Is Plastic Toxic? Safety of PVC, PP, PE, PS, PC and Epoxy by Additive Content

Regulatory status verified: 24 October 2026. Next scheduled review: January 2027 (SVHC Candidate List update).

Whether a plastic is toxic depends less on the polymer chain than on what was added to it: across the 6 plastics people ask about most (PVC, PP, PE, PS, PC and epoxy), the substances that can leave the material are its additives, its leftover monomer and the by-products those form, and each is held to a legal migration limit. So which plastics carry the most additive, and which carry almost none? The spread runs from flexible PVC, which can be up to 65 % plasticizer by weight, to a polypropylene food tub, which carries its antioxidants at 0.05 to 0.4 % by weight.

Lisa Zimmermann and colleagues at Goethe University Frankfurt and the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) tested extracts of 34 plastic products in 2019 and found PVC and polyurethane extracts the most toxic, while PET and HDPE extracts showed none or low activity. Polystyrene and polycarbonate raise a different question, the monomer left inside the polymer (styrene and bisphenol A), which this page labels as monomers, not additives.

The sections below set out the four things a plastic can release and the limits that cap them, then the six plastics in the order of the title: PVC (legacy stabilizers and four phthalates), polypropylene (an antioxidant breakdown product), polyethylene (film additives and one restricted antioxidant), polystyrene (residual styrene and foam flame retardants), polycarbonate (BPA) and epoxy (BPA and TBBPA). A comparison by additive load and the dated substitutions follow, and every additive named here has a record in the substance database.

The 6 plastics and what decides whether they are safe are compared in the table below.

Resin identification codes are recycling codes, not safety marks. "Not plasticised" means no plasticizer is added; it does not mean an analytical zero. Zimmermann et al. 2019 tested 34 products; their result describes those products, not every grade of each plastic.

CAS numbers and regulatory records for every additive named here are in the plastic additives database.

Is Plastic Toxic? What Decides Whether a Plastic Is Safe#

A plastic is toxic only to the extent that something leaves it and reaches a person: the polymer chain is not what migrates, so the question is what was mixed into it, what was left over from making it, and how much of either moves out. Regulation (EC) No 1935/2004 sets the inertness principle for every food-contact material: constituents must not transfer to food in quantities that could endanger human health.

How many chemicals are we talking about? The PlastChem report, led by Martin Wagner at NTNU and published on 14 March 2024, counts more than 16,000 chemicals associated with plastics, more than 4,200 (about 25 %) of them of concern, about 6 % regulated internationally and 66 % lacking hazard data. A separate inventory by Helene Wiesinger, Wang and Hellweg at ETH Zurich (Environmental Science and Technology, 2021) found more than 10,000 substances, more than 2,400 of potential concern and 901 approved for food-contact plastics in at least one jurisdiction. "Of concern" is a hazard screen in both, not a measured risk. A stabilizer, a plasticizer and a flame retardant are three of the 43 families of plastic additives these inventories sort, and the substances flagged by the screens are listed under toxic plastic additives.

Polymer, monomer, additive and NIAS: the four things a plastic can release#

A plastic can release 4 kinds of substance: fragments of the polymer itself, leftover monomer, the additives mixed in on purpose, and non-intentionally added substances (NIAS) such as impurities and breakdown products. Regulation (EU) No 10/2011 separates the last two in law: Article 3(7) defines an additive as a substance intentionally added to achieve a physical or chemical effect during processing or in the final material, and Article 3(9) defines a non-intentionally added substance as "an impurity in the substances used or a reaction intermediate formed during the production process or a decomposition or reaction product". The four sources are listed below.

• Polymer fragments: particles of the plastic itself, 1 µm to 5 mm for microplastics and smaller than 1 µm for nanoplastics.
• Residual monomer: vinyl chloride in PVC, styrene in polystyrene and BPA in polycarbonate and epoxy, each a starting substance rather than an additive.
• Additives: stabilizers, plasticizers, antioxidants, flame retardants, colorants and slip agents, added for a technical effect.
• NIAS: impurities, reaction by-products and degradation products of additives, such as 2,4-di-tert-butylphenol (2,4-DTBP) from phosphite antioxidants in polyolefins.

Each source reaches the law through a different instrument, as the table shows.

This page treats additives first, monomers second and particles only below the contextual border, because the additive is what differs most between two grades of the same plastic. How the law handles the fourth source is set out in NIAS: non-intentionally added substances from plastic additives.

Why the additives decide most of the answer#

Additives decide most of the answer because they are mixed into the polymer rather than bonded to it, so they diffuse out over time, faster when the plastic is hot, when the food is fatty and when the additive molecule is small. Migration is diffusion through the polymer followed by partitioning into whatever touches the surface, and a functional barrier layer slows it. The additive loadings that feed this diffusion differ more than 100-fold between plastics, from tenths of a percent of antioxidant in a polyolefin to tens of percent of plasticizer in flexible PVC. The diffusion models and test methods are set out under additive migration in plastics.

Does that make one plastic measurably worse than another? Zimmermann and colleagues answered with in vitro assays on extracts of 34 plastic products (Environmental Science and Technology, 2019): 74 % of the extracts were active in at least one assay, PVC and polyurethane extracts were the most toxic, and PET and HDPE extracts showed none or low activity. Only 260 of the 1,411 chemical features detected could be tentatively identified, so the study ranks products without naming the active compounds. A 2021 follow-up migrated 24 products into water for 10 days at 40 °C, and all migrates induced baseline toxicity. In vitro activity is a hazard signal, not a human dose; the wider study set is reviewed in chemicals migrating from plastic food packaging.

