PlasticList – Plastic Levels in Foods

Interpreting the data and “safe” limits

• Several commenters note that even very “contaminated” foods appear far below current federal intake limits, which paradoxically makes them feel reassured.
• Others point to the report section arguing that historical experience with PFOA/PFAS shows regulators often start with limits hundreds–thousands of times too high.
• Many chemicals in the table lack any official intake guideline, raising the question of what “safe” even means for them.

Ubiquity and sources of plastic contamination

• Raw farm milk in glass and grass‑fed ribeye rank surprisingly high, used as examples that even minimally processed or “premium” foods are embedded in plastic-heavy supply chains.
• Discussion highlights livestock feed (baled/wrapped hay, ground-up packaged waste), milking and processing equipment, and conveyor belts as major sources.
• Household sources get attention: plastic pepper grinders, plastic cutting boards, Teflon vs packaging, polyester clothing, dryer vents, and water infrastructure.
• Some note plastics likely enter food long before packaging; processing machinery visibly sheds plastic dust.

Health risk, evidence, and regulation

• One camp argues plastics get outsized attention compared to clearly harmful lifestyle factors like sugar and alcohol, and sees “microplastic-free” marketing as potential hype.
• Others counter with emerging evidence of endocrine disruption, inflammation, and microplastics crossing the blood–brain barrier, and stress that “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”
• Historical parallels (asbestos, lead, PFAS) are used to argue for a precautionary approach and skepticism of current regulatory limits.
• Some remain broadly fatalistic: given existing exposures (lead, asbestos, past jobs), reducing microplastics now feels marginal.

Consumer responses and practical advice

• Strong emphasis on prioritizing PFAS in drinking water; distillation and reverse osmosis are frequently recommended, along with PFAS-focused filters.
• Micro-optimizations discussed: metal/ceramic grinders, mortar and pestle, bamboo toothbrushes, wood vs plastic cutting boards, natural fibers, minimizing plastic contact with hot or fatty foods.
• Others warn against trying to “care about everything” and argue for focusing on the largest exposure sources (especially water).

Site design, methodology, and limitations

• The UI receives a lot of praise; commenters identify Next.js, Tailwind, TanStack Table, and specific fonts.
• Some criticize missing context (e.g., whether drinks were tested in plastic-lined cups vs mugs) and inconsistent units.
• Concerns about sample handling in plastic bags are raised, while others note the lab’s controls (isotopically labeled standards, solvent washes) likely keep contamination manageable.
• Several call PlasticList a valuable independent effort as trust in and funding for federal agencies declines.