PFAS 'Forever Chemicals' in Indian Food Packaging

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a group of over 12,000 synthetic chemicals characterised by extremely strong carbon-fluorine bonds — among the strongest bonds in organic chemistry. This bond strength is what makes PFAS invaluable industrially: they repel water, grease, and stains, resist heat and chemical degradation, and provide long-lasting surface protection. These same properties make PFAS persistent environmental contaminants — they do not naturally break down in the environment, in water, or in the human body, which is why they are called 'forever chemicals'.

PFAS were first developed in the 1940s and 1950s by 3M and DuPont, and became widely used in Teflon (non-stick cookware), Scotchgard (fabric protector), firefighting foam (AFFF), and food contact materials. In food packaging specifically, PFAS are used to coat paper and cardboard to make them grease-resistant — the coating that prevents a pizza box from becoming saturated with grease, or prevents microwave popcorn bags from leaking.

PFAS migrate from food packaging into food, especially when heat is involved (like microwave heating) or when oily/fatty foods come into contact with coated packaging for extended periods. Once ingested, PFAS accumulate in the body — particularly in the liver, kidneys, thyroid, and blood — and their concentration increases over time with continued exposure. This bioaccumulation, combined with their link to serious health effects, is why governments globally are moving to eliminate them from food contact applications.

The scientific evidence for PFAS health effects is extensive and grows more concerning with each passing year. Key findings documented across human epidemiological studies and experimental research:

Cancer: PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid) and PFOS (perfluorooctane sulfonate) — two of the most studied PFAS — are classified as possible to probable human carcinogens. The US EPA in 2023 classified PFOA as a known human carcinogen based on epidemiological evidence linking it to kidney cancer and testicular cancer. Other PFAS are being evaluated for carcinogenicity. IARC classified PFOA as a Group 2B possible carcinogen in 2023, and is reviewing additional PFAS for higher classifications.

Thyroid disruption: PFAS interfere with thyroid hormone synthesis and metabolism, leading to hypothyroidism. Thyroid disorders are significantly more prevalent among people with high PFAS exposure. In India, where thyroid disorders are already highly prevalent (affecting an estimated 42 million people), this is a particularly relevant concern.

Immune suppression: Multiple studies show that PFAS reduce the effectiveness of childhood vaccine immune responses and suppress adult immune function. The US National Academies of Sciences concluded in 2022 that sufficient evidence exists for PFAS-related immune effects. Reproductive harm: PFAS exposure is associated with reduced fertility in both men and women, pregnancy complications (pre-eclampsia, gestational diabetes), and lower birth weight. Metabolic effects: PFAS are associated with obesity, insulin resistance, and dyslipidaemia (abnormal cholesterol levels). Developmental effects: In utero and early childhood PFAS exposure has been linked to neurodevelopmental delays and lower cognitive performance in children.

India's PFAS problem is both an environmental contamination issue and a food contact materials issue. On the environmental side, PFAS contamination has been documented in groundwater, surface water, and soil around industrial zones in multiple Indian states — particularly near manufacturing facilities, airports (which use PFAS-containing firefighting foam), and textile processing units (which historically used PFAS-based water-repellent finishes).

A 2024 review published in Science of the Total Environment documented PFAS contamination across various Indian environmental matrices, including in drinking water sources in several regions. A separate study found PFAS in Chennai's surface water. These environmental routes contribute to human exposure through drinking water and food (fish and vegetables grown in contaminated water).

Regarding food packaging specifically: India's packaged food industry uses large quantities of grease-proof packaging materials — for fast food (burgers, fried chicken), quick service restaurants, microwave popcorn, baking parchment, food delivery packaging, and bakery boxes. Many of these applications historically used PFAS-coated paper or paperboard. The extent to which Indian food packaging contains PFAS has not been systematically surveyed by FSSAI, but the global supply chains for food packaging materials mean Indian manufacturers and importers likely use similar materials to those found to contain PFAS globally.

In October 2025, FSSAI issued a draft notification proposing amendments to the Food Safety and Standards (Packaging) Regulations, 2018, to ban PFAS in all food contact materials. This is a significant regulatory development — if finalised and enforced, it would bring India's food packaging regulation broadly in line with EU standards on PFAS (the EU has been phasing out PFAS in food contact materials since 2020 under the REACH regulation).

For urban Indians — particularly those who consume restaurant food, order through food delivery apps, use microwave cooking, or buy packaged convenience foods — PFAS exposure through food contact materials is a real and underappreciated route of exposure. Here are the specific exposure pathways:

Food delivery packaging: The paper bags, boxes, and containers used by quick-service restaurants and food delivery services (Swiggy, Zomato deliveries) may use grease-resistant paper coatings. Oil-rich foods — biryani, fried chicken, burgers, french fries — in contact with PFAS-coated packaging for 30–60 minutes during delivery can absorb measurable PFAS. Microwave popcorn bags: Microwave popcorn bags are the most extensively studied PFAS-containing food packaging. The inner lining is heat-resistant and grease-proof — properties achieved through PFAS coating. Microwaving increases PFAS migration significantly. Greaseproof baking paper: Baking parchment used for lining trays is often silicone-coated (safe) or PFAS-coated (potentially problematic). Pizza boxes: The bottom liner of pizza boxes is often coated with PFAS to prevent grease absorption. Non-stick cookware: Older Teflon (PTFE) pans with damaged coatings can shed PFAS particles into food — though modern PTFE at normal cooking temperatures is considered relatively safe if the coating is intact.

Common everyday sources of PFAS exposure from food packaging in India:

The October 2025 FSSAI draft notification proposing a ban on PFAS in food contact materials represents a significant step forward. Under the proposed amendment, all food contact materials — including paper, paperboard, plastic films, metal surfaces, and coatings — would be prohibited from containing intentionally added PFAS. Transition periods would be provided for industry compliance.

This regulatory development is timely. The EU's REACH restriction on PFAS in food contact paper (effective 2020 for some PFAS) and the broader PFAS restriction proposals in the EU are driving global supply chains towards PFAS-free alternatives. FSSAI's proposed ban would align India with these global standards and prevent Indian consumers from receiving products that cannot be sold in regulated markets.

The challenge is enforcement. FSSAI's food contact material testing infrastructure is less developed than its food testing capabilities. Testing for PFAS requires sophisticated equipment (LC-MS/MS — liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry) and trained personnel. Scaling up enforcement capacity will be essential for the proposed ban to have real-world impact.

PFAS-free alternatives exist for most food packaging applications. Silicone-coated paper (PFAS-free) is widely used for baking parchment. Bioplastic and PLA-coated paper can replace PFAS coatings in food service packaging. Unbleached, uncoated paper serves many applications where high grease resistance is not critical. The industry transition is achievable — the question is speed and enforcement.