Dispute around DINCH

Chemical laboratory background. Laboratory concept.

For couple of weeks there has been an dispute around DINCH safety in public domain after publication of an article by McGill Unviersity scientists  in Environmental Research journal questioning safety of DINCH.

The research team claims that DINCH (a non-phthalate plasticizer authorised for use in food contact materials and toys) metabolite MINCH is able to stimulate differentiation of fat cells in similar way as phthalate plasticizers do.  The whole research was conducted on undifferentiated rat cells obtained young animals tissue. Consequently McGill University scientists claim that the same negative effect can be transferred also to humans and suggested that DINCH might not be as safe as promoted.


The article has been strongly opposed by BASF’s Regulatory Affairs and Advocacy Director Dr. Rainer Otter, who interviewed by Chemical Watch Magazine stressed that the research itself is full of errors starting from samples origin – which is not clear (refuting BASF product Hexamoll DINCH), through chemicals used in the research not accurately characterised, MINCH metabolite solubility exceeded which is relatively strange comparing to other studies,  to as Dr Otter points out: completely different  structure of DINCH and DEHP molecules shapes and proprieties.


Also Dr Otter stressed that there are numerous studies carried out previously showing that DINCH has no negative effects in the matter discussed including ANSES statement.



  • Chemical Watch Magazine
  • Environmental Research Journal