An Ecuadorian food survey counted fibers and fragments and used FTIR subsampling to estimate the plastic fraction in beer, honey, milk, and soft drinks.
Source details
Milene F. Diaz-Basantes, Juan A. Conesa, Andres Fullana. Sustainability. 2020.
Findings
An Ecuadorian food survey counted fibers and fragments and used FTIR subsampling to estimate the plastic fraction in beer, honey, milk, and soft drinks.
Scroll horizontally for methods and limitations.
| Endpoint | Source-reported result | Locator |
|---|---|---|
| Craft beer | 32 estimated MPs/L | PDF p. 9 results; p. 13 Figure 6 |
| Industrial beer | 47 estimated MPs/L | PDF p. 9 results; p. 13 Figure 6 |
| All sampled food categories | 64 of 530 sampled objects | PDF p. 6 §2.3; p. 12 Figure 5 |
Methods and scope
Portions of beverage were diluted, sieved, oxidized with hydrogen peroxide, filtered and sonicated. Optical microscopy supplied counts and dimensions. Ten randomly selected objects per filter underwent FTIR. Across food groups, 64 of 530 analyzed objects were assigned as plastic; other material included cellulose and inorganic particles. Laminar flow and air cleaning were used; procedural blanks contained 4-9 fibers. Main text does not clearly document subtraction of those blank counts.
What this source can support
Supports exploratory, paper-reported estimates in the sampled Ecuadorian foods. Does not support treating every observed fiber or fragment as plastic or all category estimates as individually confirmed particle counts.
Small market sample, global FTIR fraction extrapolation, procedural contamination and uncertain blank subtraction. Sample counts differ between methods and Table 2. Reported size ranges describe mixed observed objects, not an isolated polymer-confirmed size distribution. Counts per liter of honey cannot be compared to counts per gram without a paper-supplied conversion. No health outcomes measured.
Related evidence
Reported values and source locations
| Reported value | Measurement basis | Conditions and size context | Original document location |
|---|---|---|---|
| 32 estimated MPs/L | Paper-reported category average, extrapolated from global FTIR fraction | Ecuadorian craft beer in glass; source-wide FTIR fraction extrapolated to microscopic counts No polymer-confirmed category size window supplied; microscopy/sieving/filtration workflow described pp. 5-6 | PDF p. 9 results; p. 13 Figure 6 |
| 47 estimated MPs/L | Paper-reported category average, extrapolated from global FTIR fraction | Ecuadorian industrial beer in glass; source-wide FTIR fraction extrapolated to microscopic counts No polymer-confirmed category size window supplied | PDF p. 9 results; p. 13 Figure 6 |
| 64 of 530 sampled objects | Observed count and denominator, pooled identity check, not pooled concentration | FTIR subsample pooled across honey, beer, milk and soft drinks Selected objects; no uniform polymer-confirmed size distribution | PDF p. 6 §2.3; p. 12 Figure 5 |
Source provenance
Primary PDF SHA-256: b7ebe8a293114ddc343fb228bd162a68ff1738d80b732a772efef588d1159b62
The source record identifies the scope and limits of the primary-document review. Follow the DOI or official source link for the original document; this site does not redistribute the PDF.