\u00a0<\/p>\n
Key Insights<\/p>\n
Bisphenols, pesticides, phthalates, and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS) chemicals in the global food system are linked to a host of health problems.<\/p>\n
These health problems have an estimated global cost of $2.2 trillion a year, with environmental costs adding another $640 billion a year, a new report finds.<\/p>\n
Regulating and banning the chemicals could be more economical than the costs of managing the health and environmental damage they cause.<\/p>\n
Four chemical groups are causing $2.8 trillion worth of annual harm to human health and the environment via the food system alone, according to a new report from the system design and development company Systemiq<\/a>.<\/p>\n The report, called Invisible Ingredients<\/a>, compiles and analyzes research on phthalates, bisphenols, pesticides, and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), which make their way into food through agricultural runoff, food processing and packaging, and the environment, where chemicals can accumulate in the plants and animals that people eat.<\/p>\n \u201cWe wanted to assess the real, full picture of the harms of these toxic chemicals,\u201d says Felix Cornehl, head of plastics policy at Systemiq and the report\u2019s lead author. \u201cThere are really strong deregulatory pressures and efforts going on across the world, and it\u2019s important to show the real costs of lax regulation.\u201d<\/p>\n The team focused on chemicals that are used globally and have strong evidence of harm, Cornehl says. The work was funded in part by the Grantham Foundation<\/a>.<\/p>\n “Until we start building these costs into how we think about the impacts of chemicals, it\u2019s going to be really hard to appropriately decide how to handle the problem.”<\/p>\n Carla Ng, chemical engineer, University of Pittsburgh<\/p>\n Share The chemicals covered in the report have been linked to a broad range of health problems throughout the body and across people\u2019s lifespans, largely through interference with the endocrine system, according to the report. These include birth defects and neurodevelopmental conditions, cancers, fertility issues, and problems with the endocrine, cardiovascular, and respiratory systems.<\/p>\n The bulk of the price tag\u2014about $2.2 trillion per year\u2014comes from treating these diseases, as well as loss of productivity due to disability and early death. Much of the data come from the European Chemicals Agency, which has been negotiating a ban on PFAS<\/a> in consumer goods. The European Union (EU) also voted to ban most phthalates in 2018<\/a>.<\/p>\n The team then extrapolated the data to make estimates for regions where data don\u2019t yet exist, using a method from a 2024 study that estimated the benefits of reducing exposure<\/a> to bisphenol A (BPA) and di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP).<\/p>\n The cost is likely an underestimate, the report says, given that it doesn\u2019t account for indirect costs like caregiving needs.<\/p>\n The report estimates $640 billion annually for environmental costs, most of which come from removing PFAS and pesticides from drinking water. Other costs include crop losses and fighting pesticide-resistant pests.\u00a0<\/p>\n Even imperfect numbers are useful for assessing the real costs of harmful chemicals, says Carla Ng<\/a>, a chemical engineer at the University of Pittsburgh who studies PFAS in the food system.<\/p>\n \u201cUntil we start building these costs into how we think about the impacts of chemicals, it\u2019s going to be really hard to appropriately decide how to handle the problem,\u201d Ng says.<\/p>\n Systemiq is working with researchers to submit the report for peer review, Cornehl says.<\/p>\n The report calls for a complete global overhaul of the regulatory approach to chemicals, switching from aftermarket proof of harm, where new chemicals are put into use until a problem arises, to premarket proof of safety, which is how pharmaceutical drugs come to market. It also makes specific policy recommendations, including tax incentives for companies to move away from harmful chemicals and clear deadlines for phasing them out.<\/p>\n Such changes are possible without huge costs to industry, Cornehl says, citing a 90% drop in phthalates after the EU\u2019s ban that occurred without tanking any companies. \u201cThe chemical sector is amazingly innovative and can come up with solutions when there is a real demand,\u201d he says. \u201cThat can be profitable for firms.\u201d<\/p>\n The report represents only a small portion of the health and environmental impacts from chemicals in the food system, says Birgit Geueke, senior scientific manager at the Food Packaging Forum. The forum maintains a database of more than 12,000 chemicals that come into contact with food<\/a>; more than a quarter have no published hazard data, according to a 2021 overview of the database<\/a>.<\/p>\n \u201cMany of them have never been tested for toxicity, and there are a lot of data gaps,\u201d she says. The well-known ones on which the report focuses \u201cshould really be replaced. The message is out that it\u2019s not good to have them in food packaging.\u201d<\/p>\n
\n <\/a><\/p>\n