Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
PFAS Used in Grease-Proofing Agents for Food Packaging No Longer Sold (fda.gov)
94 points by adomasm3 813 days ago
10 comments

Question: didn’t DuPont and friends just launch “new products” with minor alterations to the chemical composition in order to clear the branding? I recall the newer substitutes were also “biopersistent” carbo-flourides or whatever they’re called.
It is a cat and mouse game my chemist friend told me. There are thousands of compounds not in the public spot light. If one becomes bad like BPA, they just switch to some slightly different compound.

There are still health concerns with the different compounds, but not the FDA has to catch up and that takes years.

I’ve really starting paying attention recently to how many people in positions of power are willing to literally kill thousands of people to gain material wealth they have no practical use for.

Boeing being the poster child for this trend, but it’s truly systemic and I feel it’s just gotten worse.

Of course it’s nothing “new” per se, but that only makes me think there is a structural flaw in our species if we elevate these killers into power.

Couldn't agree more. Unfortunately, sub- or semi-conscious rationalization is a powerful force.
Agreed. It must be a weird feeling for it to be so crystal clear that your existence is a net negative to humanity
They don’t have the weird feeling because they don’t care. The serial killer doesn’t think they’re doing anything wrong, as a loose analogy.
Who says that's a net negative?

Boeing certainly provides a very substantial positive to humanity.

I meant the PFAS people
This seems to be what is happening, the lists of PFAS compounds being tested in targeted screening is becoming quite extensive.
If it's PFAS-free, then there is no fluoropolymer in it.

Shorter chain PFAS molecules, with shorter half-lives, have been and are still being explored as alternatives, for other use cases. This announcement applies only to the sale of food-contact paper and paperboard where PFAS was used fro grease-proofing.

The comments on this make me realize how far the information gap is that must be closed with the pubic. The media are not doing a great job

Yes. Many compounds are not even listed because of IP/patents.

Just a reminder - Chemical Companies, legally, police themselves.

We have sooooo many PFOA's, like GenX, and some minor ones that are similar.

The original DuP documents from the 1950s said that /all/ PFOS/PFOAs should be burned.

Off-topic, but your comment reminded me of evergreening of medical drug patents [1] (example at [2]): when a pharmaceutical company's patent on a drug is close to expiring, the patent holder makes a minor change to the drug, patents the changed version, lets the patent on the unchanged version expire, and uses the new patent to sue anyone who makes or markets a generic version of the old drug. The patent on the changed version of the drug effectively covers the old version. The changed version of the drug is simultaneously different enough from the unchanged version that the pharmaceutical company can successfully apply for a new patent from the USPTO and similar enough that anyone who wants to make a biosimilar of the unchanged version can still be sued for patent infringement. The drug patent abusers eat their cakes and still have them.

The new patents shouldn't be granted in the first place, since one of the conditions of getting a patent on an invention is that the invention be novel over what has already been invented.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evergreening

[2] https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/10/thanks-to-evergreening-a...

> Off-topic, but your comment reminded me of evergreening of medical drug patents

Wow thanks for the rabbit hole. Clicked around and found “me-too drugs”[1]:

> a medication that is similar to a pre-existing drug, usually by making minor modifications to the prototype […] used to treat conditions for which drugs already exist

Yep. Same playbook for sure.

> The changed version of the drug is simultaneously different enough from the unchanged version that the pharmaceutical company can successfully apply for a new patent from the USPTO and similar enough that anyone who wants to make a biosimilar of the unchanged version can still be sued for patent infringement.

Beyond! This is like Soviet levels of kafkaesque rules. All in the free market country of USA.

[1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Me-too_drug

Yeah, this part feels more meaningful:

    FDA is working towards a validated analytical method
    that would allow us to monitor the market for these
    food contact substances in food packaging.
The best time to do this was 50 years ago, but the second best time is now.
For the FDA "working towards" could take several years.

The FDA knew since at least 2019 that baby food sold in the US (Gerber, Beech-Nut, Parent’s Choice, Earth’s Best Organic, etc.) contains dangerous levels of heavy metals but they did nothing about it at all until they were shamed by media attention which triggered an investigation from the Subcommittee on Economic and Consumer Policy who then put out a couple of damning reports.

To this day Americans continue to spoon-feed poison into the mouths of their infant children, and the FDA has yet to even set action levels which would tell companies how much poison is too much. They keep pushing back their timeline and right now they think they might have just the first of several needed action levels finalized at the end of this year. (https://www.fda.gov/food/environmental-contaminants-food/clo...).

It's not like they only drag their feet when it comes to poisoned babies either, they also fail to act on reports of dangerous or unlawful clinical trial practices (https://www.science.org/content/article/fda-s-own-documents-...)

I don't know if it's regulatory capture, bribes, a lack of funding/support from government, or incompetence but we really need a strong FDA that actually does their job.

The best strategy is to do what the EU does and ban them unless proven safe.
Proven safe is wrought with specifics though.

Safe for mice? Because that's how a lot of testing is done.

