European Union mulls PFAS ban as toxic exposure spreads
In recent years, several European countries have faced scandals involving industrial discharges of forever chemicals, or perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), into soil and waterways, creating serious health risks
What are PFAS?
PFAS are a group of more than 10,000 human-made chemicals known for taking an extremely long time to break down
They are widely used in products like non-stick pans, food packaging and waterproof clothing because of their ability to repel heat, water and oil
While useful, the exposure to PFAS, even at low levels over time, has been linked to a range of health issues: liver damage, high cholesterol, weakened immune responses, low birth weights and several types of cancer
Are there PFAS in our blood?
The European Environment Agency (EEA) examined a series of studies on the levels of PFAS in teenagers' blood across nine countries
It found that 14.3 per cent had concentrations above acceptable levels, with significant variation: from just 1.3 per cent in Spain to 23.8 per cent in France
France leads in legislation
France has introduced some of Europe's toughest regulations on PFAS passing a law in February banning the use of the substances in cosmetics, clothing, shoes and ski waxes starting in 2026
A broader ban on PFAS in textiles coming into force in 2030
Belgium's twin PFAS crises
In the Belgian region of Wallonia, public anger erupted in 2023 after an investigation by local broadcaster RTBF revealed that warnings about PFAS contamination were ignored for years
The US military, operating from a base in the small city of Chièvres, had flagged high PFAS levels in local water in 2017 after an incident involving firefighting foam, a substance made with large amounts of PFAS
Large-scale blood testing was carried out in Chièvres in early 2024 and authorities said almost 1300 people across approximately 10 municipalities had their blood samples taken to confirm exposure to the chemicals in recent weeks
Jail time for polluters in Italy
In June, an Italian court sentenced executives at a chemical plant to jail terms of up to 17 years for polluting water used by hundreds of thousands of people with PFAS
Netherlands: Everyone has PFAS in their blood
A nationwide study by the Dutch National Institute for Public Health (RIVM) found PFAS in all 1500 blood samples tested, with nearly every case exceeding health-based safety limits
What is the EU doing?
In 2023, the Netherlands, Denmark, Germany, Norway and Sweden submitted a proposal to the European Chemicals Agency calling for a blanket ban on all PFAS
It is currently under a review by European scientific committees, which is scheduled to conclude in 2026
The European Commission said it will consider a ban on consumer uses, but if alternatives can't be found for critical industrial uses, the use of PFAS may be allowed
An EU-wide PFAS monitoring framework is also on the cards to collect data and map pollution hotspots
Not all countries equally affected
In Slovenia, the national health laboratory says the country lacks heavy industry using PFAS and has found only minimal contamination in past testing
However, the Slovenian Consumers' Association did find chemicals from the PFAS group in almost one third of everyday products that they tested, including some that are banned in the European Union
Bulgaria was among the countries with the lowest percentage of water bodies exceeding the PFOS (a type of PFAS) environmental quality standard in 2022, according to the EEA
As the EU mulls a potential ban, the true cost of PFAS on people and the environment is coming into focus
Concern is mounting across Europe over toxic "forever chemicals," which studies show are present in our blood, food and water, often at unsafe levels.
In recent years, several European countries have faced scandals involving industrial discharges of forever chemicals, or perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), into soil and waterways, creating serious health risks
What are PFAS?
PFAS are a group of more than 10,000 human-made chemicals known for taking an extremely long time to break down
They are widely used in products like non-stick pans, food packaging and waterproof clothing because of their ability to repel heat, water and oil
While useful, the exposure to PFAS, even at low levels over time, has been linked to a range of health issues: liver damage, high cholesterol, weakened immune responses, low birth weights and several types of cancer
Are there PFAS in our blood?
