16 ms·
PlasticList – Plastic Levels in Foods
- chiffre01 1y agoThe 1952 Korean war rations are comparable with Whole Foods Boneless Beef Ribeye Steak Grass Fed ?
- cmaggiulli 1y agoOh shit I've been drinking powdered milk from 1952 Korean war rations basically every day.
- Mr_Eri_Atlov 1y agoTop tier shitpost
- mock-possum 1y agoI know I promised not to, but I am indeed freaking out a little bit.
- showerst 1y agoGoing by the lower limit of 20,000 ng/kg, a 70kg person has a limit of 1,400,000 ng/day for DEHP and 70MM ng/day DEHT. So am I reading this right you're probably an order of magnitude below the 'safe' limit even if you subsist solely off of RXBars and Sweetgreen? Which is not so far from me at one point in my 30s... I didn't expect to open this chart and feel _better_ about my plastic consumption, maybe I'm just misunderstanding the chart. It seems even if the limits are 10x too high, you're still probably fine.
- jvanderbot 1y agoThere is an option to view the total daily recommendations, and many of the tested-for items do not have one. So, what is OK for those? But yes, eating even a pound of the 100th percentile food daily seems to have well below the recommended amounts. So - update the recommendations?
- markasoftware 1y agoThe "report" tab on the website shows which items are above federal recommended limits. The vast majority of tested items are within the limits. So yes, if you're only concerned with what the federal government considers safe, the action item is "probably nothing". But the report page also brings up a lot of good reasons to doubt that the federal limits are sufficient.
- Centigonal 1y agoThe "Are the intake limits correct?" section (and the whole report, really) is fascinating and worth a read, but just to provide a concrete example of why federal limits might not be sufficient: 3M began producing PFOA (the most infamous "forever chemical") in 1947. It has been widely used in industry, and many millions of pounds of the stuff have been dumped into waterways since then. PFOA manufacturers were aware of some of the negative health effects of the substance in lab animals in the 1960s. Researchers outside of corporate America began studying PFOA in the 1980s. In the early 2000s, PFOA exposure via drinking water began to get public attention due to a lawsuit against DuPont. As far as I know, the US government had no recommended limit on PFOA exposure in drinking water between 1947 and 2009. Since 2009, limits have become progressively stricter. (For the timeline below, I'm quoting https://www.nrdc.org/press-releases/epa-restricts-toxic-pfas-forever-chemicals-found-drinking-water-0 https://www.nrdc.org/press-releases/epa-restricts-toxic-pfas... ) In 2009, EPA established provisional health advisories for PFOA at 400 ppt and for PFOS at 200 ppt. In 2016, EPA set a lifetime health advisory of 70 ppt for PFOA and PFOS combined. In 2022, EPA published interim lifetime health advisories of 0.004 ppt for PFOA and 0.02 ppt for PFOS. In 2023, EPA proposed health-based maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs) for PFOA and PFOS of 0 ppt. A lot of these chemicals are newer and less well-studied than PFOA, and we may still be in the period where federal limits are hundreds or thousands of times higher than the true safe level.
- bobywoodwarrior 1y agoLove the UI !
- dmm 1y agoIt's interesting that several products from the 1920s contain measurable quantities of DEHP, which was apparently first synthesized in the 1930s. How did that happen? For example, the cocoa powder from the 1920s https://www.plasticlist.org/product/990 https://www.plasticlist.org/product/990
- giantg2 1y agoThat is interesting. I wonder if it's a byproduct of another process and the 1930s date was only when it was commercially produced in isolation.
- eestrada 1y agoThe most disturbing is "Raw Cow Milk from Farm in Glass". It still is loaded with plastic, even though it is one of the least processed things on the list. My only question is was the cow milked by hand or by machine? The tubing in a milking machine almost certainly contains plastic. https://www.plasticlist.org/product/29 https://www.plasticlist.org/product/29
- xnx 1y agoFortunately, raw cow milk is unnecessary for humans (good for baby cows though!) and easy to avoid.
- eestrada 1y agoI bring up raw milk because it is minimally processed (I don't even consume it personally). I used it as an example because it shows how much plastic is embedded in the food chain and ecosystem by looking at one of the least processed items on the list.