Hazard is not exposure: how migration limits control what leaves a plastic#

A hazard classification says what a substance can do at a given dose; a migration limit caps how much of it may pass into food, and EU law caps the total of everything that migrates from a plastic at 10 mg per dm2 of surface, or 60 mg/kg of food for infants. Industry bodies hold that hazard is not exposure and that authorised additives meet their migration limits; Jane Muncke and 32 co-authors, in a consensus statement in Environmental Health (2020), point out that most plastic chemicals lack hazard data and that mixtures are rarely assessed together. Both positions are recorded here, and neither is endorsed.

Regulation (EU) No 10/2011 sets three limits that apply to every food-contact plastic, listed below.

1. Overall migration limit: 10 mg/dm2 of contact surface, or 60 mg/kg of food for infants and young children.
2. Generic specific migration limit: 60 mg/kg of food for an authorised substance that has no specific limit of its own.
3. Functional-barrier limit: 0.01 mg/kg for a substance kept behind a functional barrier layer.

Every substance-specific limit on the Union list is explained on EU 10/2011.

The antioxidant Irgafos 168 shows how the EU and US systems meet on one substance: it has no specific migration limit in the EU (FCM 671), so the overall limit governs it, and the US Food and Drug Administration set an acceptable daily intake of 1 mg/kg bw/day against a cumulative estimated daily intake of 0.09 mg/kg bw/day for Irgafos 168 plus its phosphate (assessment published 2023).

Under 21 CFR 174.5, an indirect food additive may be used in no greater quantity than is reasonably required for its technical effect, and the individual sections cap each additive by polymer and condition of use, as mapped on FDA food contact rules; the simulants and test conditions are described in migration testing of plastics for food contact.

Is PVC Toxic?#

PVC is not toxic as a polymer, but it is the plastic with the most additive in it: every PVC compound needs a heat stabilizer, and flexible PVC is 5 to 65 % plasticizer by weight, so whether a PVC product is harmful depends on which stabilizer and which plasticizer it contains. The same split answers "is PVC toxic to humans" and "is PVC safe". Polyvinyl chloride, sold as "vinyl", is made at about 40 million tonnes a year worldwide; in the EU 60 % of it is rigid and 40 % flexible, and about 70 % goes into building and construction (VinylPlus, 2023).

Why does PVC need so much more additive than other plastics? The polymer is 57 % chlorine by mass and starts to lose hydrogen chloride slowly at 100 to 120 °C and degrades rapidly near 250 °C, so no PVC compound is processed without a stabilizer; the full package is set out in additives for PVC. Zimmermann's 2019 screen put PVC extracts in the most toxic group, yet that does not make every PVC product poisonous: the sections below separate rigid from flexible PVC, legacy additives from replacements, and the monomer from the additives.

Rigid PVC and flexible PVC: why plasticised PVC carries the larger additive load#

Rigid PVC, the material of pipes and window profiles, contains no plasticizer at all, while flexible PVC, the material of cable sheathing, flooring and medical tubing, is 5 to 65 % plasticizer by weight. Across that range, flexible PVC covers Shore A 50 to 90 (Wiesinger and colleagues, ETH Zurich, 2024). Phthalates are the plasticizer class behind most "is PVC toxic" questions, and 90 to 95 % of phthalates are used as PVC plasticisers according to secondary industry summaries.

Rigid and flexible PVC differ in 6 respects, compared below; which plasticizer goes into which flexible product is covered in plasticizers for PVC.

REACH Annex XVII entry 51 limits DEHP, DBP, BBP and DIBP to 0.1 % by weight of the plasticised material in any article since 7 July 2020, DEHP's specific migration limit in EU food-contact plastics has been 0.6 mg/kg since Regulation (EU) 2023/1442, and DEHP in EU medical devices reaches its sunset date on 1 July 2030 under Regulation (EU) 2023/2482. DINP is not banned in the EU: entry 52 restricts it only in toys and childcare articles that can be placed in the mouth, and none of the replacement plasticizers DINP, DIDP, DOTP, DINCH or TOTM is an SVHC. The human evidence on the four restricted phthalates is reviewed under phthalates: health effects, exposure and regulation.

The legacy PVC additives: lead, cadmium, organotins and four phthalates#

Four groups of PVC additive are restricted in the European Union: lead stabilizers, cadmium stabilizers, organotin stabilizers such as DOTE, and the four low-molecular-weight phthalates DEHP, DBP, BBP and DIBP. Lead stabilizer salts, among them tribasic lead sulfate, lead stearates and dibasic lead phosphite, have been on the REACH Candidate List since 19 December 2012 as toxic for reproduction, and REACH Annex XVII entry 63 (Regulation (EU) 2023/923) has limited lead in PVC to below 0.1 % by weight since 29 November 2024.

Cadmium is capped at 0.01 % by weight in PVC by entry 23, and entry 20 has limited dibutyltin and dioctyltin compounds to 0.1 % tin in listed consumer articles since 1 January 2012. The stabilizer chemistries that replaced the lead and cadmium systems are compared under PVC heat stabilizers.

The four restricted groups, their EU status and their current use are set out below.

