Testing food and drinks for contaminants like PFAS, microplastics, and other harmful substances is essential for public health and environmental protection. PFAS, known as “forever chemicals,” and microplastics, which accumulate in the food web, pose significant risks to human health, including cancers, immune system disruption, and metabolic disorders. These pollutants enter food through packaging, water, and industrial processes. Advanced detection methods, like liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS), allow for precise identification of these contaminants in food. Regulatory frameworks are evolving to address these threats, with bans and limits on PFAS in food packaging and stricter monitoring of microplastics. Mitigation strategies include using alternative packaging, improved waste management, and consumer actions like using glass or stainless steel containers. Testing throughout the food supply chain ensures safety from production to consumption, helping reduce exposure and safeguard human health.
Long Version
The Imperative of Testing Food and Drinks for PFAS, Microplastics, and Contaminants
In an era where synthetic chemicals permeate every corner of our environment, testing food and drinks for contaminants has become a cornerstone of public health and environmental protection. Emerging contaminants like per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), often dubbed forever chemicals, alongside microplastics (MPs) and nanoplastics, pose insidious threats through dietary exposure. These pollutants, stemming from industrial processes and consumer products, lead to bioaccumulation in human bodies, raising alarms about long-term health risks such as toxicity and pollution-related illnesses. Regular monitoring not only ensures food safety but also empowers consumers to make informed choices, mitigating environmental contamination and promoting regulatory compliance.
Understanding PFAS, Microplastics, and Other Contaminants
PFAS encompass a vast family of synthetic chemicals, including long-chain variants like perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA), perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS), perfluorodecanoic acid (PFDA), perfluoroundecanoic acid (PFUnDA), perfluorododecanoic acid (PFDoA), perfluorotridecanoic acid (PFTrDA), and perfluorotetradecanoic acid (PFTeDA), as well as short-chain ones like perfluorobutane sulfonate (PFBS), perfluorobutanoic acid (PFBA), perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA), perfluoropentanoic acid (PFPeA), and alternatives such as GenX (HFPO-DA), trifluoroacetic acid (TFA), perfluoropropionic acid (PFPrA), and ultrashort-chain PFAS. Fluorotelomers, another subset, contribute to their persistence. Microplastics, tiny particles less than 5mm, and nanoplastics, even smaller, arise from plastic pollution, often biofilm-covered MPs or aged MPs that enhance their interactions with other pollutants. Broader contaminants include heavy metals, pharmaceuticals, and persistent organic pollutants, all classified as emerging contaminants due to their novel or unregulated status. These substances are ubiquitous, appearing in everything from bottled water to seafood, and their detection has advanced significantly with new methods capable of identifying even ultrashort-chain PFAS and nanoplastics in complex matrices.
Sources and Exposure Pathways
Exposure pathways are multifaceted, with point sources like wastewater treatment plant effluents and non-point sources such as atmospheric deposition, runoff to surface water, and groundwater contamination playing key roles. PFAS infiltrate food matrices through food contact materials (FCMs) like nonstick cookware and grease-resistant paper, as well as firefighting foams and biosolids applied to soil. Microplastics enter via plastic pollution in oceans and rivers, migrating into beverages and food through trophic transfer, where they accumulate across the food web from phytoplankton to higher organisms. Additional sources include compostable packaging that may degrade into microplastics, industrial processes releasing synthetic chemicals, and even household items like plastic cookware that leach particles during heating. In 2025, increased scrutiny has highlighted how microplastics in tap and bottled water average hundreds of particles per liter, while PFAS from manufacturing sites contaminate nearby communities through soil contamination and water pathways. Food processing and packaging further exacerbate exposure, with ultra-processed foods showing higher PFAS levels due to contact with contaminated equipment and materials during manufacturing.
Health Impacts and Risks
Human health impacts begin with dietary exposure, where these substances cross barriers like placental transfer and appear in breast milk exposure, leading to elevated cholesterol, reduced vaccine efficacy, and cancers such as kidney and testicular varieties. The health risks are profound, driven by mechanisms like oxidative stress, intestinal damage, and reproductive system disruption. PFAS and microplastics exhibit synergistic toxicity; for instance, MPs act as carriers for PFAS, facilitating adsorption through electrostatic interactions, hydrophobic interactions, and even surface complexation. This synergy amplifies bioaccumulation, with recent studies showing that combined exposure disrupts homeostasis more severely than individual pollutants, causing hormone disruption, thyroid hormone disruption, immune system suppression, and metabolic disorders. Trophic transfer exacerbates this, as contaminants move up the food chain, increasing concentrations in predators and ultimately in human diets. Aged MPs and biofilm-covered MPs heighten these risks by providing larger surface areas for adsorption, influenced by environmental factors like pH and salinity. Emerging research in 2025 links these mixtures to heightened inflammation, cardiovascular issues, type 2 diabetes, and developmental harms, with communities near pollution sources facing higher rates of these conditions. Nanoplastics, in particular, can penetrate tissues like the brain, testes, blood, lungs, liver, urine, feces, and placenta, doubling the risk of heart attacks, strokes, or death in affected individuals. Over 3,600 chemicals from packaging are linked to cancer, genetic mutations, and endocrine issues.
