A prioritization strategy for functional alternatives to bisphenol A in food contact materials

Abstract

The use of bisphenol A (BPA), a substance of very high concern, is proposed to be banned in food contact materials (FCMs) in the European Union. To prevent regrettable substitution of BPA by alternatives with similar or unknown hazardous properties, it is of importance to gain the relevant toxicological information on potential BPA alternative substances and monitor them adequately. We created an inventory of over 300 substances mentioned as potential BPA alternatives in regulatory reports and scientific literature. This study presents a prioritization strategy to identify substances that may be used as an alternative to BPA in FCMs. We prioritized 20 potential BPA alternatives of which 10 are less familiar. We subsequently reviewed the available information on the 10 prioritized less familiar substances regarding hazard profiles and migration potential obtained from scientific literature and in silico screening tools to identify a possible risk of the substances. Major data gaps regarding the hazard profiles of the prioritized substances exist, although the scarce available data give some indications on the possible hazard for some of the substances (like bisphenol TMC, 4,4-dihydroxybenzophenone, and tetrachlorobisphenol A). In addition, very little is known about the actual use and exposure to these substances. More toxicological research and monitoring of these substances in FCMs are, therefore, required to avoid regrettable substitution of BPA in FCM.

Keywords:

• Bisphenol A
• bisphenol A substitutes
• bisphenol A alternatives
• hazard assessment
• migration
• in silico
• regrettable substitution

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the preparatory work of Joantine van Esterik (RIVM), the help of data information specialist Rob van Spronsen (RIVM), the input from the participants in the stakeholder consultation and the valuable review of this manuscript by prof. Dr. Aldert Piersma (RIVM) and the anonymous external reviewers that were selected by the Editor of this journal.

Declaration of interest

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s). This work was supported by the Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority (NVWA BuRO - RBT 090469/23).

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article is available online here.