Foodservice Packaging and… Black Plastics

/in

Foodservice packaging is made from a wide variety of materials. These products go through rigorous testing to ensure that they meet stringent food packaging regulations, ensuring the safe delivery of foodservice items to consumers.

However, the safety of foodservice packaging made from black plastics has been called into question recently, with claims being made that recycled plastic from electronic parts are being added to plastics used to manufacture items like take-out containers and cutlery, leading to the presence of hazardous chemicals.

The truth is…

  • The Food and Drug Administration and Health Canada, which regulate materials that come into contact with food in the U.S. and Canada respectively, do not allow non-food-grade plastics, whether from virgin or recycled sources, to be used when manufacturing foodservice packaging.
  • While bromine/antimony flame retardants may be used in plastics associated with electronics, they are not used in the resins produced to manufacture foodservice packaging in the U.S. and Canada.
  • Additionally, mercury, lead, cadmium and hexavalent chromium (also known as “CONEG 4”) may not be used in foodservice packaging in the U.S. and Canada.
  • The mere presence of chemicals deemed hazardous does not mean a true health risk exists. Ambient or unintentional additions of chemicals could possibly occur, but these exist at trace or extremely low levels, far below the rigorous testing standards set out by international regulatory agencies.
  • Plastics from electronic waste may be recycled, but these materials are sold to very limited, very specific markets (often outside North America). These markets do not include food-grade plastics.

Consumers can be assured that black plastics used to make foodservice packaging in the U.S. and Canada has been deemed safe for use by the appropriate regulatory agencies… and that means plastics from electronic waste was not used to manufacture it.

For more detailed information on recycling and plastics used in food-contact applications, please check out these resources:

From the U.S. Food and Drug Administration:

From Health Canada:

Published September 2018

Market Research Resources

/in

One of the most common questions we receive at the Foodservice Packaging Institute is “Do you have market research data on the foodservice packaging industry?” The answer is yes — but most of it is for FPI members only.

In 2017, we updated FPI’s estimates for the size of the foodservice packaging industry in the U.S. and Canada, in terms of both units and pounds. The estimates were based on FPI’s 2011 market research study and subsequent input from members and other market research sources. The following products were included in the report, with each broken down by material:
  • Beverage Cups
  • Cup Sleeves
  • Lids and Domes for Beverage Cups
  • Straws and Stirrers
  • Beverage Carriers
  • Portion Cups
  • Plates, Platters and Bowls
  • Domes for Plates, Platters and Bowls
  • Food Containers and Pizza Boxes
  • Wraps in Sheets
  • Foodservice/Cafeteria Trays
  • Single Portion and Carryout Bags
  • Cutlery
  • Napkins and Placemats/Tray Covers
Outside of FPI’s propriety reports, we are aware of two companies that offer data specific to foodservice packaging: Freedonia Group and Technomic. In both cases, the companies publish reports with market size estimates (in units and dollars), market trends and company profiles. Please contact them directly for more information.
For more details on FPI’s market research, or if your company offers data specific to foodservice packaging and you would like to be listed as a resource, please contact FPI’s Natha Dempsey.

Benefits of Paper Placemat or Tray Cover Use in the Reduction of Bacterial Contamination in Selected Public Facilities: Executive Summary (Members Only)

/in

Executive Summary:

Benefits of Paper Placemat or Tray Cover Use in the Reduction of Bacterial Contamination in Selected Public Facilities

Conducted by the University of Wisconsin – Oshkosh
for the Foodservice & Packaging Institute, Inc.
INTRODUCTION
In 1979, a study documenting the sanitary benefits of paper placemats was conducted by the Food Protection Laboratory of the Syracuse Research Corporation. Results from this study demonstrated that placemats help in the reduction bacterial transfer from tabletops in restaurants. Similar results were found in a study conducted in 1997 by University of Wisconsin – Oshkosh’s Department of Biology and Microbiology.
The objective of the 2006 study, also conducted by the University of Wisconsin – Oshkosh was to expand upon the study conducted in 1997 to include new groups of facilities and products and a more detailed breakdown of the microorganisms present. In the restaurants and daycares the objective was to evaluate microbial loads on placemats versus uncovered tables. In long-term care facilities, lodging and hospitals tray covers were compared to uncovered trays. In all cases, the microorganisms examined were Bacillus, coliforms, Enterococcus, Micrococcus, Staphylococcus, Streptococcus, among others.
METHODOLOGY
Sampling was conducted from mid-January to mid-May 2006, and the protocol was followed from Standard Methods for the Examination of Dairy Products, 16th edition (1985). A total of twenty plates were used per facility, ten tabletop/tray surfaces and ten placemat/tray cover surfaces. If a location did not use placemats/tray covers just the tabletop/tray was sampled. Samples were usually collected mid-afternoon, following the lunch hour. The samples were collected by uncovering the Rodac® plate, inverting it, and stamping the agar on the sample surface. They were then transported to UW Oshkosh where they were incubated. Following the incubation period, plates were counted and identified by morphology.
RESULTS
A total of 50 facilities, in the five aforementioned groups, agreed to have their locations participate in this study. The daycare group did not have any placemat data due to the fact that none of the facilities contacted used placemats. Therefore, a total of 900 data points were collected.
Long-term care, restaurants, hospitals and lodging all showed a statistically significant difference between the samples that had placemats/tray covers when compared to samples that did not use this protective barrier.
While the daycare facilities had no statistics conducted due to the lack of placemats, these facilities had the highest levels over overall microbes and ten-times the amount of coliforms of the next highest facility group. Restaurants and lodging facilities were the next two groups with the highest levels of overall microbes and coliforms. The hospital and long-term care facilities demonstrated the least amount of overall microbes and coliforms.
While the placemats/tray covers were very successful as a barrier to overall bacterial contact, they were particularly effective as a barrier to coliforms. Additionally, there were much higher levels of Staphylococcus found in samples with no placemats/tray covers. Only one group (restaurants) showed any coliforms when the placemats were sampled.
DISCUSSION
This study shows similar results to the two previous studies mentioned in the Introduction. The placemats/tray covers provided an excellent barrier to the inadvertent contact with microorganisms at a number of facilities. Statistical analysis of the overall microbial means within each group showed a significant difference in all groups that had both covered and uncovered sites. Additionally, the daycare group did not use placemats, but likely could benefit from their use due to their relatively high level of microbes and coliforms. This overall lack of microbial contact would likely translate into a more sanitary environment, and consequently an environment that would be less likely to transmit disease causing microorganisms to unsuspecting users of these facilities. This principal is no more important than in a daycare where children lack the basic understanding of sanitation and personal hygiene.
Given the relatively low cost of these paper products they could be a value-added public health benefit to all these facilities. A cost-benefit analysis may be warranted to show operators of these facility types that the benefits of using placemats/tray covers far outweigh any additional costs to the facility. If more facilities used these barriers it would be an asset to environmental public health and may be able to prevent the spread of common illnesses.