Ok, I'll amend by changing to "majority". :D

I'm curious what the implication in not having a lining is. If it isn't needed, why have it on the other cans? I'm assuming it has a decreased shelf life?

Edit: I'm a little confused on the reading real quick. I am seeing that most cans are now BPA free, but it seems they are still lined with a plastic?

"BPA free" = we changed ~one chemical to avoid the disclosure requirement != it's totally safe.

The metal in cans would react with certain foods or chemicals in food in often far worse ways than anything the plastic will do. There's likely no packaging material that wouldn't make any impact on its contents.

Right. This was my understanding going into this. I was surprised to hear that there were unlined cans. I'm less surprised to hear we have BPA free packaging.

> no packaging material that wouldn't make any impact on its contents.

We solved this many decades ago with a cheap, safe, abundant, recyclable material: glass.

Centralized factories and the associated transport and breakage costs ruined it.

I feel unreasonable about it, but this is exactly why I only buy glassed drinks when I can. Luckily, I should drink less anyway.

The Whole Foods cans are still plastic coated, they just market the fact that the coating is BPA free. Epoxy has historically been the predominant coating for canned food and drink products, which does contain BPA. Polyolefin dispersion coatings have been available for several years and are now widely used in jurisdictions that restrict BPA in food manufacturing; they are expected to become industry-standard within the next few years due to increasingly strict regulations.

To the best of my knowledge, all can coatings are phthalate free. I should also note that not all phthalates are created equal - terephthalates and trimellitates are of considerably less concern than ortho-phthalates.