Sharp increase in PFAS-covered substances: The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) updated its definition of PFAS in 2021, increasing the number of regulated substances from over 4,000 to nearly 10,000. Specifically, the OECD significantly expanded the scope of PFAS, defining PFAS as fluorinated substances that contain at least one fully fluorinated methyl（–CF₃）or methylene carbon atom（–CF₂–）, with no hydrogen, chlorine, bromine or iodine atoms attached to these carbon atoms. This widely recognized definition has considerably expanded the range of PFAS, increasing the number of covered substances from more than 4,000 to nearly 10,000.

Regulations are becoming increasingly stringent: EU, France, Canada and other countries have successively introduced regulations, shifting PFAS control from individual substances to broad restrictions or bans, while commonly adopting total fluorine or total organic fluorine thresholds (Total fluorine refers to the content of all fluorine elements or fluorine present in organic form). In particular, the EU’s PPWR sets limits on both total PFAS content and individual PFAS substances, thereby increasing the complexity of compliance for companies.

Rethinking the risks of PFAS alternatives: New toxicological studies show that short-chain PFAS, once regarded as safe alternatives to carcinogenic PFAS such as PFOA and PFOS, are not absolutely safe. Their toxicological effects affect multiple systems including immunity, nerves, reproduction and the liver. Based on the toxicity of short-chain PFAS and the bioaccumulation of their metabolites, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has revoked 35 PFAS-related food contact notifications, including one for 6:2 fluorotelomer alcohol (6:2 FTOH), a short-chain PFAS. This indicates that conventional substitution strategies are facing serious challenges.

Growing challenges in testing and traceability: A large number of PFAS substances lack reference standards and effective testing methods, posing new technical challenges for detection, traceability, and regulatory control.

Paper products: Including disposable paper tableware, molded pulp tableware, and greaseproof paper, where fluorinated copolymers are used to achieve oil and water resistance.

Coatings and processing aids: Such as non-stick pan coatings and mold release agents.

PFAS can easily migrate into food under high-temperature or high-fat conditions.

Excessive human exposure may lead to reproductive and developmental toxicity, immunotoxicity, liver damage, endocrine disruption, and potential carcinogenic effects.

When food packaging waste is incinerated or landfilled, PFAS can contaminate soil and groundwater, causing long-term ecological damage.

Physical barriers: Cellulose-based alternatives such as natural greaseproof paper as well as composite structures incorporating plastic coatings or aluminum layers.

Chemical substitutes: R&D focused on silicone polymers, acrylic polymers and bio-based coatings.

Background contamination in the supply chain: Auxiliary materials, process water and production environment pollution may lead to excessive fluorine in finished products.

Compliance risks of alternative products: Many new alternatives lack complete toxicological data and have not been officially approved for food contact applications, posing compliance risks in countries operating under positive list systems.

Environmental liabilities after disposal: Although some alternatives are labeled "compostable", they may still contain PFAS, which could cause environmental contamination and subsequent litigation once released into the environment.

Insufficient supply chain transparency: With multiple definitions of PFAS, suppliers hold varied understandings of "PFAS-Free", leading to information barriers along the value chain. Incomplete material disclosure directly impacts final compliance.

Upgraded regulatory policies: Controls will shift from restricting specific substances to broad restriction or ban of all PFAS, except for essential and critical applications.

Stricter testing standards: The adoption of total fluorine / total organic fluorine thresholds combined with PFAS content limits will become a global consensus, requiring more accurate and sensitive testing technologies.

Adjustments in circular economy: Fluorine-containing waste paper may become a "risk asset". The industry should accelerate the transition toward virgin pulp systems and PFAS-free production.

Establish a multi-dimensional, tiered control strategy based on total fluorine screening + non-targeted analysis + targeted confirmation.

Proactively screen for fluorine-containing components in the supply chain to prevent contamination from inorganic fluorine and non-intentionally added fluorine, while developing high-performance alternatives that meet performance requirements.

Take an active role in standard-setting to voice rational industry needs and actual production conditions, making standards more scientific and operable.

Conduct timely new substance notifications for alternative products to avoid unauthorized use of unapproved chemicals.

Develop tailored PFAS compliance strategies according to the regulatory requirements of different target markets.