Or like teflon which is perfectly safe until it reaches an easy-to-reach stovetop temp, and then it kills budgies in your home, and turns to poison in the pan?

Teflon passed, knowing it was deadly after being too hot, with the assumption that "people won't accidentally let a pan get too hot". Suuure, no one will get distracted by kids , the phone, someone at the door, etc. Suuure, no one will make a mistake in years of use!

Somewhat is "safe"?

I agree it would be a nice thing, but are we capable of that?

You and I, maybe. But our agencies? Dunno.

what if medication was sold in this manner? Seems like we already have a platform and the burden should be on the industry.
This is from Feb 28th, but as discussed here 5 days ago[0], a US appeals court blocked this ban.

[0]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39875053

That's different. This is a voluntary phase-out of PFAS impregnated paper and paperboard (the infamous pizza boxes and burger wrappers)
Liability perhaps? Voluntary phase out might buy you some goodwill with judge and jury when the class action suits roll in.
Of course they did...
I mean, it's not really clear if substitutes are better.

It's also an issue with cans. https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news/bpa-update-tracking-c...

If you want to be safer rather than sorry, it seems best to opt for the glass option. Although, they are becoming rarer and rarer.

Even if it's not PFAS, plastic bottles often release different chemicals, especially when sour, heated, and stored for a long time.

> are no longer being sold by manufacturers for food contact use in the U.S. market

Does this mean if the product is produced outside the US and imported it could still be permitted?

Yes. This announcement only applies to four unnamed manufacturers in the US. Here is the original announcement of the phase-out from 2020:

https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-anno...

It's becoming obvious to me that rather than holding a blacklist of ingredients and products allowed in and around our foods we need to create a whitelist and sue into oblivion any corporation that steps outside of these bounds.

We already do this with medicine, but we seem to have nearly zero concern about foods, the vast majority of what flows through our bodies to (hopefully) provide nourishment.

“Inactive” ingredients need to be put under a big fat microscope as well.
Not food, but I got a new chain for the bicycle today, and they are also teflon-lubricated when you get them (a workshop installed it). It's PFAS everywhere.
Which brand? I know all bike chains come with factory grease but I don't know if I've ever seen it indicated what they are lubricated with.

Of course there are plenty of commercial bike lubes that come with Teflon aka PTFE mixed in.

Completely unnecessary, there's a movement to move towards simple paraffin or natural waxes in the cycling community. In fact, wax wears chain less via less contamination and is vastly more efficient than many of the teflon drip lubes.

https://zerofrictioncycling.com.au/lubetesting/

Don't know the brand unfortunately - I was basic and just asked the workshop to do it, because I don't have the tools to adjust the chain. I just thought it was interesting to me that the mechanic explained to me that they come in teflon coating.
PFAS lube works really well
Ai should come up with a simplified diet that is optimized to avoid these chemicals. I watched this youtube guy that climbs sky scrappers. Supper fit guy. And his diet mostly consists of eggs, a beet, tomatoes, brown rice and a serving of fish. Very minimal and simple whole foods. And he looks fitter and healthier than 99.9% of people. Despite climbing sky scrappers without a harness, he still will probably live longer than people with a bad diet...so who is living the riskier lifestyle.
What are they using now instead of PFAS?
> Shorter chain-length PFAS telomeric substances have been submitted to EPA for review as alternatives for a variety of uses including, for example, textile, carpet and paper additive uses and tile surface treatments.

1. https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-t...

That's incorrect. The voluntary phase-out covers all PFAS inclusive of shorter-chain molecules.

The most likely replacement are food-grade silicone alternatives. Silicone alternatives are also being used in waterproofing rain jackets, etc. (see Patagonia for example, who started by using C6, shorter chain PFAS, instead of C8, but now has switched to PFAS-free)

I've got some nonstick greaseproof paper in the cupboard that's apparently lined with silicone.
Parchment paper, butcher paper etc can have a variety of different treatments used. PFAS is a common one. Silicone or a combination of PFAS and silicone is another one. Acid treated without a coating is less common although that was the original parchment paper back in the day. Personally, I use "If you care" brand from whole foods which has been independently tested to have the least PFAS.

This voluntary phase-out doesn't include parchment paper you use at home. It's for food packaging

Ok, and PFOS and PFOA?
Virtually all freshwater fishing and rainwater in the USA now has PFAS

It's also found in human mothers' breast milk when nursing.

It's teflon, etc. and it is never ever going away, we've made the planet toxic, forget global-warming/climate-change, this is going to take us out even sooner.

Elsewhere in the thread people mention bike chains but that pales skiers have been putting telfon on their skis to go faster/easier for decades now and all that stays on the snow and then melts into the water/ground forever.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/freshwater-fish-co...

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62391069

The FIS and many other ski organizations are moving away from flouro wax: https://www.fis-ski.com/cross-country/news/2022-23/fis-to-fu...
PFAS is not teflon.
Teflon contain PFAS

Look at pubchem.