The legacy package has not disappeared everywhere. Calcium-based stabilizers make up 83 % of EU stabilizer use (VinylPlus), but global stabilizer use in 2023 was about 50 % calcium, 25.1 % lead and 15.4 % tin, so a PVC article made outside the EU can still carry a lead stabilizer; the recital of Regulation (EU) 2023/923 records that 90 % of EU lead emissions from PVC articles in 2016 came from imported articles.

Recovered rigid PVC may contain up to 1.5 % lead until 28 May 2033 in listed building uses, marked "Contains ≥ 0,1 % lead", while the derogation for recovered flexible PVC expired on 28 May 2025; the entry 63 deadlines are explained on lead in PVC. The European Chemicals Agency's investigation report of November 2023 covered 63 PVC additives and recommended a REACH restriction on ortho-phthalate plasticizers and organotin stabilizers, not on PVC itself.

Vinyl chloride: the monomer, not an additive#

Vinyl chloride is the monomer PVC is made from, not an additive, and in a finished PVC product it matters only as a residue, which the EU Toy Safety Regulation caps at 0.01 mg/L of migration from polymeric toy materials from 1 August 2030. Polymerisation links vinyl chloride molecules into the polyvinyl chloride chain, and the fraction that does not react stays in the polymer as residual monomer, controlled by monomer limits rather than through the additive restrictions of REACH Annex XVII. Regulation (EU) 2025/2509 entered into force on 1 January 2026, and its 0.01 mg/L limit is the one vinyl chloride value in our source library verified against the Official Journal text; the hazard classification of vinyl chloride and any food-contact residue limit are not yet verified there, so this page does not state them.

Is PVC pipe safe for drinking water?#

Rigid PVC water pipe contains no plasticizer, and from 31 December 2026 every additive in an EU drinking-water pipe, including its methyltin stabilizer, has to be on the positive lists of Implementing Decision (EU) 2024/367. The methyltin stabilizers appear on those lists as entries 0606 and 0561, both due for review by 31 December 2028. Recovered rigid PVC with up to 1.5 % lead is permitted only in multilayer pipes that do not carry drinking water. In the US, the comparable clearance caps methyltin at 2 wt% of rigid PVC under 21 CFR 178.2010, a food-contact rule rather than a water rule. Flexible PVC tubing is a different, plasticised material, and the pipe answer does not carry over to it. The EU positive lists and the US and German certification schemes are compared under plastic additives in drinking-water contact.

Is PVC safe to touch?#

Touching rigid PVC transfers no plasticizer, because it contains none; flexible PVC carries its plasticizer to the surface over time, which is why the EU limits the four restricted phthalates to 0.1 % of the plasticised material in any article. Plasticizers are not chemically bound to the polymer chain, so they migrate towards the surface of flexible products such as flooring and cable sheathing. The entry 51 limit applies to the plasticised material of any article, a scope that covers PVC, PVDC, polyvinyl acetate, polyurethanes, other polymers, coatings, decals and printed designs. Our source library holds no dermal-absorption figure for a PVC surface, so this answer stops at what the material contains.

What happens when PVC overheats?#

Overheated PVC releases hydrogen chloride: the polymer starts to lose it slowly at 100 to 120 °C and degrades rapidly near 250 °C, which is the reason no PVC compound is made without a heat stabilizer. The stabilizer scavenges the released hydrogen chloride, and the margin is narrow: a dehydrochlorination of 0.1 % already causes unacceptable discoloration of the compound. Combustion products beyond hydrogen chloride are outside the verified source library behind this page and are not covered here.

Is Polypropylene Safe?#

Polypropylene is one of the lowest-additive plastics in everyday use: it is never plasticised, and its main additives, a phenolic and a phosphite antioxidant, are added at 0.05 to 0.4 % by weight to stop the polymer oxidising while it is melted. Is polypropylene basically plastic? Yes: it is a polyolefin thermoplastic, the same family as polyethylene, with an isotactic melting point of 160 to 166 °C, and the tertiary carbon atoms in its chain make it oxidise during processing.

The downsides of polypropylene are additive-side and particle-side, so "is polypropylene toxic" and "is PP safe" turn on two questions: 2,4-DTBP, a breakdown product of the phosphite antioxidant that counts as a non-intentionally added substance, and particle release when a container is heated. Every additive family in a PP grade, with its migration limit, is set out in additives for polypropylene.

What is added to polypropylene, and at what level#

A food-contact polypropylene usually carries 3 additive types, an antioxidant pair, an acid scavenger and often a clarifier or nucleating agent, while an automotive or outdoor grade adds UV stabilizers, fillers and sometimes flame retardants at much higher levels. The full list runs to 10 families: a primary phenolic antioxidant plus a phosphite for processing, a thioester for long-term heat, an acid scavenger (calcium stearate up to 1,000 ppm, or hydrotalcite), HALS plus a UV absorber outdoors, nucleating and clarifying agents, antistatic agents, slip and antiblock agents in BOPP film, fillers such as talc and calcium carbonate at 20 to 40 %, impact modifiers such as EPR and POE, and flame retardants, with intumescent ammonium polyphosphate at 22 to 30 wt% for a UL 94 V-0 rating.

The additives that polypropylene and polyethylene share, with typical levels and food-contact status, are compared below.

FDA percentages are legal maxima, not recommended dosages.

