Microplastics from packaging migrate into food at scale each year, study finds

A new study has research consultancy Earth Action has revealed that around 1,000 tons of microplastics migrate from packaging into food annually, with many of the particles small enough to enter human cell barriers and potentially interact with biological systems. 

The research highlights a framework for identifying high-risk packaging formats and outlines practical measures for the packaging industry that could reduce particle release. 

From Pack to Plate, published in collaboration with rePurpose Global, aims to assess the scale of microplastics migration from packaging into food. It highlights packaging elements such as caps, closures, multi-components, PET bottles, and foodservice trays as contact points for the potential of particle migration into food. 

Packaging Insights sits down with Julien Boucher, co-CEO at Earth Action, to find out more about the research’s findings and how the packaging industry can innovate to reduce microplastic exposure. 

“High-stress interfaces, such as caps, closures, and seals, are priority areas. Cap design alone significantly influences abrasion-related emissions.”

“The industry should prioritize designs delivering more product per unit of packaging mass, and test against realistic use scenarios including repeated handling, heating, and extended storage, not just first-use conditions.” 

The impact of microplastics on human and environmental health is of growing concern to consumers as research continues to identify the presence of microplastics in human brains and stomachs, as well as IV drips and agricultural soil.

Packaging types and microplastics

A central finding of the report is that microplastic exposure from packaging is not random but driven by three factors: material choice, packaging design, and real-world use conditions.

The study identifies high-risk formats and outlines practical measures for the packaging industry to reduce microplastics exposure.Boucher says: “PET bottles contribute to approximately 28% (292 tons/year) of total packaging-related exposure, followed by rigid PET at roughly 15% (155 tons/year) and flexible PE at around 13% (139 tons/year). Together, these three formats account for over half of total estimated emissions.”

He adds that the “two biggest” reduction opportunities are upstream with manufacturers and supply chain operators.

The study also identifies high-risk formats and outlines practical measures for the packaging industry that could help reduce microplastics exposure — such as limiting UV exposure, which can influence particle release. 

“Stressors can cumulatively, meaning prolonged repeated exposure compounds the wear and tear on the packaging, leading to more particles being released. UV exposure can be systematically reduced through shielding during transportation, storage, and retail display.”

The research notes that while packaging is not the largest source of microplastics, its direct contact with humans creates a more concentrated ingestion than environmental pathways such as water or air. 

Chemical concerns 

The study states how ingesting micro- and nanoplastics can mean exposure to other chemical substances, including carcinogenic and endocrine-disruptant substances, either intentionally and non-intentionally added. 

It argues that current food contact regulations do not account for particle release or chemical exposure, “despite originating from the same product.” 

Boucher adds: “Packaging safety frameworks have historically focused on a limited set of chemical hazards, and this needs to change. Food-contact material regulations should shift to assess packaging systems as a whole, including geometry, closures, and use conditions, not polymer identity alone.” 

Packaging approval processes for material type should test realistic and foreseeable scenarios, says Boucher.Last month, the European Commission published new guidance to support the implementation of the EU’s Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation. It aims to simplify compliance for economic actors and member states, but industry stakeholders have noted that it does not sufficiently address PFAS compliance.

Regulatory push 

He adds that the approval process for packaging and material type must also test realistic, foreseeable scenarios such as repeated handling, heating, and extended storage, rather than laboratory conditions.

Earth Action recommends establishing micro- and nanoplastic emissions limits or disclosure requirements for high-volume formats, starting with PET bottles, rigid PET, and flexible PE.

Boucher concludes: “In a globalized marketplace, harmonized legislation is essential. The UN Global Plastics Treaty, despite delays, remains a pivotal opportunity to integrate such regulation into legislation worldwide for both the environment and human health, while also benefiting corporations who currently must navigate a patchwork of regulation across jurisdictions.”

Concern over microplastic exposure has prompted the US Department of Health and Human Services to launch a nationwide US$144 million microplastics research program. It aims to create a toolbox for measuring, researching, and affordably removing microplastics and nanoplastics from the human body.