Analytical Techniques for Detection
Analytical techniques for detection are sophisticated and essential for accurate assessment. Liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS) and ultra-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS), often paired with tandem mass spectrometry, dominate PFAS analysis, enabling quantification at low levels. For total organic fluorine measurement, methods like pressurized liquid extraction (PLE) and accelerated solvent extraction (ASE) are employed, while nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) aids in structural identification. Microplastics detection involves similar advanced tools, with Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) revealing surface changes in aged or biofilm-covered particles. Pyrolysis-gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (PY-GC-MS) has gained prominence for analyzing polymeric PFAS and microplastics, offering thermal decomposition for precise identification. High-resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS) and non-targeted screening methods allow for broader detection of emerging contaminants, achieving lower limits like 20 micrometers for microplastics. These techniques facilitate monitoring in diverse food matrices, from bottled water to processed foods, supporting comprehensive exposure assessments like those in Total Diet Studies (TDS). In 2025, innovations have improved reproducibility and speed, enabling near real-time analysis for better public health responses. For PFAS, methods now target up to 30 types at parts per trillion, with sample preparation emphasizing PFAS-free containers, homogenization tools, extraction solvents like methanol and acetonitrile, and purification via solid phase extraction cartridges to prevent cross-contamination.
Testing After Packaging
Testing food and drinks after packaging is critical to detect contaminants that migrate during storage or handling, ensuring that products remain safe from production to consumption. PFAS often leach from grease-proofing agents in paper and paperboard FCMs, with studies showing contamination levels up to 10 times higher in alternatives like sugar cane or wheat pulp materials used in coffee cups and food trays. Microplastics and nanoplastics shed through everyday actions like opening bottle caps, ripping wraps from meat or produce, unwrapping deli items, or steeping tea bags in hot water, with repeated use increasing abrasion and release. Glass containers with plastic-coated lids and cartons for milk or juice also contribute. Ultra-processed foods exhibit elevated levels due to prolonged contact with plastic equipment. Analytical approaches post-packaging include LC-MS/MS and GC-MS for PFAS, with rigorous workflows involving PFAS-free glass or certified plastic storage, disposable blenders, QuEChERS kits, and syringe filters to achieve low detection limits. For microplastics, reviews of high-quality studies confirm packaging as a direct source, though standardized protocols are lacking, making comparisons challenging. In 2025, surveys reveal rising concerns, with bottled water containing an average of 240,000 nanoplastics per liter. Health-focused testing, such as in TDS samples and targeted seafood surveys, assesses exposure from packaged goods, including filter feeders like clams and bivalves. Recommendations emphasize testing at consumption stages to capture real-world migration influenced by heat, sunlight, and mechanical stress.
Regulatory Frameworks and Updates
Regulatory frameworks are evolving rapidly to address these threats. In the United States, federal agencies have set maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for key PFAS under the Safe Drinking Water Act, with extensions in 2025 pushing compliance deadlines to 2031 for some systems to allow for infrastructure upgrades. Reference doses and minimal risk levels (MRLs) guide toxicological reference values (TRVs), while designations of PFOA and PFOS as hazardous substances under comprehensive environmental laws persist, emphasizing cleanup responsibilities. State-level actions in 2025 include over a dozen new regulations, with at least 17 states prohibiting PFAS in food packaging and others addressing biosolids and pesticides. Federal testing of the general food supply continues, with announcements in early 2025 confirming the phase-out of grease-proofing agents containing PFAS. Internationally, the EU Commission Regulation and REACH regulation advance PFAS phaseout and bans, with an updated proposal in August 2025 outlining restriction options: a full ban after an 18-month transition or use-specific derogations lasting 5 to 12 years to avoid regrettable substitution. Scientific evaluations are slated for completion by 2026, incorporating an essential use approach. Globally, 2025 mandates emphasize preparation for compliance by 2027, including reporting under toxic substances acts delayed to 2026. For microplastics, regulatory trends include congressional reports and state-level waste management updates, focusing on reducing plastic pollution in aquatic environments. Tolerable weekly intake levels for PFAS, such as 4.4 nanograms per kilogram of body weight, drive annual monitoring of foodstuffs like fruits, vegetables, cereals, animal products, and beverages.
Mitigation and Prevention Strategies
Mitigation strategies focus on reducing entry at the source and removing contaminants post-exposure. Reverse osmosis and granular activated carbon filtration effectively treat water, while alternatives like compostable packaging, plant-based coatings, silicone-based coatings, wax coatings (e.g., beeswax, carnauba wax), chitosan, and BPI-certified materials replace PFAS-laden FCMs. For microplastics, preventing plastic pollution through better waste management, bans on polystyrene foam, and biodegradable options is key. Public health initiatives emphasize minimizing exposure via filtered water, organic foods, and avoiding plastic cookware that releases particles during use. Ongoing research into combined toxicity and environmental impacts supports these efforts, with recommendations to ditch high-risk items like certain nonstick products. In 2025, extended producer responsibility programs and phase-outs in consumer products further aid prevention, promoting safer industrial processes and regulatory compliance. Individual steps include using stainless steel or glass containers, avoiding microwaving or dishwashing plastics, checking recycling codes to skip those with phthalates, and opting for PFAS-free cookware like cast iron. Systemic actions, such as global plastics treaties and stricter food safety regulations, are vital for population-level reductions.
Conclusion
Ultimately, testing food and drinks for these contaminants isn’t just a scientific endeavor—it’s a vital safeguard against the creeping dangers of environmental contamination. By integrating advanced analytical techniques, adhering to stringent and evolving regulations, and adopting proactive mitigation, we can curb bioaccumulation, protect human health, and preserve ecosystems for future generations. This holistic approach transforms awareness into action, ensuring safer consumption in a polluted world.
