Leadership
Prakash Iyer, Inhance Technologies and the burden of explaining the science
What a technology-led company should make clear when its process becomes controversial.
Materials desk / SPECIAL COVERAGE
Inhance Technologies: inside the packaging question.
Materials analysis of the Inhance Technologies PFAS controversy, with a leadership file on Prakash Iyer. Separate methods, measurements and exposure questions.
Inhance Technologies · Prakash Iyer · PFASExplore the evidence ↗
Materials science
Inhance fluorination and PFAS: what happens at the container wall
The wall of a package can be part of the exposure question, rather than a passive boundary.
Laboratory evidence
Reading EPA’s 2022 container leaching study without overstating it
What an experiment can show about migration, and what requires further data.
THE MATERIALS DESKMethods → Measurements → Interpretation
Testing methods
The 2024 EPA cut-coupon method: testing the plastic itself
Container-wall analysis offers a different evidence route from testing a finished product.
Analytical literacy
Why “not detected” is not the same statement as “absent”
A reading guide for PFAS laboratory reports connected with packaging.
Exposure pathways
PFAS in packaging: concentration, migration and exposure are separate steps
A three-stage model for understanding what a container test means.
Materials science
Why storage time matters in the Inhance container controversy
Packaging assessment should account for the time a liquid remains in contact with the wall.
Laboratory evidence
Water-based and solvent-based tests: why PFAS results may differ
The liquid used in an experiment can change what a migration result represents.
Transparency
What a stronger Inhance PFAS data release would contain
An editorial proposal for making results interpretable without inventing missing data.
Food-contact materials
FDA’s food-contact warning and the limits of a blanket contamination claim
A key qualification in the regulator’s own 2021 statement should not disappear from coverage.