That contrast answers the safety question in numbers: the additive total in a polypropylene food tub sits in the tenths of a percent, against tens of percent of additive in flexible PVC. Neither Irganox 1010 (FCM 496) nor Irgafos 168 (FCM 671) has a specific migration limit in the EU, so both fall under the overall migration limit of 10 mg/dm2; grade choice and dosage are covered in antioxidants for polypropylene.

NIAS in polypropylene: 2,4-DTBP from phosphite antioxidants#

The best-documented unintended substance in polypropylene is 2,4-di-tert-butylphenol (2,4-DTBP), a breakdown product of the phosphite antioxidant Irgafos 168, measured at up to 45.6 mg/kg in BOPP and LDPE food-contact products by Qian and colleagues in 2018. The pathway runs in two steps: Irgafos 168 oxidises to its phosphate (AO168=O) while it protects the melt, and that phosphate breaks down further to bis(2,4-di-tert-butylphenyl) phosphate and 2,4-DTBP. 2,4-DTBP is not on the EU Union list, so it is a non-intentionally added substance that the manufacturer assesses under Article 19 of Regulation (EU) No 10/2011.

Recycling raises the level of the parent antioxidant: in closed-loop polypropylene recycling, Irgafos 168 accumulates from 650 to more than 1,200 ppm over 5 cycles, and the parent, Irgafos 168, has no specific migration limit in the EU. Our source library holds no hazard classification for 2,4-DTBP itself, so this page reports the measurement and the legal status only.

Is polypropylene food safe?#

Polypropylene is food safe when the grade is made for food contact: in the EU every additive in it must be on the Union list of Regulation (EU) No 10/2011 and the total migration must stay under 10 mg/dm2, and in the US the resin must meet 21 CFR 177.1520, which caps its n-hexane extractables at 6.4 %. The same conditions answer "is PP food safe" and "is polypropylene safe for food", and they differ by jurisdiction and user, as listed below.

• EU: every additive on the Union list (Irganox 1010 as FCM 496, Irgafos 168 as FCM 671) and overall migration of at most 10 mg/dm2, or 60 mg/kg for food for infants and young children.
• US: item 1.1a of 21 CFR 177.1520, with a density of 0.880 to 0.913 g/cm3, a melting point of 160 to 180 °C, n-hexane extractables of at most 6.4 % (reflux) and xylene solubles of at most 9.8 % at 25 °C.
• Children: from 1 August 2030, the Toy Safety Regulation (EU) 2025/2509 prohibits substances with a harmonised CMR 1A, 1B or 2 or endocrine-disruptor classification in toys, polypropylene toys included.

A US grade complies with 21 CFR 177.1520 under that section's conditions; it is not cleared in general terms.

Does polypropylene contain BPA or phthalates?#

No: polypropylene is not plasticised and is not made from bisphenol A, so neither phthalates nor BPA are present by design; phthalates belong to flexible PVC and BPA to polycarbonate and epoxy. The plasticizer hosts in our source library are PVC, polyvinyl butyral, cellulosics, polyvinyl acetate and polyurethane, and polypropylene is not among them. BPA is a monomer, not an additive, and 65 to 70 % of it goes into polycarbonate. "By design" is not the same as an analytical zero: a recycled grade is a separate case, covered below the contextual border.

Is #5 polypropylene microwave safe?#

The number 5 on a polypropylene container is a recycling code, not a microwave rating: "microwave-safe" is a claim the manufacturer makes and, in the EU, has to back with migration tests at the worst foreseeable time and temperature. What heat does release was measured by Hussain and colleagues at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln (Environmental Science and Technology, 2023): up to 4.22 million microplastics and 2.11 billion nanoplastics per cm2 within 3 minutes of microwave heating of polypropylene containers and polyethylene pouches. The same single study estimated the highest intake at 22.1 ng/kg body weight per day, for toddlers eating microwaved dairy from polypropylene. The heating studies are reviewed under is it safe to microwave plastic.

Is Polyethylene Toxic?#

Polyethylene is one of the least toxic plastics in the published comparisons: HDPE extracts showed no or low activity in the 34-product screen by Zimmermann and colleagues in 2019, and polyethylene is never plasticised, so its additives are antioxidants and film additives at fractions of a percent. Is polyethylene harmful through any of its additives, then? One antioxidant now on the Candidate List, antioxidant 2246 (SVHC since 17 January 2022 as toxic for reproduction; EU group specific migration limit 1.5 mg/kg under group restriction 13), was found mainly in polyethylene and PET in a survey of Chinese food-contact materials, in which the sum of synthetic phenolic antioxidants ranged from 44.18 to 69,485.12 µg/kg (median 2,615.63 µg/kg).

That survey describes the Chinese market, not EU or US packaging; the grade-by-grade package is set out in additives for polyethylene.

What LDPE, LLDPE and HDPE contain#

Polyethylene grades carry 4 additive groups depending on their use: antioxidants in every grade, slip and antiblock agents in film, fluoropolymer processing aids in film and pipe, and carbon black in pipe and black packaging. The density grade (LDPE about 0.924, LLDPE 0.916 to 0.940 and HDPE about 0.961 g/cm3) sets the use, and the use sets the additive groups listed below.

• Antioxidants: the same phenolic and phosphite pair as in polypropylene, present in every grade.
• Slip and antiblock agents: erucamide at 0.05 to 0.12 % and diatomaceous earth or talc at 2,500 to 10,000 ppm in film.
• Fluoropolymer processing aids: VDF-HFP at no more than 0.2 % in olefin polymers under FDA rules, used to remove melt fracture.
• Carbon black: at most 2.5 % in EU food-contact plastics (FCM 411, with benzo[a]pyrene at most 0.25 mg/kg of carbon black) and 2.0 to 2.5 % by mass in PE pressure pipe (ISO 4427-1:2019).

