Nanotechnology has been considered to have high potential for food packaging applications very early on. The ability to provide additional consumer benefits through the improvement of key properties of packaging materials and the creation of new functionalities means that the increased use of nanomaterials and nanotechnologies is highly likely. It has however up to now failed to reach the widespread use that was initially expected, mainly because of remaining uncertainties on the safety of these materials during the various stages of their life-cycle, which limit legal and consumer acceptance.This paper aims at presenting the latest developments in the field of nanotechnologies for food packaging applications, describing the legal framework linked to their usage and attempts to clarify the current knowledge of the safety of these materials both for the consumer and the environment.It is shown that particulate migration into foodstuff is absent in many applications, which drastically reduces the potential risk during the use phase of packaging materials, i.e. the exposure of the consumer to nanoparticles. Other release routes are also evaluated, showing that, although safe in normal use conditions, prudence should still be used, especially with regard to release after disposal of the materials.

Boobis (2019) Value and limitation of invitro bioassays to support the application of the threshold of toxicological concern to prioritise unidentified chemicals in food contact materials, Food Additives & Contaminants:

Orange juice was stored in glass bottles and polyethylene/barrier material laminated cartons at 4°C for 24 wk. Studies were carried out on the absorption of 19 orange juice aroma compounds (e.g ethyl butyrate, d-limonene) into low density polyethylene (LDPE). Sensory evaluations were performed on the same orange juice in different packages over the storage period. A reduction of d-limonene of up to 50% by absorption into the LDPE inside coating was observed. However, an experienced sensory panel did not distinguish between orange juice stored in glass bottles and polyethylene laminated cartons.

This work is the second part of a milk study evaluating the effect of package light transmittance on the vitamin content of milk, in this case on UHT whole milk. The milk was stored at three different light intensities in polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles with varying light transmittance as described by Saffert et al. (2006). Changes in the vitamin A, B 2 and D 3 content were monitored over a storage period of 12 weeks at 23°C. Losses in vitamins A and B 2 were most pronounced in completely transparent PET bottles exposed to the highest light intensity. In these bottles, a reduction of the light intensity reduced the vitamin A loss from 88 to 66%, while in the case of vitamin B 2 the complete decomposition was just delayed from 4 to 8 weeks storage. The vitamin D 3 losses in clear PET bottles were almost independent of the light intensity. For pigmented PET bottles, the impact of package light transmittance and light intensity differed for each vitamin. An increase in package light transmittance and light intensity was found to be most decisive for vitamin B 2 stability. In the case of vitamin D 3 , only the increase in light intensity was found to be of relevance, whereas for vitamin A stability the influence of increased package light transmittance and light intensity could not be clearly observed. In dark-stored 'control' samples, the analysed vitamins were almost stable.