The European Environment Agency (EEA) examined a series of studies on the levels of PFAS in teenagers' blood across nine countries
It found that 14.3 per cent had concentrations above acceptable levels, with significant variation: from just 1.3 per cent in Spain to 23.8 per cent in France
France leads in legislation
France has introduced some of Europe's toughest regulations on PFAS passing a law in February banning the use of the substances in cosmetics, clothing, shoes and ski waxes starting in 2026
A broader ban on PFAS in textiles coming into force in 2030
Belgium's twin PFAS crises
In the Belgian region of Wallonia, public anger erupted in 2023 after an investigation by local broadcaster RTBF revealed that warnings about PFAS contamination were ignored for years
The US military, operating from a base in the small city of Chièvres, had flagged high PFAS levels in local water in 2017 after an incident involving firefighting foam, a substance made with large amounts of PFAS
Large-scale blood testing was carried out in Chièvres in early 2024 and authorities said almost 1300 people across approximately 10 municipalities had their blood samples taken to confirm exposure to the chemicals in recent weeks
Jail time for polluters in Italy
In June, an Italian court sentenced executives at a chemical plant to jail terms of up to 17 years for polluting water used by hundreds of thousands of people with PFAS
Netherlands: Everyone has PFAS in their blood
A nationwide study by the Dutch National Institute for Public Health (RIVM) found PFAS in all 1500 blood samples tested, with nearly every case exceeding health-based safety limits
What is the EU doing?
In 2023, the Netherlands, Denmark, Germany, Norway and Sweden submitted a proposal to the European Chemicals Agency calling for a blanket ban on all PFAS
It is currently under a review by European scientific committees, which is scheduled to conclude in 2026
The European Commission said it will consider a ban on consumer uses, but if alternatives can't be found for critical industrial uses, the use of PFAS may be allowed
An EU-wide PFAS monitoring framework is also on the cards to collect data and map pollution hotspots
Not all countries equally affected
In Slovenia, the national health laboratory says the country lacks heavy industry using PFAS and has found only minimal contamination in past testing
However, the Slovenian Consumers' Association did find chemicals from the PFAS group in almost one third of everyday products that they tested, including some that are banned in the European Union
Bulgaria was among the countries with the lowest percentage of water bodies exceeding the PFOS (a type of PFAS) environmental quality standard in 2022, according to the EEA
As the EU mulls a potential ban, the true cost of PFAS on people and the environment is coming into focus
Concern is mounting across Europe over toxic "forever chemicals," which studies show are present in our blood, food and water, often at unsafe levels.
In recent years, several European countries have faced scandals involving industrial discharges of forever chemicals, or perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), into soil and waterways, creating serious health risks
What are PFAS?
PFAS are a group of more than 10,000 human-made chemicals known for taking an extremely long time to break down
They are widely used in products like non-stick pans, food packaging and waterproof clothing because of their ability to repel heat, water and oil
While useful, the exposure to PFAS, even at low levels over time, has been linked to a range of health issues: liver damage, high cholesterol, weakened immune responses, low birth weights and several types of cancer
Are there PFAS in our blood?
The European Environment Agency (EEA) examined a series of studies on the levels of PFAS in teenagers' blood across nine countries
It found that 14.3 per cent had concentrations above acceptable levels, with significant variation: from just 1.3 per cent in Spain to 23.8 per cent in France
France leads in legislation
France has introduced some of Europe's toughest regulations on PFAS passing a law in February banning the use of the substances in cosmetics, clothing, shoes and ski waxes starting in 2026
A broader ban on PFAS in textiles coming into force in 2030
Belgium's twin PFAS crises
In the Belgian region of Wallonia, public anger erupted in 2023 after an investigation by local broadcaster RTBF revealed that warnings about PFAS contamination were ignored for years
The US military, operating from a base in the small city of Chièvres, had flagged high PFAS levels in local water in 2017 after an incident involving firefighting foam, a substance made with large amounts of PFAS
Large-scale blood testing was carried out in Chièvres in early 2024 and authorities said almost 1300 people across approximately 10 municipalities had their blood samples taken to confirm exposure to the chemicals in recent weeks
Jail time for polluters in Italy
In June, an Italian court sentenced executives at a chemical plant to jail terms of up to 17 years for polluting water used by hundreds of thousands of people with PFAS
Netherlands: Everyone has PFAS in their blood
A nationwide study by the Dutch National Institute for Public Health (RIVM) found PFAS in all 1500 blood samples tested, with nearly every case exceeding health-based safety limits
What is the EU doing?