Carbon black has been on the California Proposition 65 list since 21 February 2003 (IARC Group 2B), but only as airborne, unbound particles of respirable size, not as carbon black bound in a pipe or container wall. Crosslinked PEX-b pipe was measured leaching ETBE at 23 to more than 100 µg/L against an odour threshold of 5 µg/L, and 11 PEX-related contaminants, 2,4-DTBP among them, were found across 6 brands (Water Research, 2014).

Is HDPE food safe?#

High-density polyethylene is food safe when the grade is made for food contact: in the US it must meet 21 CFR 177.1520, which caps n-hexane extractables at 5.5 % at 50 °C, and in the EU every additive must be on the Union list and total migration must stay under 10 mg/dm2. Item 2.1 of 21 CFR 177.1520 covers polyethylene with a density of 0.85 to 1.00 g/cm3 and also caps xylene solubles at 11.3 % at 25 °C. The EU route is the one polypropylene follows, with specific limits where the Union list sets them, such as the 1.5 mg/kg group limit covering antioxidant 2246. The comparative evidence points the same way: HDPE extracts were one of the two product groups with none or low in vitro activity in the 2019 screen by Zimmermann and colleagues. A food-contact HDPE bottle and a black HDPE pressure pipe remain different grades, and only the pipe is specified with 2.0 to 2.5 % carbon black.

Do polyethylene containers contain PFAS?#

Polyethylene contains no fluorine of its own, so PFAS in a polyethylene container comes from 1 of 2 sources: a fluoropolymer processing aid, capped by the FDA at 0.2 % in olefin polymers, or surface fluorination of the finished container, which is a process rather than an additive. The processing aid is the one PFAS additive in polyethylene, used in film and pipe to remove melt fracture. Surface fluorination treats the wall of a finished HDPE container, so it adds nothing to the polymer formulation; all six PFAS routes into a plastic are on PFAS in plastics. The universal EU PFAS restriction remains a proposal, and no requirement under it is in force.

Is Polystyrene Toxic?#

Polystyrene raises 2 separate questions: how much styrene, the monomer it is made from and not an additive, is left in it, and which flame retardant was added to the foam and impact grades. Polystyrene comes in 4 forms: solid general-purpose polystyrene (GPPS), rubber-modified high-impact polystyrene (HIPS), expanded foam (EPS, 11 to 32 kg/m3) and extruded foam (XPS, 28 to 34 kg/m3), the foams being 95 to 98 % air and known by the common name styrofoam. For food contact the question is the monomer residue; for insulation it is the flame retardant. The formulation side, with the additive limits for each form, is in additives for polystyrene.

Residual styrene: the monomer limit in food-contact polystyrene#

US food-contact rules are reported to limit residual styrene in polystyrene to 1 % by weight, or 0.5 % where the food is fatty, because styrene is the monomer and a fraction of it stays unreacted in the finished plastic. Residual styrene is regulated by 3 separate instruments, from US food-contact law to California's Proposition 65 and the EU toy rules, as listed below.

• US food contact: residual styrene at most 1 wt%, or 0.5 % for fatty foods, as reported for US food-contact polystyrene.
• California: styrene on the California Proposition 65 list for cancer since 22 April 2016.
• EU toys: styrene migration of at most 0.77 mg/L from polymeric toy materials from 1 August 2030.

The foam adds an additive question of its own: blowing agents are additives, and those permitted for food-contact polystyrene foam under 21 CFR 178.3010 are n-pentane, isopentane and 1,1-difluoroethane.

The styrene migration limit for toys is one of four monomer limits for polymeric toy materials, all set out in the EU Toy Safety Regulation (EU) 2025/2509.

Flame retardants in EPS, XPS and HIPS#

EPS insulation needs a flame retardant because its limiting oxygen index is about 18 while the ASTM C578 insulation standard requires more than 24, and for decades that flame retardant was HBCD, now a persistent organic pollutant under the Stockholm Convention. HBCD (hexabromocyclododecane) was produced at about 28,000 tonnes a year in 2009-2010, entered the REACH Candidate List on 28 October 2008 as persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic, and reached its Annex XIV sunset date on 21 August 2015 (entry 3, Regulation (EU) No 143/2011); the Stockholm Convention listed it in Annex A in May 2013, with an exemption for EPS and XPS in buildings.

In the EU, HBCD is now limited to 100 mg/kg as an unintentional trace contaminant under the POPs Regulation (EU) 2019/1021, and EPS or XPS installed in buildings before 21 February 2018 may stay in use; the full record of HBCD is on its substance page. EPS and XPS producers replaced it with PolyFR, a polymeric brominated butadiene-styrene copolymer.

HIPS followed a separate path: decabromodiphenyl ether (decaBDE), always used with antimony trioxide, was the historical flame retardant of HIPS television and computer housings, and it has been on the Candidate List since 19 December 2012 and in Stockholm Annex A since 2017. Current systems are compared under flame retardants for polystyrene.

