Chemicals in plastics: how everyday items can harm your health

Chemicals in plastics now accompany almost every moment of our lives: they are in our food packaging, our clothes, children’s toys, kitchen utensils and personal care products. The “Poison Plastics” report published on 30 September 2026 by the London-based Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF) re-analysed PlastChem, the world’s largest database of plastic chemicals – and the findings are far from reassuring. Across the everyday product groups examined, 92.8% of the substances for which sufficient data exist pose a high risk to human health, while most of them fall outside any international regulation.

In short: Some chemicals in plastics are linked to hormone disruption, infertility, impaired neurodevelopment in children, cardiovascular disease, diabetes and cancer. According to the EJF analysis, the problem lies not only in the toxic substances themselves but also in vast data gaps and weak regulation. Exposure can be reduced, but the real solution is cutting plastic production and banning hazardous additives.

What goes into plastic besides the polymer?

Plastic is not a single material. Manufacturers add a wide range of substances to polymer chains made from oil, gas or coal: plasticisers (such as phthalates), stabilisers, antioxidants, flame retardants, colourants and fillers. These give a product its flexibility, colour, heat resistance or fire resistance. On top of these come “non-intentionally added substances” (NIAS): impurities, manufacturing by-products and degradation products that often even the manufacturer does not know about.

The PlastChem project – funded by the Norwegian Environment Agency – compiled more than 16,000 chemicals that may be present in plastics or are marketed for use in them. More than 4,200 of these have been classified as hazardous to human health or the environment, while for over 10,000 there is simply not enough hazard data. Experts estimate that between 30,000 and 100,000 different non-intentionally added substances may migrate into food from food-contact materials alone.

The key point: most additives are not chemically bound to the polymer. They can therefore leach (migrate) into food, drinks, air and dust – and ultimately into our bodies. Heat, acidity, sunlight, scratching and ageing all speed up the process. As plastic breaks down into micro- and nanoplastics, the surface area grows and leaching can accelerate.

This matters for waste management, too: hazardous additives do not simply disappear during recycling. This spring, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) warned that recycled plastics used for food packaging need stronger safeguards, as recycled feedstock may carry more metals, flame retardants and phthalates than virgin material.

Three routes into the body: ingestion, inhalation and skin contact

Ingestion. This is the most significant route. Chemicals can leach from films, containers, bottles, plastic cutlery and kitchen utensils, plastic-lined paper cups and fast-food packaging, and non-stick coatings. According to the report, hot liquids can release phthalates and heavy metals from plastic-lined paper cups, while containers labelled “microwave safe” released substances above recommended limits in laboratory tests. Babies and young children are a distinct risk group: chemicals can enter their bodies from feeding bottles, pacifiers and toys they put in their mouths. Several studies have measured BPA migration even from feeding bottles and pacifiers advertised as “BPA-free”.

Inhalation. Indoor air and household dust typically contain more plastic-derived chemicals than outdoor air, sometimes including substances banned decades ago. Sources include furniture, flooring, paints, synthetic textiles, and the washing and drying of clothes. Cars deserve special attention: their cabins are largely made of plastics and synthetic textiles, and one study found styrene levels in car air at around 1.5 times the tolerable daily intake recommended by the WHO. Outdoors, tyre wear is one of the main sources of airborne microplastics.

Skin contact. Synthetic clothing, bedding and upholstery can release flame retardants and other additives onto the skin, while cosmetics and hygiene products – including menstrual products – are also important sources.

Which diseases are chemicals in plastics linked to?

Many chemicals in plastics are endocrine disruptors, meaning they interfere with the hormonal system. A comprehensive umbrella review published in 2024 examined 52 systematic reviews and 759 meta-analyses, and found adverse health outcomes for every chemical group studied. The key associations in plain language:

• Bisphenols (e.g. BPA): type 2 diabetes, insulin resistance, obesity, high blood pressure, cardiovascular disease, and polyendocrine metabolic ovarian syndrome (PMOS, formerly known as PCOS).
• Phthalates (plasticisers, e.g. DEHP): miscarriage, lower birth weight, altered genital development in boys, early puberty in girls, reduced sperm quality, endometriosis, lower IQ, and asthma in children and adults.
• PFAS (“forever chemicals”): changes in thyroid function, childhood obesity, ADHD in girls, allergic rhinitis.
• PBDE flame retardants: impaired cognitive development in children, IQ loss, changes in thyroid function.
• PCBs: diabetes, cardiovascular disease, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, breast cancer.