Sharp increase in PFAS-covered substances: The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) updated its definition of PFAS in 2021, increasing the number of regulated substances from over 4,000 to nearly 10,000. Specifically, the OECD significantly expanded the scope of PFAS, defining PFAS as fluorinated substances that contain at least one fully fluorinated methyl（–CF₃）or methylene carbon atom（–CF₂–）, with no hydrogen, chlorine, bromine or iodine atoms attached to these carbon atoms. This widely recognized definition has considerably expanded the range of PFAS, increasing the number of covered substances from more than 4,000 to nearly 10,000.

Regulations are becoming increasingly stringent: EU, France, Canada and other countries have successively introduced regulations, shifting PFAS control from individual substances to broad restrictions or bans, while commonly adopting total fluorine or total organic fluorine thresholds (Total fluorine refers to the content of all fluorine elements or fluorine present in organic form). In particular, the EU’s PPWR sets limits on both total PFAS content and individual PFAS substances, thereby increasing the complexity of compliance for companies.

Rethinking the risks of PFAS alternatives: New toxicological studies show that short-chain PFAS, once regarded as safe alternatives to carcinogenic PFAS such as PFOA and PFOS, are not absolutely safe. Their toxicological effects affect multiple systems including immunity, nerves, reproduction and the liver. Based on the toxicity of short-chain PFAS and the bioaccumulation of their metabolites, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has revoked 35 PFAS-related food contact notifications, including one for 6:2 fluorotelomer alcohol (6:2 FTOH), a short-chain PFAS. This indicates that conventional substitution strategies are facing serious challenges.

Growing challenges in testing and traceability: A large number of PFAS substances lack reference standards and effective testing methods, posing new technical challenges for detection, traceability, and regulatory control.

Paper products: Including disposable paper tableware, molded pulp tableware, and greaseproof paper, where fluorinated copolymers are used to achieve oil and water resistance.

Coatings and processing aids: Such as non-stick pan coatings and mold release agents.

PFAS can easily migrate into food under high-temperature or high-fat conditions.

Excessive human exposure may lead to reproductive and developmental toxicity, immunotoxicity, liver damage, endocrine disruption, and potential carcinogenic effects.

When food packaging waste is incinerated or landfilled, PFAS can contaminate soil and groundwater, causing long-term ecological damage.

Physical barriers: Cellulose-based alternatives such as natural greaseproof paper as well as composite structures incorporating plastic coatings or aluminum layers.

Chemical substitutes: R&D focused on silicone polymers, acrylic polymers and bio-based coatings.

Background contamination in the supply chain: Auxiliary materials, process water and production environment pollution may lead to excessive fluorine in finished products.

Compliance risks of alternative products: Many new alternatives lack complete toxicological data and have not been officially approved for food contact applications, posing compliance risks in countries operating under positive list systems.

Environmental liabilities after disposal: Although some alternatives are labeled "compostable", they may still contain PFAS, which could cause environmental contamination and subsequent litigation once released into the environment.

Insufficient supply chain transparency: With multiple definitions of PFAS, suppliers hold varied understandings of "PFAS-Free", leading to information barriers along the value chain. Incomplete material disclosure directly impacts final compliance.

Upgraded regulatory policies: Controls will shift from restricting specific substances to broad restriction or ban of all PFAS, except for essential and critical applications.

Stricter testing standards: The adoption of total fluorine / total organic fluorine thresholds combined with PFAS content limits will become a global consensus, requiring more accurate and sensitive testing technologies.

Adjustments in circular economy: Fluorine-containing waste paper may become a "risk asset". The industry should accelerate the transition toward virgin pulp systems and PFAS-free production.

Establish a multi-dimensional, tiered control strategy based on total fluorine screening + non-targeted analysis + targeted confirmation.

Proactively screen for fluorine-containing components in the supply chain to prevent contamination from inorganic fluorine and non-intentionally added fluorine, while developing high-performance alternatives that meet performance requirements.

Take an active role in standard-setting to voice rational industry needs and actual production conditions, making standards more scientific and operable.

Conduct timely new substance notifications for alternative products to avoid unauthorized use of unapproved chemicals.

Develop tailored PFAS compliance strategies according to the regulatory requirements of different target markets.