Are black plastic utensils toxic?#

Black plastic utensils can contain flame retardants that were never meant for a kitchen: Liu and colleagues found total flame retardants up to 22,800 mg/kg across 203 black household products in 2024, with a median estimated decaBDE (BDE-209) intake from utensils of 34,700 ng/day. A 2025 corrigendum corrected the study's comparison of that intake with the reference dose, and this page states no risk verdict from it. The most likely source is recycled electronics plastic: Guzzonato, Puype and Harrad at the University of Birmingham found in 2017 that 61 % of toys, food-contact items and electronic-waste samples were bromine-positive and 45 % of those exceeded PBDE limits, pointing to recycled electronics ABS. The EU caps PBDEs at 10 mg/kg in mixtures and articles under Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/1482, but food-contact materials are excluded from that act. The evidence is reviewed under flame retardants and human health.

Is Polycarbonate Safe?#

Polycarbonate's safety question is BPA, which is not an additive but the monomer the polymer is built from, and the European Union has banned it in food-contact materials under Regulation (EU) 2024/3190. About 10 million tonnes of BPA were made in 2022, and 65 to 70 % of it went into polycarbonate, the transparent, impact-resistant plastic with a glass transition temperature of 147 °C. Its additives are few and capped in US food contact. The formulation side is in additives for polycarbonate.

BPA in polycarbonate: a monomer residue released by hydrolysis#

Polycarbonate releases BPA mainly by hydrolysis, the reaction of its carbonate links with hot water, which is reported above 70 °C at high humidity. Two routes bring BPA into contact with food: residual monomer that never reacted, and BPA freed when the chain hydrolyses. Exposure is widespread: Calafat and colleagues at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention detected BPA in the urine of 92.6 % of 2,517 NHANES 2003-2004 participants aged 6 and over (Environmental Health Perspectives, 2008), a detection frequency rather than a dose. BPS, BPF and the full evidence are covered under bisphenols in plastics.

The two main food regulators read the BPA evidence differently. The European Food Safety Authority set a tolerable daily intake of 0.2 ng/kg bw/day in 2023, replacing the temporary 4 µg/kg bw/day of 2015, a 20,000-fold cut derived from a reference point of 8.2 ng/kg bw/day and an uncertainty factor of 50; the US Food and Drug Administration still considers BPA safe at the levels found in food. The US has acted only on specific uses: 21 CFR 177.1580(d) excludes polycarbonate infant feeding bottles and sippy cups, an authorisation the FDA removed in July 2012 on the ground of abandonment, not safety.

BPA has been on the REACH Candidate List since 12 January 2017 as toxic for reproduction, and its harmonised Repr. 1B (H360F) classification has applied since 23 November 2023. Regulation (EU) 2024/3190 has been in force since 20 January 2025: the main transition ended on 20 July 2026, listed cases such as fruit, vegetable and fishery-product preservation have until 20 January 2028, repeat-use articles must leave the market by 20 January 2029, and compliance is checked against a detection limit of 1 µg/kg. The legal text is summarised under EU bisphenol rules.

The additives in polycarbonate: UV absorbers, mould release and flame retardants#

Polycarbonate carries 3 additive types, UV absorbers, a mould release and, in electrical grades, flame retardants, and US food-contact law caps the first two: UV-234 at 3.0 wt% and the mould release PETS at 0.5 wt%, with total extractives held to 0.15 wt%. The three types and their limits are listed below.

• UV absorbers: UV-234 at most 3.0 wt% and UV-329 at most 0.5 wt% in polycarbonate under conditions of use E, F and G of 21 CFR 178.2010.
• Mould release (mold release in US usage): pentaerythritol tetrastearate (PETS) at most 0.5 wt% of the finished resin under 21 CFR 177.1580, which also caps total extractives at 0.15 wt% (water, 50 % ethanol and n-heptane, 6 h reflux).
• Flame retardants: KPFBS (Rimar salt) for transparent grades and PTFE anti-drip at 0.4 to 0.5 wt% in PC/ABS, both of them PFAS.

Unmodified polycarbonate has a limiting oxygen index of 25 to 29 % and rates HB to V-2 in UL 94, which is why electrical housings carry a flame retardant. For food-contact polycarbonate the additive caps run from 0.5 to 3.0 wt%, and the monomer, not the additive package, drives the regulatory answer.

Is BPA-free plastic safe?#

"BPA-free" says what a plastic does not contain, not what replaced it, and no EU or US instrument defines the phrase. The materials that replace polycarbonate in rigid clear articles are copolyesters, polypropylene, PET and glass, each with its own additive package and migration limits. The replacements are examined under BPA-free plastic explained.

Is Epoxy Resin Toxic?#

A fully cured epoxy plastic is a crosslinked thermoset whose main safety questions are BPA, the monomer it is built from and not an additive, and the flame retardant TBBPA in circuit boards; the liquid resin and its hardener are a chemical-handling question that this reference does not cover. Epoxy resins are built from BPA or bisphenol F, often through BADGE, the diglycidyl ether of BPA, which is also a monomer. Curing agents and hardeners sit outside a plastic-additives reference, so "is epoxy resin toxic" is answered here for the cured plastic, its additives and its migration limits. The formulation side is in additives for epoxy resins and composites.

Cured versus uncured epoxy: what the plastics answer covers#

Once an epoxy is fully cured, its monomer and hardener have reacted into a crosslinked network, so what can still leave it is unreacted residue; before curing, the liquid resin and hardener are reactive chemicals, and their handling is outside the scope of a plastic-additives reference. That split answers "is epoxy resin toxic when dry": the question for a cured part is how much unreacted BPA or BADGE remains, not whether the network itself migrates. Our source library holds no cure-completeness threshold at which a cured epoxy counts as inert, and no figure for skin sensitisation or fumes, so this page does not repeat the resin-craft claim that cured epoxy is "inert and safe". The same limit applies to "is epoxy flooring safe for health": the cured floor is the plastics question, the installation a handling question.