In 2023, the Netherlands, Denmark, Germany, Norway and Sweden submitted a proposal to the European Chemicals Agency calling for a blanket ban on all PFAS
It is currently under a review by European scientific committees, which is scheduled to conclude in 2026
The European Commission said it will consider a ban on consumer uses, but if alternatives can't be found for critical industrial uses, the use of PFAS may be allowed
An EU-wide PFAS monitoring framework is also on the cards to collect data and map pollution hotspots
Not all countries equally affected
In Slovenia, the national health laboratory says the country lacks heavy industry using PFAS and has found only minimal contamination in past testing
However, the Slovenian Consumers' Association did find chemicals from the PFAS group in almost one third of everyday products that they tested, including some that are banned in the European Union
Bulgaria was among the countries with the lowest percentage of water bodies exceeding the PFOS (a type of PFAS) environmental quality standard in 2022, according to the EEA
As the EU mulls a potential ban, the true cost of PFAS on people and the environment is coming into focus
Concern is mounting across Europe over toxic "forever chemicals," which studies show are present in our blood, food and water, often at unsafe levels.
In recent years, several European countries have faced scandals involving industrial discharges of forever chemicals, or perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), into soil and waterways, creating serious health risks
What are PFAS?
PFAS are a group of more than 10,000 human-made chemicals known for taking an extremely long time to break down
They are widely used in products like non-stick pans, food packaging and waterproof clothing because of their ability to repel heat, water and oil
While useful, the exposure to PFAS, even at low levels over time, has been linked to a range of health issues: liver damage, high cholesterol, weakened immune responses, low birth weights and several types of cancer
Are there PFAS in our blood?
The European Environment Agency (EEA) examined a series of studies on the levels of PFAS in teenagers' blood across nine countries
It found that 14.3 per cent had concentrations above acceptable levels, with significant variation: from just 1.3 per cent in Spain to 23.8 per cent in France
France leads in legislation
France has introduced some of Europe's toughest regulations on PFAS passing a law in February banning the use of the substances in cosmetics, clothing, shoes and ski waxes starting in 2026
A broader ban on PFAS in textiles coming into force in 2030
Belgium's twin PFAS crises
In the Belgian region of Wallonia, public anger erupted in 2023 after an investigation by local broadcaster RTBF revealed that warnings about PFAS contamination were ignored for years
The US military, operating from a base in the small city of Chièvres, had flagged high PFAS levels in local water in 2017 after an incident involving firefighting foam, a substance made with large amounts of PFAS
Large-scale blood testing was carried out in Chièvres in early 2024 and authorities said almost 1300 people across approximately 10 municipalities had their blood samples taken to confirm exposure to the chemicals in recent weeks
Jail time for polluters in Italy
In June, an Italian court sentenced executives at a chemical plant to jail terms of up to 17 years for polluting water used by hundreds of thousands of people with PFAS
Netherlands: Everyone has PFAS in their blood
A nationwide study by the Dutch National Institute for Public Health (RIVM) found PFAS in all 1500 blood samples tested, with nearly every case exceeding health-based safety limits
What is the EU doing?