- giantg2 1y agoMany livestock feeds have some level of plastic in them.
- dehrmann 1y agoHay is often bound up into bales with plastic twine. Cattle happily eat bits on accident. They used to use wire, but that caused a much more serious problem for the cattle.
- giantg2 1y agoThey used to use natural twines like jute, which was better. They really don't eat much of the plastic stuff. The larger pieces of it do kill them (choking, cholic, etc).
- kylebenzle 1y ago
- xnx 1y agoWeird to see how much attention plastics in food are getting despite no(?) evidence of harm vs. something like consuming too much sugar or alcohol, and BPA/BPS in receipt paper (https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/24/well/health-effects-paper-receipts.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/24/well/health-effects-paper...). It's very hard to maintain a mental ranked list of health things to be worried about when hypothetical concerns get more attention/coverage the confirmed ones.
- cg5280 1y agoThis website does have a column for BPA/BPS and receipts are indeed listed.
- showerst 1y agoSugar and alcohol are clearly labelled and provide an obvious benefit, so people feel empowered to make that cost/benefit trade-off. Microplastics do nebulous harm, and it's difficult or impossible to control intake.
- joshuamcginnis 1y agoWhat is the obvious benefit of alcohol?
- crazygringo 1y agoRelaxation. Stress reduction. Being able to connect with people in a way you might not be able to otherwise. Obviously, varies dramatically from person to person.
- williamdclt 1y ago“Obvious” is maybe not quite the word I’d use, but lower inhibition, fun and social aspects are benefits of (a reasonable use of) alcohol (Not saying it’s a good trade off or that it’s the only or best way to achieve these things obviously)
- mbustamanter 1y ago
- dredmorbius 1y agoOne class of items not listed here, which I'd recently started to think might be less-than-optimal: pepper sold in jars with built-in, plastic, grinders. I'd long since noted that as the jar emptied the grinders were increasingly ineffective. Thinking on why that might be ... I realised that this was because as you grind the pepper, you're also grinding plastic directly into your food. There's surprisingly little discussion about this that I can find, though this 5 y.o. Stackexchange question addresses the concern: <https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/103003/microplastics-from-plastic-pepper-grinders https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/103003/microplas...> Seems to me that plastic grinders, whether disposable or sold as (apparently) durable products, are a class of products which simply shouldn't exist. Searching, e.g., Walmart for "plastic grinders" turns up five listings presently, though it's not clear whether it's the body or the grinder itself which is plastic. In several cases it seems to be the latter. <https://www.walmart.com/c/kp/plastic-grinders https://www.walmart.com/c/kp/plastic-grinders> (Archive of current state: <https://archive.is/yIIX4 https://archive.is/yIIX4>
- williamdclt 1y agoThe grinder itself is almost certainly always plastic in these. Even in refillable grinders, in the low-medium range the burr is often plastic
- dredmorbius 1y agoIt's (thankfully) still possible to buy all-metal grinders, ensuring one a reliable source of dietary steel. Krell or otherwise.
- jcattle 1y agoIs it? I always thought the cheap ones were ceramic. Or is ceramic also somehow a type of plastic?
- williamdclt 1y agoCeramic are also a thing, but plastic burrs do exist afaik (don’t know which is more common). Plastic < ceramic < metal
- egberts1 1y agoShocking comparison (search for 'sugar', only 2 results) on: - Korean War-era sugar ration Vs. - store-bought sugar
- cheeseomlit 1y agoWhat is the deal with whole foods grass-fed ribeye? https://www.plasticlist.org/product/65 https://www.plasticlist.org/product/65 What are they grazing on, plastic lawn turf?
- johncole 1y agoBeef cows are accumulators. And their feed often contains plastics.
- cheeseomlit 1y agoJust thought it was interesting considering they are 'grass-fed'. Is that just a lie? Or maybe it's something else, like if they're drinking water from plastic containers that sit in the sun all day
- johncole 1y agoIt's a good point. I'm not an ag lawyer, but I am willing to bet that there's wiggle room in any grass-fed definition set by the USDA. And you're right, there's also: plastic from water sources, plastic in the field that gets taken up by the gras, supplements given to the cow, plastic in the cutting board the meat was cut in, plastic the meat was wrapped in . . . it's hard to get plastic out of your supply chain.