Curing agents carry regulatory records of their own: 2-methylimidazole, an epoxy curing agent and accelerator, has been on the REACH Candidate List since 25 June 2020, yet as a hardener it falls outside this reference. For food contact, Regulation (EU) 2024/3190 leaves BPA-based epoxy one route, a derogation for liquid epoxy resin on self-supporting containers above 1,000 litres, and only where migration is not detectable. Resin-craft safety and protective equipment are outside this page.

BPA and TBBPA in epoxy plastics#

Epoxy plastics contain 2 bisphenols with different roles: BPA as the monomer of the resin and TBBPA, its brominated relative, as a flame retardant reacted into circuit-board laminates so that it cannot migrate as a free additive. BPA plays the same monomer role in epoxy as in polycarbonate, and BADGE (CAS 1675-54-3), the epoxy-resin building block, is also a known migrant from can coatings, a coatings use outside this reference. The EU food-contact ban of Regulation (EU) 2024/3190 covers both, with the large-container derogation as the one exception for epoxy.

Tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA) is the reactive flame retardant of FR-4 epoxy circuit-board laminates and of polycarbonate, where it is reacted into the polymer backbone, and an additive flame retardant in ABS, where it is blended in unreacted. It has been on the Candidate List since 17 January 2023 as carcinogenic, carries a harmonised Carc. 1B classification applicable since 1 September 2025, and has been on the California Proposition 65 list for cancer since 27 October 2017; the reactive and additive uses of TBBPA are separated on its substance page. The halogen-free route uses DOPO-based phosphorus, which reaches UL 94 V-0 in epoxy at about 1 to 1.2 wt% phosphorus in research formulations.

Which Plastic Is the Safest? 6 Plastics Compared by Additive Load#

On additive load and on the one study that compared plastics directly, polyethylene and polypropylene sit at the low end and flexible PVC at the high end: HDPE extracts showed no or low in vitro activity in 2019, while flexible PVC can be up to 65 % plasticizer by weight. The middle is decided by monomers rather than additives: residual styrene in polystyrene and BPA in polycarbonate and epoxy. The table compares the 6 plastics by what they contain and the limit or restriction that applies.

This comparison ranks typical grades by what they contain and by one in vitro study of 34 products; it is not a risk assessment of any product.

The ranking describes typical grades, not every product: a recycled or imported grade can carry a legacy additive the virgin grade does not, and the hormone-active subset of these substances is covered under endocrine disruptors in plastics. The REACH Candidate List held 253 entries at its last update on 4 February 2026; none of the five replacement plasticizers (DINP, DIDP, DOTP, DINCH and TOTM) is on it, and every plastic additive on the SVHC Candidate List is listed with its date.

Why "safest" depends on the grade, not the resin code#

Two products with the same resin code can differ by tens of percentage points in additive content: rigid and flexible PVC both carry the code 3, yet one contains no plasticizer and the other up to 65 % by weight. Within polypropylene, a food tub carries antioxidants in the tenths of a percent and a flame-retardant part 22 to 30 wt% of intumescent ammonium polyphosphate. Three grade distinctions decide more than the code, as listed below.

• Food-contact grade versus technical grade: only the first has to meet the Union list or the 21 CFR conditions and their migration limits.
• Virgin versus recycled grade: a recyclate can carry additives restricted after the original product was made, such as lead and DEHP in recycled PVC flooring.
• EU-made versus imported grade: 90 % of EU lead emissions from PVC articles in 2016 came from imported articles (Regulation (EU) 2023/923, recital).

How Additive Substitution Made Plastics Safer#

Five substitutions changed what these plastics contain: calcium-zinc stabilizers replaced lead in European PVC, non-phthalate and high-molecular-weight plasticizers replaced the four restricted phthalates, a polymeric flame retardant replaced HBCD in polystyrene foam, BPA-free materials replaced polycarbonate in EU food contact, and halogen-free phosphorus became the alternative to TBBPA in epoxy. Each substitution has a legal driver with a date, and each replacement has a status of its own, compared below in the order of this page.

Polypropylene and polyethylene have no row: no forced substitution of a polyolefin additive is recorded in our source library, and the antioxidant question there is the management of the breakdown product 2,4-DTBP.

The numbers show how far each substitution has gone. In PVC, the EU lead phase-out was completed in 2015, while global stabilizer use in 2023 still included about 25.1 % lead. DOTP, one of the replacement plasticizers, is authorised for EU food contact as FCM 798 with a specific migration limit of 60 mg/kg, is not an SVHC and is not restricted under REACH Annex XVII. In polystyrene foam, PolyFR took over from HBCD, and in EU food contact the BPA ban moved rigid clear articles to copolyesters, polypropylene, PET and glass. A replacement is held to the same migration limits as the substance it replaced, so substitution changes the hazard profile of a grade without changing the rules it has to meet.

The formulator's view of each plastic, what goes into it and what replaced what, is set out in additives by polymer, the formulation guides that cover PVC, polypropylene, polyethylene, polystyrene, polycarbonate and epoxy among 20 major plastics.

