PFAS25/ 100Poor
Overall7/ 100Bad
Limited Edition Crayola Retired Colors Glad Take-aways Orange Red

Glad · Lunch Boxes

Limited Edition Crayola Retired Colors Glad Take-aways Orange Red

Poor

Skip; Glad does not disclose coating chemistry for food contact.

Verdict · SkipGlad does not disclose water/grease-resistant coating chemistry; PFAS concern is high. Non-PFAS hazards cannot be fully assessed without material transparency.

Glad's take-out containers use plastic film with unspecified water and grease-resistant treatments typical of food packaging. Brand makes no PFAS disclosure, and coating composition is not publicly detailed.

The better-graded swap

Bentgo Kids Prints Stainless Steel Lunch Box

Bentgo

Bentgo Kids Prints Stainless Steel Lunch Box

80/100 safety

80Excellent

Same rubric that flunked this product. The swap earned Excellent.

Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.

Material

plastic film with unspecified water/grease-resistant coating

Brand disclosure

Brand is silent on PFAS

Lab data

No public lab test

What Limited Edition Crayola Retired Colors is made of, ingredients and materials

This product is a plastic film take-out container with an unspecified water and grease-resistant coating. Glad has not publicly disclosed the chemistry of that coating, which is the critical unknown for food-contact safety. The coating's composition determines leaching risk under typical use (hot foods, oils, acidic items). Without transparency, you cannot know whether the coating contains legacy PFAS, newer PFAS alternatives, or other persistent chemicals.

What’s concerning

♾️

Waterproof / stain-resistant treatment

Water-repellent coating treatments have historically used PFAS.

65/ 100
♾️

Category baseline

The starting point for this type of product, before anything specific to this product is counted.

75/ 100
♾️

No PFAS disclosure

No public statement from the brand about PFAS in this product.

85/ 100
♾️

PFAS

The unspecified water/grease-resistant coating may contain Teflon-family coating, silicones, waxes, or other film-forming agents. Without Glad's disclosure, the specific leaching profile under heat or with acidic/fatty foods cannot be assessed. Risk is higher than for uncoated plastic.

Source, ATSDR ↗
70/ 100
🫧

Microplastic migration under heat

Plastic film containers can shed microplastics when heated or repeatedly flexed. The unspecified coating may increase this risk if it degrades under temperature stress. Heating food in this container raises the likelihood of microplastic ingestion.

70/ 100
🍂

Coating adhesion and flaking

Disposable plastic food containers with coatings can degrade or flake over time, especially if scratched or washed. Flaking coating fragments entering food is a reported concern in this product category; Glad does not publish data on coating durability or replacement intervals.

45/ 100

What’s reassuring

🍼

BPA & bisphenols

No recalls or testing reports specific to this product indicate BPA or BPS contamination. However, Glad has not publicly committed to BPA-free formulations across all product lines, so baseline risk cannot be ruled out without third-party testing.

Source, FDA ↗
95/ 100
🧴

Phthalates

No specific recalls or public test results document phthalates in this Glad product. However, many disposable food-packaging plastics still use phthalate plasticizers; Glad does not disclose its policies or material certifications.

Source, ATSDR ↗
95/ 100

The full breakdown

The brand's record and disclosure

Glad has maintained silence on the specific chemical composition of its food-contact coatings. The company has not published commitments to phase out PFAS or adopt alternative coating chemistries, nor does it provide ingredient lists for its proprietary water/grease barrier formulations. This lack of transparency is standard across many disposable food-packaging manufacturers but reflects a low priority on consumer disclosure.

How it compares in its category

Single-use plastic takeout containers with durable grease barriers are among the most likely food-packaging items to contain PFAS or similar fluorinated coatings, because the water and oil repellency is difficult to achieve without them. Compostable alternatives (molded fiber, certified compostable plastic) typically have lower PFAS risk but are less grease-resistant. Uncoated plastic containers avoid the coating hazard entirely but offer no grease barrier.

If you buy it

Do not microwave or heat food in this container, as heat can accelerate any potential leaching from an unknown coating. Store room-temperature foods only. Do not reuse for storage; these are single-use items. If you must use it, transfer hot or greasy foods to ceramic or glass immediately after purchase. Consider uncoated or certified compostable alternatives if available for your use case.

What we don’t know

Basis
Model estimate, 35% confidence, not a lab result
Lab test
None on record for this exact product
Brand statement
Glad has made none

Formulations change between production runs, so check the current label. How we grade.

Better-graded alternatives in Lunch Boxes

Klean Kanteen Double Wall Vacuum Insulated Stainless Steel Food Canister Container with Leak Proof Lid

Klean Kanteen

Double Wall Vacuum Insulated Stainless Steel Food Canister Container with Leak Proof Lid

100ExcellentPFAS grade
  • Stainless steel body, silicone gasket lid seal
  • The brand calls it PFAS-free, which we have not verified
  • Silicone gasket degradation

3 hazards checked on this product. See all of them.

Snapware Meal Box Glass

Snapware

Meal Box Glass

80ExcellentPFAS grade
  • borosilicate glass
  • We found no PFAS statement from the brand
  • Leaching from glass matrix or lid seals

2 hazards checked on this product. See all of them.

Oxo Steel Pop Big Square Short - 2.8 Qt/2.6 l

OXO

Steel Pop Big Square Short - 2.8 Qt/2.6 l

80ExcellentPFAS grade
  • Stainless steel container, no surface treatment
  • Lid/gasket polymer leaching

3 hazards checked on this product. See all of them.

More lunch boxes grades

How we score, every product runs through the same public 0-100 rubric based on materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls. See the full methodology → Spotted a mistake? Report an error.