- kube-system 1y agoYou're probably imagining the marketing depiction of "grass fed" https://www.primalmeats.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/grass-fed-beef-from-flickr.jpg https://www.primalmeats.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/gra... But nobody said it was coming straight off the ground! https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/b/cows-eating-trough-made-blue-plastic-barrels-different-breeds-being-bred-intensively-hay-cowshed-cattle-confinement-253454259.jpg https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/b/cows-eating-trough-made-blue... https://c8.alamy.com/comp/2CFFY4J/hay-bales-wrapped-in-heavy-plastic-for-protection-from-cold-and-rain-on-a-farm-in-south-freeport-maine-2CFFY4J.jpg https://c8.alamy.com/comp/2CFFY4J/hay-bales-wrapped-in-heavy...
- 1y ago
- ChrisArchitect 1y agoSome previous discussion late last year: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42525633 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42525633
- sumsurf 1y agoWhat table library does this wonderful site use?
- rgovostes 1y agoI believe it is TanStack Table (https://tanstack.com/table https://tanstack.com/table)
- metalrain 1y agoThe amount of different units just stunts me, we are really early.
- johncole 1y agoThis list is amazing, but at some point you have to prioritize what you’re paying attention to. Your most dangerous plastic or microplastic is the PFAS. And the biggest source of PFAS is the water you drink. Does it run through plastic tubing? A pfas filter at any point? Sit in a plastic jug? The most effective way to deal with this is to distill your water. Distilled water is nearly pfas free, and also removes bpas, lead, mercury, and any bacteria.[1] https://learn.pfasfreelife.com/research/distillers-remove-pfas-for-pfas-free-water-effectively https://learn.pfasfreelife.com/research/distillers-remove-pf...
- johncole 1y agoThe original article even alludes to this. The first thing at the top of the list is water from a purifier: https://www.plasticlist.org/product/460 https://www.plasticlist.org/product/460
- mannanj 1y agoAnother we refuse to accept and admit, due to the implications of other things that touch our skins, are the plastics from polyester fabrics that enter our body through our skin stream. The skin is the largest organ and has the largest surface area exposure, and these polyesters are one of the largest polluters of micro and nano plastics into the environment - and effectively, our bodies, the skin being one of the most efficient filters and processors of the plastic poison in them. Don't research the poison of the plastics that wash out of those volatile fibers whiilst in the laundry machines. Oh, did you think that the only source of the micro-plastics in the water supply was water bottles?
- CSSer 1y agoI've taken prenatal vitamins for as long as I can remember because they're FDA regulated to actually contain the nutrients they claim to include. I never would've thought that could be a source for microplastics. Separately, I always knew there was a reason those RXBars taste like plastic. /s
- nottorp 1y agoUh. Forget plastics, I love the presentation. Any web dev type can tell me what framework, if any, is that done with?
- davidmurdoch 1y agoNot a fan of the scroll re-alignment behavior on mobile though.
- batrat 1y agoSame. I would like to know too.
- Sn0wCoder 1y agoIts a next.js site using Tailwind -- https://departuremono.com/ https://departuremono.com/ -- https://fonts.google.com/specimen/IBM+Plex+Mono https://fonts.google.com/specimen/IBM+Plex+Mono -- some other fonts mixed in Other that that just styled HTML based on a quick look at the debugger window if there was another framework used its not obvious...
- nottorp 1y agoOh, so the magic is in the custom style and the fonts mostly. Thanks!
- zkmon 1y agoSo, what's the action item for the consumers? How much if this gets outside of our digestion system? What's the impact of that? What are the remedies?
- aydyn 1y agoThere's 10,000s ng of plastic in a Starbuck's Latte ... https://www.plasticlist.org/product/173 https://www.plasticlist.org/product/173
- cjflog 1y agoWhile PlasticList has already tested hundreds of products and found plastic chemicals in 86% of them, laboratory.love lets you crowdfund testing for the specific products you actually buy. Think of it as democratizing PlasticList's methodology: you choose what gets tested, we handle the logistics of sample collection + lab work, and results are published openly to pressure companies toward cleaner supply chains.