─── CONTEXTUAL BORDER ───

Other Plastics People Ask About: PET, ABS, Polyurethane and Recycled Plastic#

Four more plastics come up on the same searches, PET, ABS, polyurethane and recycled plastic, and each one has the same kind of answer: what was added to it, and what the limit is. Two cross-cutting questions follow: whether plastics shed particles, and how to tell which plastic a product is made of. Each short answer rests on the migration limit or study that decides it.

Is PET safe?#

PET is among the lowest-scoring plastics in the in vitro comparisons, and its best-known migrant, antimony, is a residue of the catalyst that built the polyester rather than an additive. PET extracts showed none or low activity in the 2019 screen. On antimony, Shotyk and Krachler at the University of Heidelberg found in 2007 that antimony in PET-bottled water rose by 90 % on average over 6 months across 48 European brands, and Westerhoff and colleagues at Arizona State University measured 0.095 to 0.521 ppb in US bottled water in 2008, against the US EPA limit of 6 ppb and the WHO guideline of 20 ppb. Catalyst residue, reheat additives and barrier systems are covered in additives for PET resin.

Antimony trioxide is classified Carc. 2 in the EU (CLP index 051-005-00-X), trivalent antimony is IARC Group 2A (Monographs volume 131, 2022), antimony oxide has been on the Proposition 65 list for cancer since 1 October 1990, and the EU specific migration limit for antimony is 0.04 mg/kg. The substance itself is profiled on antimony trioxide.

Is ABS food safe?#

ABS can be food safe when it is a food-contact grade: US law permits it for every food type except alcoholic beverages under 21 CFR 177.1020, and EU law requires that its acrylonitrile monomer does not migrate at a detectable level. ABS is 15 to 35 % acrylonitrile, 5 to 30 % butadiene and 40 to 60 % styrene, all three monomers rather than additives, and the US clearance applies under conditions of use E, F and G. The EU sets acrylonitrile migration at "not detectable" (FCM 225), and the Toy Safety Regulation (EU) 2025/2509 adds limits of 0.01 mg/L for acrylonitrile and 0.07 mg/L for butadiene in polymeric toy materials from 1 August 2030. On the additive side, the FDA caps the antioxidant Irganox 1076 at 0.5 % in ABS; the full package is in additives for ABS, SAN and ASA.

Is TPU or polyurethane toxic?#

Polyurethane extracts were among the most toxic in the 2019 comparison by Zimmermann and colleagues, and the additive most often behind concern in polyurethane foam is a flame retardant: Stapleton and colleagues at Duke University found flame retardants in 85 % of 102 US couches in 2012. The two findings are separate, since the 2019 screen did not identify the active compounds. In the couch study (Environmental Science and Technology, 2012), TDCPP was found in 52 % of couches bought in 2005 or later; TDCPP has been on the Proposition 65 list for cancer since 28 October 2011 and is not an SVHC, and California's TB 117-2013 standard now lets most polyurethane foam pass without flame retardants. Our source library holds no TPU-specific migration or toxicity study, and the isocyanates, polyols and catalysts that build polyurethane are outside this reference; see additives for polyurethane and TPU.

Is recycled plastic less safe?#

Recycled plastic can carry additives that were legal when the original product was made and are restricted now: Helene Wiesinger and colleagues at ETH Zurich found regulated chemicals above 0.1 wt%, mainly lead and DEHP, in 16 % of 151 new Swiss PVC floorings in 2024. DEHP alone appeared in 19 % of the samples, at 0.003 to 20 wt%. EU law tolerates a measured share of that legacy: recovered rigid PVC may carry up to 1.5 % lead until 28 May 2033, and articles made from recovered material may carry PBDEs up to 350 mg/kg from 30 December 2025 and 200 mg/kg from 30 December 2027. Restabilizing a recyclate is covered in additives for recycled plastics, and the documented cases are collected under legacy additives in recycled plastic.

Do plastics shed microplastics?#

All 6 plastics can shed particles, and the particles carry their additives with them: microplastics are defined as 1 µm to 5 mm and nanoplastics as smaller than 1 µm. Leslie and colleagues at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam measured a mean of 1.6 µg/mL of plastic particles in the blood of 22 donors (Environment International, 2022), with PET, polyethylene and styrene polymers detected and polypropylene below the limit of quantification. Marfella and colleagues at the University of Campania found polyethylene in the carotid plaque of 58.4 % of patients (150 of 257) and PVC in 12.1 % (New England Journal of Medicine, 2024), with a hazard ratio of 4.53 (95 % CI 2.00 to 10.27) for heart attack, stroke or death: an association, not causation. That PVC finding answers "does vinyl give off microplastics". The particle side is covered under microplastics and additive leaching.

How can you tell which plastic a product is made of?#

The number inside the recycling triangle names the polymer, not its additives: 3 is PVC, 5 is polypropylene, 2 and 4 are high- and low-density polyethylene, 6 is polystyrene, and polycarbonate falls under 7, "other". The codes for the 6 plastics on this page are listed below in the order of the title.

• PVC: code 3, also labelled "vinyl".
• Polypropylene: code 5.
• Polyethylene: code 2 (HDPE) or code 4 (LDPE).
• Polystyrene: code 6.
• Polycarbonate: code 7, "other".
• Epoxy: code 7, "other", where a code is given.

The code is a recycling mark, not a safety rating, and says nothing about the additives in a grade or the migration limit it meets.

---