were designed to be able to be marketed as environmentally friendly. Big difference. If someone sees it disintegrate they'll think "good, biodegradable" even if that's not actually what's happening. The manufacturers don't care. They know, most of the people raising the hubbub about it don't take the 5 minutes to understand what theyre screeching about, they don't have to appease the environmentalists, they have to appease the pantywads, the kind of people who don't buy animal tested cosmetics but flush them down the drain all the same. Just use paper for Christ's sake and quit it with all these shenanigans. Brown, recycled paper, maybe some wax. And glass for bottles and things. It's all you need.
- sizzle 4y agoThey need to fine these companies and mandate they disclose the chemicals they are impregnating the fibers with to make it “grease resistant”
- pacomerh 4y agoConsumer reports has an analysis of several restaurants, it's from 2022 but maybe worth a look, https://www.consumerreports.org/health/food-contaminants/dangerous-pfas-chemicals-are-in-your-food-packaging-a3786252074/ https://www.consumerreports.org/health/food-contaminants/dan...