Food Contact & CPG Testing — Migration, PFAS & Stability
Food-contact packaging, cosmetic formulations and consumer-product shelf-life claims need different evidence programmes. Choose tests around the article, intended exposure, market and claim rather than applying a universal safety panel across unrelated products.
Separate material authorization from migration evidence
A migration result measures transfer under defined conditions; it does not itself authorize a food-contact substance. FDA explains that food-contact notifications are specific to the notifier and intended use, and manufacturers must follow the relevant specifications and limitations. For EU work, identify the material-specific measure and intended use before choosing simulants and limits. Formulation review, migration testing and declarations have connected but distinct roles.
PFAS packaging work has a specific 2026 legal context
Article 5(5) of Regulation (EU) 2025/40 applies food-contact packaging PFAS provisions from 12 August 2026. The article distinguishes targeted individual and summed PFAS from the broader total-PFAS measure. Do not extrapolate these requirements to every consumer product, or treat a generic fluorine screen as full compliance evidence. Use the dedicated PFAS spoke to scope analytes, extraction and reporting with the responsible economic operator.
Design cosmetics and shelf-life studies separately
FDA describes cosmetic shelf life as depending on product type, storage and use. Emulsion separation, oxidation, preservative performance and package interaction may require different endpoints. Physical stability is not the same as microbiological suitability, and food shelf life needs its own matrix and storage plan. Ask for real-time confirmation where acceleration is used; a single elevated-temperature observation does not justify a universal shelf-life claim.
Make quotations comparable
Send the finished article or packaged formulation with composition information under confidentiality, intended market, use conditions and the decision needed. Request separately priced work packages without assuming published test prices or completion times. Clarify exclusions, method validation, subcontracting and who interprets results against the applicable requirement. Laboratory Vortex is an independent request coordinator, not a regulator or a guarantor of product compliance.
Sample considerations
- Identify material layers, formulation, supplier authorization evidence, intended food/product contact and market.
- State time, temperature, repeated use, storage and labelled shelf-life conditions.
- Agree finished-product lots, blanks, controls, microbiological versus physical endpoints and retention.
Questions to ask a laboratory
- Which authorization or legal measure applies independently of testing?
- What conditions and endpoints represent intended use rather than a generic panel?
- Which results support this claim and which still require regulatory or toxicological interpretation?
Laboratories with relevant capabilities
No directory profile currently documents this specific capability. Submit a request and we will look for laboratories that cover it.
Sources and scope references
FDA — food-contact chemistry and migration study guidance
Regulation (EU) 2025/40 — Article 5(5)
Related testing briefs
Confirm standard edition, jurisdiction and actual laboratory scope. Service references are not partnerships or endorsements.