In 2023, the Netherlands, Denmark, Germany, Norway and Sweden submitted a proposal to the European Chemicals Agency calling for a blanket ban on all PFAS
It is currently under a review by European scientific committees, which is scheduled to conclude in 2026
The European Commission said it will consider a ban on consumer uses, but if alternatives can't be found for critical industrial uses, the use of PFAS may be allowed
An EU-wide PFAS monitoring framework is also on the cards to collect data and map pollution hotspots
Not all countries equally affected
In Slovenia, the national health laboratory says the country lacks heavy industry using PFAS and has found only minimal contamination in past testing
However, the Slovenian Consumers' Association did find chemicals from the PFAS group in almost one third of everyday products that they tested, including some that are banned in the European Union
Bulgaria was among the countries with the lowest percentage of water bodies exceeding the PFOS (a type of PFAS) environmental quality standard in 2022, according to the EEA
As the EU mulls a potential ban, the true cost of PFAS on people and the environment is coming into focus
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
7 hours ago
- ABC News
21 new PFAS chemicals identified in Sydney tap water via sensitive testing methods
Australian researchers have found 21 new "forever chemicals" in Sydney's tap water, including one that's been detected in tap water globally for the first time. The researchers from the University of New South Wales sampled tap water from four catchment sites across Sydney, looking for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) — a family of chemicals in firefighting foam and everyday products that remain in the environment. Alex Donald, a professor in chemistry and the lead author of the research, said they found 31 PFAS chemicals in total from sites at Ryde, Potts Hill, Prospect and North Richmond. "We knew we would find more than were known, but we actually found 21 that hadn't been reported previously in Australian drinking water," he said. Professor Donald said he wanted to "reassure" the public, however, noting the concentrations are very low. "We're talking about one drop of water in up to 20 Olympic-sized swimming pools. "So very low levels and they're within safe Australian drinking water guidelines, which regulate four distinct PFAS chemicals and their concentrations." He said the chemicals had not been identified until now, likely due to two main factors, including using more sensitive testing methods that can detect low levels of chemicals. The researchers were also looking for specific chemicals in order to detect them. Professor Donald said one of the PFAS chemicals found had not been reported previously in any drinking supply globally. "It has been picked up in various consumer products like food packaging and so somehow that must have made it into the waterway, but we don't know the origin of it," he said. Another significant finding was the first ever detection in Australian drinking water of a compound he described as a "breakdown product of firefighting foams". "And that's only been reported once previously overseas," he said. "Those two are quite rare to see in drinking water." The US Environmental Protection Agency considers there is no safe level of PFAS in drinking water, due to health risks it presents to humans, but the Australian government guidelines state there is a safe level of exposure. "Sydney's water meets current Australian standards, but when considering health benchmarks used in other countries, some samples were near or above safety limits," Professor Donald said. 'I still drink the tap water, and the experts are saying it's safe, but I think it does give you pause about just what is in there and I would like to see more research about detecting chemicals and seeing how prevalent it is." The research comes at the same time as the release of the findings of an expert advisory panel established by NSW Health. It found that based on "substantial research already undertaken, the health effects of PFAS appear to be small". The report says at present there is "no clinical benefit for an individual to have a blood rest for PFAS" and that "clinical interventions that reduce blood PFAS are of uncertain benefit and may cause harm". The expert panel was made up of speciality practitioners, including leading science and health experts in the fields of oncology, endocrinology, toxicology, cardiology, epidemiology, pathology, primary care, public health and risk communication.