The report lists further studies as well: DEHP has been linked to autism and ADHD symptoms in children, brominated flame retardants to rheumatoid arthritis, and BPA to inflammatory activity in Crohn’s disease and to immune dysfunction. One disease-burden model estimated that 13.5% of cardiovascular deaths among people aged 55–64 in 2018 could be attributed to DEHP exposure. The health impacts of just three chemicals – BPA, PBDE and DEHP – were estimated to have caused around US$1.5 trillion in economic losses across 38 countries in 2015.

We have previously covered the effects on fertility in our piece on Netflix’s documentary “The Plastic Detox”: couples taking part in the plastic detox experiment saw significant drops in their bisphenol and phthalate levels.

An important caveat: most of this research shows statistical associations, and effects depend on dose, duration and individual susceptibility. Experts are particularly concerned about the “cocktail effect” – the combined, long-term impact of many different chemicals, which is still poorly understood.

Why are children and pregnant women most at risk?

Fetal development and early childhood are the most sensitive periods. Children’s organs are still immature and less able to break down and excrete toxic substances, which can therefore accumulate. Per kilogram of body weight, children consume more food, drink and air than adults, and they put everything in their mouths. The report links exposure during pregnancy to miscarriage, premature birth, stillbirth, low birth weight, birth defects, impaired lung growth, lower IQ, autism, ADHD, asthma and childhood cancer. As one of the researchers interviewed points out, IQ loss suffered in childhood is irreversible.

Healthcare settings add a heavy burden: according to some studies, infants on infusion lines may receive daily intakes of certain plastic chemicals up to 160,000 times higher than safe limits via PVC tubing and bags.

Five everyday product groups in the EJF analysis

EJF broke down the PlastChem data into five product groups. “High risk” here means that a chemical is known or suspected to be carcinogenic, mutagenic, toxic to reproduction, toxic to organs or hormone-disrupting, and that it has also been shown to be released from, or to be present in, the product.

• Food-contact plastics (films, containers, bottles, cups): 2,109 chemicals. Of those with data, 91.6% are high risk, and 90.6% of these are not regulated internationally. Data are lacking for 76.4% of the chemicals. Experts consulted for the report consider this the most worrying, daily source of exposure.
• Textiles (clothing, bedding, carpets, upholstery): 2,430 chemicals, 92.8% high risk, 81.5% unregulated internationally. Microfibres from synthetic clothing are a problem in their own right.
• Toys: 522 chemicals, 88.9% high risk, 84.7% unregulated internationally. Soft plastic toys contain especially high levels of plasticisers, and damaged surfaces speed up leaching.
• Household items (kitchen utensils, tableware, buckets, sponges, stationery): 1,197 chemicals, 92.4% high risk, 85.0% unregulated internationally. Non-stick coatings are typically PFAS-based – and because these compounds are so persistent, dedicated technologies are now being built to fully destroy PFAS-containing waste.
• Hygiene and medical items (toothbrushes, pads, tampons, catheters, IV equipment): 247 chemicals, 92.6% high risk, 92.0% unregulated internationally. In one study, every menstrual pad tested shed microplastics.

Regulatory gaps and “regrettable substitution”

Perhaps the most important message of the EJF analysis is that current regulation lags behind even where the risks are well established. For 82.9% of the high-risk chemicals across the five product groups, no relevant multilateral environmental agreement (the Stockholm, Basel, Minamata or Rotterdam Conventions, or the Montreal Protocol) applies. And 54.2% are regulated neither internationally nor in any of the four jurisdictions reviewed by PlastChem (the EU, Japan, South Korea and California).

EU rules, which apply in Hungary, are among the stricter ones: alongside the REACH regulation, the EU is phasing BPA out of food-contact materials, and the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) restricts PFAS in food packaging. How fragile these steps are became clear this spring, when 138 companies – including McDonald’s and Coca-Cola – lobbied to postpone the PFAS ban.

