## 1 Introduction  
The extensive use of plastics in the food industry, particularly as one of the most commonly utilized food packaging materials, has led to growing concerns regarding food safety [1]. Public health agencies worldwide have emphasized the importance of addressing human exposure to microplastics through food. This issue has been incorporated into the objectives of the 2030 Agenda (SDG 6), particularly concerning the safety and sanitary quality of food (i.e., drinking water and canned food) [2]. Therefore, food is an important route for the transmission of microplastics for humans [3]. Among the various food matrices investigated as sources of microplastics, milk is the most extensively studied product in the dairy sector. For instance, studies have detected significant amounts of microplastics in prepared formula milk, estimating that infants may consume approximately 1.6 million microplastics per day, influenced by water temperature and sterilization processes. Common plastics used in packaging, such as polyethylene (PE), polyethylene terephthalate (PET), and nylon-6, release microplastics that infants may ingest [4]. Research by [PERSON] et al. (2020) [5] found microplastics in both whole and lactose-free milk, and a study on milk powders revealed that boxed milk powder contained significantly higher levels of microplastics than canned milk powder. Microplastics from feed bottles were also notably higher than those from milk powders. Raw milk and powdered cow's milk products showed microplastics ranging from 204 to 1004 MPs 100 mL\({}^{-1}\), with PE being the most frequently found polymer. Microplastics were also detected in breastmilk and skimmed milk samples from Ecuador, suggesting contamination from milk processing methods [5]. A study conducted by [PERSON] et al. (2024) [3] suggested that 89.28% of raw milk samples were contaminated with microplastics (<5 mm). Specifically, the analyzed cow milk samples showed a contamination rate of approximately 90% with microplastics \(<\) 5 mm. The most frequently observed size of microplastics in cow milk ranged between 20 and 150 \(\upmu\)m (32.03%), followed by those between 150 and 500 \(\upmu\)m (23.88%), in the form of fibers, fragments, spheres, and films. All microplastics were chemically confirmed using Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR) [3]. So far, research has focused on the contamination of milk, while the potential translocation of microplastics into dairy products has received less attention. A search on Scopus databases using the keywords \"microplastics\" and \"dairy products\" yielded nine (n = 9) studies. Among the various contamination pathways, the tubes and membranes used for milking (i.e., food processing) represent a route of exposure of milk to microplastics. It was found that fibers made of polyethersulfone and polysulfone, likely derived from membranes commonly used in dairy processes, at an average concentration of 6.5 \(\pm\) 2.3 microplastics L\({}^{-1}\) were present in milk [5], confirming that processed foods are more likely contaminated by microplastics [6]. Contamination during production is supported by the presence of microplastics in indoor air; the microplastics found in indoor environments are typically between 50 and 250 \(\upmu\)m, with a predominance of fibers [7]. Through deposition, microplastics could contaminate food during its production. Furthermore, foods can interact with the inner side of the packaging, as their properties such as acidity (i.e., pH), water content, and viscosity are affected by temperature and UV radiation [8]. Although there is not yet sufficient scientific evidence confirming the release of microplastics from packaging, the interaction between plastic packaging and food could be considered based on the behavior of plastic takeaway containers. [PERSON] et al. (2020) [9] have suggested the release of plastic particles, of mostly less than 50 nm, from plastic packaging materials [9].