Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FDA denies petition against use of phthalates in food packaging

fda.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 197 posts

Re: FDA denies petition against use of phthalates in food packaging

#131

Post by kragen »

mightyham wrote: post #126
kragen wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there was excellent evidence against leaded gasoline even before it was commercialized. lead had been known to be toxic for two thousand years, many of the workers in the pilot tetraethyl lead plant died, and midgley (the inventor) gradually became paralyzed, probably as a result of his exposure. people used leaded gasoline to kill insects, and accidental human deaths from ingestion were fairly common there are in fa…

>conservatism like yours was the default stance for thousands of years, which is why human life was impoverished and short during that time. The ridiculousness of this claim is basically self-evident. The obvious reason for impoverished and short life spans was a low level of technological development, not conversative social attitudes. It begs the question, how exactly could modern liberal attitudes even exist in an…

that's like saying 'the obvious reason she died was that my hammer hit her in the head, not that i swung my hammer at her head'

i'm not sure what you mean by 'modern liberal attitudes' but in any case i think it's irrelevant

Re: FDA denies petition against use of phthalates in food packaging

#132

Post by s1artibartfast »

__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #75
cynicalpeace wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me, the standard is: if the material was used pre-industrial age, it's far more likely to be "safe". Any person could overintellectualize this point and find exceptions. But it's just common sense.

I agree. I'm reminded of "the naturalistic fallacy" which asserts > Things are not necessarily safe just because they're natural Whatever "natural" means. It's not wrong exactly, but I think it distracts from some adjacent, non-fallacious inductive/anthropic reasoning: > Things that have not harmed your ancestors are less likely to harm you than a novel thing which your ancestors did not come in contact with. The for…

Why do we think our ancestors were not harmed? do we have any reason at all to think that?

Re: FDA denies petition against use of phthalates in food packaging

#134

Post by balls187 »

Aurornis wrote: post #51
balls187 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think more people would get significant benefit from using sun block daily then obsessing over minutiae like this.

Unfortunately, questioning sunscreen use has become a popular topic among health communities that obsess over (and misinterpret) studies about chemicals. Even Andrew Huberman, who was held up as the most science-y podcaster before people caught on that he doesn't know what he's talking about on many topics (not to mention, it turns out he's kind of a bad person) made a big deal about sunscreen for a long time. At one…

Not to go off topic--cheating on his girlfriend and being a man-whore is bad behavior, yet I don't think that makes Huberman a bad person.

Re: FDA denies petition against use of phthalates in food packaging

#135

Post by __MatrixMan__ »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #132
__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. I'm reminded of "the naturalistic fallacy" which asserts > Things are not necessarily safe just because they're natural Whatever "natural" means. It's not wrong exactly, but I think it distracts from some adjacent, non-fallacious inductive/anthropic reasoning: > Things that have not harmed your ancestors are less likely to harm you than a novel thing which your ancestors did not come in contact with. The for…

Why do we think our ancestors were not harmed? do we have any reason at all to think that?

Because we exist. Admittedly, "healthy enough to procreate" is not a high bar, but it's pretty good in comparison with no bar at all.

Yeah, there are cases where they were unaware of the harm--like lead. We should absolutely be finding better ways to identify and mitigate harms of that sort. But in the absence of reliable information from such efforts, natural==safe is a viable heuristic.

And I'd say that our scientific establishment is not sufficiently hardened against attempts by companies to tamper with scientific consensus in cases where that consensus might be bad for business--so an absence of reliable information is indeed our reality.

Re: FDA denies petition against use of phthalates in food packaging

#136

Post by westurner »

lolinder wrote: post #57
abeppu wrote: post #49

A bunch of comments here are roughly "there's not great evidence that these are harmful" -- but is that the right standard? Or should there be an obligation to provide evidence that something is "safe" in order to use it in some consumer applications (like food packaging)? It's tempting to say that we should conclusively establish that something isn't harmful before we use it absolutely everywhere ... but what standa…

Your second paragraph is a very good argument against requiring that everything used in food packaging be shown to be safe before it can be used. Can we reasonably run such a study to prove that wax paper is safe? What about plain paper? Do we just require all food producers to use no packaging at all until these controlled longitudinal studies are completed? If we allow them to use packaging, how do we define in a p…

Cellulose and algae are considered safe for human consumption and are also biodegradable; but is that an RCT study?

CO2 + Lignin is not edible but is biodegradable and could replace plastics. "CO2 and Lignin-Based Sustainable Polymers with Closed-Loop Chemical Recycling" https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/adfm.202403035

What incentives would incentivize the market to change over to sustainable biodegradable food-safe packaging?

Re: FDA denies petition against use of phthalates in food packaging

#137

Post by amelius »

Aurornis wrote: post #47

I was surprised to learn that some of the highest concentrations of phthalates can be found in alcoholic beverages in glass bottles (Table 3: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7460375/ ) This occurs due to the plastics used in producing the alcoholic beverages combined with ethanol (alcohol) acting as a solvent to liberate the phthalates I was equally surprised to learn that the food industry was already m…

And here I thought the gynecomastia was caused by just the beer ...

Re: FDA denies petition against use of phthalates in food packaging

#138

Post by s1artibartfast »

sqeaky wrote: post #123
s1artibartfast wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This data would only be useful if it was accurate and predictive. I dont see it getting there on either front.

Yeah, microplastics seem to be systemic. I don't know that we actually have good data on this, but many sources claim that most microplastics are from polyester (a plastic) clothing and industrial nylon fishing nets. If true then wearing and washing a tacky shirt could be more hazardous that drinking from tons of plastic bottles and that would make such questions hard to ask in a predictive manner.

That doesnt say anything about accuracy or predicative power.

Re: FDA denies petition against use of phthalates in food packaging

#139

Post by westurner »

Aurornis wrote: post #47

I was surprised to learn that some of the highest concentrations of phthalates can be found in alcoholic beverages in glass bottles (Table 3: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7460375/ ) This occurs due to the plastics used in producing the alcoholic beverages combined with ethanol (alcohol) acting as a solvent to liberate the phthalates I was equally surprised to learn that the food industry was already m…

Which plastics could and should be replaced with other materials?

"How Do You Know If Buckets Are Food Grade" https://epackagesupply.com/blog/how-do-you-know-if-buckets-a... :

> Buckets made of HDPE (number 2) are generally considered the best material for food storage, especially over the long term. A vast majority of plastic buckets that are sold for food storage purposes will be made of HDPE. It’s important to note that not all HDPE buckets are food grade; to be sure, you’ll want to look for the cup and fork logo (described below) or other indication of “food safe” or “food grade” materials.

> Cup and Fork: Elsewhere on the bottom of the bucket, some food-grade buckets will have a symbol consisting of a cup and fork on them. There may also be markings like “USDA approved” or “FDA approved.”

Re: FDA denies petition against use of phthalates in food packaging

#140

Post by autoexec »

Aurornis wrote: post #47

I was surprised to learn that some of the highest concentrations of phthalates can be found in alcoholic beverages in glass bottles (Table 3: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7460375/ ) This occurs due to the plastics used in producing the alcoholic beverages combined with ethanol (alcohol) acting as a solvent to liberate the phthalates I was equally surprised to learn that the food industry was already m…

> was surprised to learn that some of the highest concentrations of phthalates can be found in alcoholic beverages in glass bottles

Well, this fun fact ruined my day. Alcohol is itself an endocrine disruptor already. I just want to be able to poison myself with wine without being poisoned from the epoxies used in storage tanks or the hoses during bottling!

Anyone got a list of "clean" wineries that aren't selling contaminated product?

Post reply on HN