The other trap is “regrettable substitution”: replacing a banned chemical with a structurally similar substance that has not yet been tested. In one study, bisphenol F – a common BPA substitute – showed the strongest association with lower IQ in children. This is why EJF calls for chemicals to be regulated as groups, based on the precautionary principle: anything proven to be hazardous, or belonging to a hazardous group, should not reach the market – and the burden of proof should lie with the producer.

It is also worth bearing in mind that EJF is an environmental and human rights organisation, and the report also serves as a campaign document for the Global Plastics Treaty negotiations. The analysis is based on hazard classifications and on whether chemicals are present in products, not on measurements of actual intake. Its core message – that we know very little about thousands of chemicals and that most hazardous ones remain unregulated – nonetheless stands on solid ground.

What can we do, and what must decision-makers do?

The good news is that exposure to chemicals in plastics can be reduced. In a 2026 intervention study, every participant excreted plastic-associated chemicals in their urine, but switching to plastic-free kitchenware, low-plastic personal care products and less packaged food cut phthalate levels by up to 44.1% and bisphenol levels by up to 58.5%. Based on the report and the researchers’ own practices, a few simple steps:

• Do not heat food in plastic containers or pour hot drinks into plastic cups.
• Use glass, stainless steel or ceramics for food storage and drinks.
• Buy less packaged, highly processed and canned food, and more fresh ingredients.
• Choose tap water and a refillable bottle over bottled water.
• Replace scratched non-stick pans and damaged plastic kitchen utensils.
• Choose natural-fibre clothing and home textiles, and ventilate and vacuum often.
• Avoid soft PVC toys for young children, and keep old, damaged toys out of their hands.

Experts stress, however, that eliminating plastic entirely is impossible, and shoppers cannot be expected to vet every product like chemists. EJF therefore calls for a “Right to Reduce”. It endorses the “40×40” target proposed by Rwanda and Peru: a 40% cut in primary plastic production by 2040 from a 2025 baseline. It also urges bans on hazardous chemical groups, transparency and traceability across the entire life cycle, and the roll-out of toxic-free reuse, refill and repair systems.

In waste management terms, this means the best plastic is the one that is never made. Recycling matters, but it cannot wash out of the system the chemicals that should never have entered it in the first place.

---

FAQ – Chemicals in plastics

How do chemicals in plastics get into the body?

Through three main routes: ingestion, inhalation and skin contact. Ingestion is the most significant, as chemicals leach from packaging, bottles, cups and kitchen utensils into food and drink. We also breathe them in with household dust and indoor air, while they can pass through the skin from synthetic clothing, cosmetics and hygiene products.

Which diseases are plastic additives linked to?

Research links plastic additives to hormone disruption, infertility, reduced sperm quality, endometriosis, miscarriage and premature birth, as well as lower IQ, ADHD and asthma in children. In adults, associations have also been found with type 2 diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular disease and certain cancers, particularly for phthalates and bisphenols.

What did the EJF Poison Plastics report find?

EJF analysed the PlastChem database across five everyday product groups. Data needed to assess risk are missing for 79.2% of the chemicals. Of those with sufficient data, 92.8% pose a high health risk. No international agreement covers 82.9% of the high-risk chemicals, and 54.2% are unregulated both internationally and in the EU, Japan, South Korea and California.

Why are children more at risk?

Children’s organs are still immature, so they are less able to break down and excrete toxic substances, which can then accumulate. Per kilogram of body weight, they consume more food, drink and air than adults, and they often put toys and pacifiers in their mouths. Exposure in the womb and early childhood can have lasting developmental effects, such as irreversible IQ loss.

How can exposure to plastic chemicals be reduced?

Avoid heating food in plastic, use glass, stainless steel or ceramics for food storage, and buy less packaged and processed food. In a 2026 study, steps like these cut phthalate levels by up to 44.1% and bisphenol levels by up to 58.5%. A full solution, however, requires cutting plastic production and banning hazardous additives.

---

🔗 Official sources and references: 👉

• Environmental Justice Foundation (30 September 2026): Poison Plastics: How chemicals in everyday plastics are harming your health
• The report in PDF: Poison-Plastics-report.pdf
• PlastChem background: Wagner, M. et al. (2024): State of the science on plastic chemicals – Identifying and addressing chemicals and polymers of concern

Consistent structure, quick answers: every article is built so that both readers and AI search tools can find the key points easily. Our content is produced with the help of AI tools and reviewed by our editor.