- culi 1y agoAre you associated with plastic.love? If so you should be explicit about it. Also, if it's crowdfunded, why am I unable to see any finished results without giving you my email?
- ls-a 1y agoIs this TikTok or HN!
- gavmor 1y ago> Consider this a snapshot of our raw test results, suitable as a starting point and inspiration for further work, but not solid enough on its own to draw conclusions or make policy recommendations or even necessarily to alter your personal purchasing decisions. A fairly responsible caveat.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- jjani 1y agoSuper cool project, but I think there's pretty valid nitpick here: It should clearly state the container (when multiple are possible) as that's likely the origin of 99.9% of the microplastics, as well as temperature. Prime example: "Starbucks Matcha Latte". I bet there are orders of magnitude difference in microplastic content between getting a hot one in a plastic (coated, if not fully) takeaway cup vs an iced one in a mug. In general, containers and the way they're used generally make the difference, but all the focus here is only on the food item.
- IAmBroom 1y agoMy suspicion as well, but so far we have only guesses, not data.
- TuringNYC 1y agoImagine eating $22 SweetGreen salads each day for good health...and then seeing it on the top-5 list for plastics.
- ericd 1y agoSeriously. I think their fibery-looking bowls also tested near the top on PFAS by Consumer Reports.
- rsync 1y agoIt's on the top 5 list when sorted "nanograms per serving" but if you re-sort the table by "nanograms per gram" it is quite low. But by this same measure (intention of consumer vs. exposure) we find a deeper irony: If you sort the entire dataset by "nanograms per gram", 3 of the top 5 items are prenatal vitamins: https://www.plasticlist.org/product/260 https://www.plasticlist.org/product/260
- TuringNYC 1y agoThe per-gram reading is good for things without real servings (e.g., per gram of water). However, for a single-serving meal, winning on per-gram isnt really helpful since we wouldnt eat a gram of a 1-serving salad. Its sort of like how McMansions are actually inexpensive on a per-sqft basis, but how that isnt helpful since you have to purchase all 5000 sqft of the McMansion
- Isamu 1y agoI struggle with taking this too seriously YET, knowing that we ingest all manner of tiny things, and breathe in all kinds of particles and toxins all the time. NOT SAYING this is fine, but rather I haven’t heard anything yet to bump it up higher in the list of concerns. I mean I already have exposure to lead and asbestos, and the random particulates I breathe in aren’t going away. I feel like this is getting attention because it’s a new issue, not that all other concerns pale in comparison.
- protocolture 1y agoI used to hand sort damaged batteries without gloves. I feel like I am not going to see much benefit from trying to minimise microplastic consumption. But maybe the next generation will see some benefit.
- nikkwong 1y agoJesus christ at the numbers on the Rxbars. So much for "4 ingredients with no B.S.". Kind of insane that they could get up to 30,000 ng/serving with such a small serving size consisting of something like 4 blueberries, 4 cashews, and 3 dates. Also the negligible levels of plastic detected in plastic water bottles is surprising. I was under the impression, based on other reports, that water in plastic bottles is something we should avoid.
- kbenson 1y agoI think that's mostly BPA and phthalates, and microplastics are often listed along with those, but I'm unsure if it was actually tested or if we notices people had a lot of microplastics and just assumed that was a likely source.
- nikkwong 1y agoI remember at least one study that pointed to 250k nanoplastics in a liter of bottled water [0]. Possibly these types of particles weren't studied. There are certainly many different toxicants to be looking out for; overwhelming to the point of being pointless. [0]: https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/plastic-particles-bottled-water https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/plastic...
- klevertree1 1y agoI'm making a product to help trap plasticizers in the digestive tract and prevent them from getting into the bloodstream, NeutraOat (NeutraOat.com). I was originally inspired by PlasticList, and actually made a quiz on my website based off their data for people to assess their plastics exposure (quiz.neutraoat.com)
- ashwinsundar 1y agoWhat is the scientific background for what appears to be an oat fiber supplement to "reduce plasticizer absorption by up to 70%"?
- IAmBroom 1y ago> I'm making a product to help trap plasticizers in the digestive tract That would be amazing... if backed by science, and not just of the "herbal cleansing" ilk of products. What's the science behind your claims?
- any1 1y agoI used to work for a company that makes equipment for the food processing industry. Sometimes conveyor belts would be left running for days or even weeks in the test area. After a while, you would start to see very fine dust on and around the conveyor belts. This was finely ground POM plastic. On some occasions, there were actually heaps of that stuff forming beneath the conveyor belts. In the factories, everything gets washed down with pressure washers at least once per day, so very little of this stuff goes into the food, but it definitely gets washed away out to sea. I think that there is probably a wide-spread misunderstanding on how the micro-plastics enter the food. It does not seem very likely that it would come from the packaging or your tupperware (unless your tupperware is so old that it has actually started to disintegrate). It seems much likelier that the plastics were in the food before it was packaged.
- alliao 1y agobeats metal shavings I guess...
- fooqux 1y agoMaybe not? We already have a variety of metals in our bodies, and cells already interact with them as needed and filtering them if not. (I'm obviously being very generic here. Heavy metals are an obvious exception to this.) Meanwhile, biology has no idea what plastic is and it seems like our bodies have a hard time filtering it out. Sorry if you were joking and I missed it.
- AnimalMuppet 1y agoMetals, yes. Metal shavings can have sharp edges, which may not do good things to the inside of your mouth (nor to your GI track if you swallow them).
- kritr 1y agoA friend of mine built an alternative UI for this, that may be more digestible if you’re trying to lookup individual items. http://plastic.food/ http://plastic.food/
- zkmon 1y agoWhat are we complaining about? Is it about the industrialization, economy and jobs that produced plastics? How far do we want to go back? Industries came out of scientific advances and business, which came from social dynamics and foundational academics such as mathematics and logic, which in turn were a result of leisure time due to civilizations, settlements, more food availability, farming, tools etc. All this was inevitable and incremental. Nothing happened overnight. We didn't cause it. And we won't be doing anything to stop it. There is a story in Hindu mythology about churning of the milk ocean, by gods and demons in cooperation, using a mountain as the churning rod, with an objective of extracting the nectar of immortality. After a great amount of churning, a great poison comes out which must be consumed, otherwise it ends the universe. Lord Shiva consumes it, but keeps it in his throat, to save himself and the universe. When the Nectar finally comes out, somehow gods trick the demons, to keep the nectar to themselves. Sometimes it occurs to me that this story foretold the extraction of oil from ocean deeps, giving the luxuries to the developed world and pollution to the third world.
- rrgok 1y agoWell, I don't know if the story foretold the future or not. But in any case, why didn't Shiva let the world end? We would not have all this shitty problems now. Look at it: we can't even drink water anymore without getting harmful chemicals.
- porridgeraisin 1y ago426,000 years to go...
- kerakaali 1y agoRead through their "industry advice" section and thought this interesting: > If you chop something on a plastic cutting board (because wood cutting boards are outlawed in commercial kitchens, apparently), test before and after chopping. Who banned wood cutting boards from kitchens and for what purpose? I did some digging and some sources cite that neither FDA nor USDA strictly ban wood cutting boards, but individual state health departments are often strict on commercial kitchens that use wood instruments. I get concerns of wood being porous and all, but with the alternative being I have to ingest shavings from the plastic cutting board with every meal... Maybe it's time for a paradigm shift.
- BenjiWiebe 1y agoThe only recall our cheese ever had was through a 3rd party who was cutting our cheese on a wooden cutting board which was contaminated with listeria. Really kinda annoying, since we have absolutely no control over that, and it's hardly good brand optics. Wood is very hard to clean.
- lacoolj 1y agodont want to use this data for anything solid other than ... i will never visit the bay area
- Liwink 1y agoCan anyone help test the plastic level of Coke? I wonder whether plastic or sugar would kill me first.
- limitedfrom 1y agoCanned versions (original, Diet, and Zero) are in the dataset if you search for "Coca-Cola"
- alliao 1y agozuck at least got this part right... got his own farm and everything
- pnw 1y agoRIP my RXBARs. I must be full of plastics at this point, they were my go-to snack for years.
- LinguaBrowse 1y agoWas wondering how they got hold of "Powdered Milk from 1952 Korean War Rations", but they even answer that! > COLLECTION LOCATION: > eBay, sold by littlebitoeverythingjoe Amazing how meticulous they've been, right down to recording the conditions that the package was shipped in: > SHIPPED IN: > Original packaging inside Ziploc bag > > SHIPPING METHOD: > UPS Overnight https://www.plasticlist.org/product/37 https://www.plasticlist.org/product/37
- pewpewp 1y agoAnyone else notice the samples are stored/delivered in a plastic bag. Like wtf??
- pewpewp 1y agoThe samples are stored/delivered in a plastic bag. LMFAO wtf??
- IG_Semmelweiss 1y agoI will forever remember this list as the one that revealed that Shakeshack burgers have 5x microplastics than your average McD quarter pounder. I've avoided Shakeshack ever since.
- sadcodemonkey 1y agoThis site has been posted to HN before, but it's definitely interesting to revisit in light of drastic cuts to federal agencies like the FDA, USDA, and CDC. Independent efforts like PlasticList are probably going to be more and more important as research funding gets slashed and health-related data is suppressed or manipulated.
- ChaoPrayaWave 1y agoThank you for sharing this data, it is really helpful. Now it feels like microplastics are almost everywhere in life, even breathing and eating are difficult to completely avoid. What we can do is probably to try to understand their sources, and then reduce contact as much as possible, make a little bit of active choices, at least to protect ourselves and our families.
- ainiriand 1y agoWell, more than food those are food products and other sort of products like toothpaste. Not sure you should consume them in the first place.
- krige 1y agoMan, remember a few year backs some magic microbes that eat plastic were making the rounds in news? Whatever happened to those, did not work out, are still worked on, lack of funding...?
- perrygeo 1y agoI'm very skeptical of plastics research at this point. Remember the "we have a plastic spoon worth of microplastics in our brains!" hype cycle. Turns out their methods were highly flawed and "not a suitable analysis method for PE and PVC in biological matrices" (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11800385/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11800385/) Can anyone comment on the methods used here? Seems they don't have the same issues.
- avoutos 1y agoThe PlasticList tests seem to have accounted for matrix effects / contamination. They used several various reactions (w acetonitrile, PSA, MgSO4, C18) to selectively dissolve / isolate the plastic compounds. This is also assisted by certain techniques (sonication, GC-MS/MS). They also added isotopically-labeled control plastic samples. That should enable them measure matrix affects and adjust for them in the non-control sample. It is the isotopic labels that give me the most assurance. While the ziploc bags had pthalates, I agree that it is probably not enough to impact the results, especially considering the lab used acetonitrile on the bags to test them. There's also the hand soap. These would probably cause a difference of + 80 at most. Overall, I'd say the tests were the best we can get with current techniques / technology. To fully assess the health impact of ingested plastics, we have to establish the underlying mechanism (e.g. bioaccumulation + endocrine activity) as well as the pattern of health consequences in real-world data. The first part is easier and I believe has been demonstrated (especially regarding endocrine activity) fairly well. The latter is notoriously difficult; it is probably better approached with animal studies as human association studies are too unreliable and would take too long to tease out effects. Dosage is also an important factor and often makes poison-in-principle not poison-in-practice, though low-dosages over a long period of time may still have an effect that is not immediately noticeable. Bioaccumulation is also related to this. As for the "plastic spoon" claim, it originated from this study -- https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12003191 https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12003191 -- in Nature. The study you list is specific to analysis of human blood, whereas the original was done on human brain tissue. The original study cites other papers that have demonstrated the accumulation of plastics in other organ tissues using different techniques so I wouldn't discount plastics research because of the potential flaws of one method. Plus the fact that in the original study, the level of plastics increased by 50% between those who died in 2016 vs 2024 and increased further in those with dementia suggests that there is a real relationship here and something to be concerned about. There are many other studies that establish a negative health relationship here. I don't think we should discount them.
- twsted 1y agoLook at the report (https://www.plasticlist.org/report https://www.plasticlist.org/report), it is very informative
- hobo_in_library 1y agoWhy are they measuring plastic in a "Paper Receipt in Water"??? https://www.plasticlist.org/product/754 https://www.plasticlist.org/product/754