The Advertiser
9 hours ago
- The Advertiser
Major finding on health effects of PFAS revealed by NSW Health panel
The health effects of PFAS "appear to be small", a NSW Health expert panel has found. The panel, which released its recommendations on Tuesday, found "there is no clinical benefit for an individual to have a blood test for PFAS". The panel has 13 members, including Hunter New England Health public health physician Tony Merritt. John Hunter Hospital clinical director of endocrinology Shamasunder Acharya was also on the panel. PFAS contamination has been an issue at Williamtown since 2012. In more recent years, health concerns have risen across the country, amid reports of PFAS contamination of drinking water and the food chain. The panel's report said "many health conditions potentially associated with PFAS are common in the community and associated with well-established risk factors". Nonetheless, the report noted that studies had "reported an association between PFAS exposure and high cholesterol and reduced kidney function". Further associations were made between PFAS exposure and changes to the immune system, hormone levels, liver enzymes and menstruation. Additionally, these "forever chemicals" had been linked to "lower birthweight, high blood pressure in pregnancy and some cancers". But the panel said there were "inconsistent findings across different studies, with limited evidence of a dose-response relationship". "The amount of PFAS measured in some studies was low, similar to levels found in the general population. "These studies are unable to distinguish any effects of PFAS from the many other factors that can affect health." The report said there were "few high-quality studies of workers exposed to high levels of PFAS". It added that health effects associated with PFAS "may instead result from factors such as poor kidney function". "PFAS are partly excreted by the kidneys. This means people with poor kidney function will have higher levels of PFAS, which may result in apparent associations between PFAS and other health conditions." The International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified PFOA as carcinogenic to humans and PFOS as possibly carcinogenic. The panel examined these findings, but said it was "confident that the absolute cancer risk from PFAS was low". It also stated that authorities should avoid using "currently available human epidemiological studies" to obtain PFAS threshold levels due to a high risk of bias. Research shows forever chemicals are in the blood of most people. A University of Newcastle paper, published last year, said mounting epidemiological evidence supports "negative associations between PFAS exposure and an array of human health conditions". The paper acknowledged that it was "challenging to definitively link PFAS exposure to impacts on human health". However, it found that "the balance of evidence" supports the potential for PFAS exposure to lead to adverse health outcomes. The Newcastle Herald reported in June that Hunter Water had welcomed revised Australian drinking water guidelines for PFAS. Tests confirmed that Hunter Water-supplied drinking water was safe and met the revised guidelines. Dr Kerry Chant, the chief health officer, said "updated NSW Health advice provides consumers with guidance on how to reduce PFAS exposure". "There is considerable concern, particularly in the Blue Mountains community, about exposure to PFAS through drinking water, and NSW Health takes these concerns very seriously," Dr Chant said. Nonetheless, NSW Health said it accepted all the expert panel's recommendations, which included "how to communicate risk in the context of evolving evidence". The health effects of PFAS "appear to be small", a NSW Health expert panel has found. The panel, which released its recommendations on Tuesday, found "there is no clinical benefit for an individual to have a blood test for PFAS". The panel has 13 members, including Hunter New England Health public health physician Tony Merritt. John Hunter Hospital clinical director of endocrinology Shamasunder Acharya was also on the panel. PFAS contamination has been an issue at Williamtown since 2012. In more recent years, health concerns have risen across the country, amid reports of PFAS contamination of drinking water and the food chain. The panel's report said "many health conditions potentially associated with PFAS are common in the community and associated with well-established risk factors". Nonetheless, the report noted that studies had "reported an association between PFAS exposure and high cholesterol and reduced kidney function". Further associations were made between PFAS exposure and changes to the immune system, hormone levels, liver enzymes and menstruation. Additionally, these "forever chemicals" had been linked to "lower birthweight, high blood pressure in pregnancy and some cancers". But the panel said there were "inconsistent findings across different studies, with limited evidence of a dose-response relationship". "The amount of PFAS measured in some studies was low, similar to levels found in the general population. "These studies are unable to distinguish any effects of PFAS from the many other factors that can affect health." The report said there were "few high-quality studies of workers exposed to high levels of PFAS". It added that health effects associated with PFAS "may instead result from factors such as poor kidney function". "PFAS are partly excreted by the kidneys. This means people with poor kidney function will have higher levels of PFAS, which may result in apparent associations between PFAS and other health conditions." The International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified PFOA as carcinogenic to humans and PFOS as possibly carcinogenic. The panel examined these findings, but said it was "confident that the absolute cancer risk from PFAS was low". It also stated that authorities should avoid using "currently available human epidemiological studies" to obtain PFAS threshold levels due to a high risk of bias. Research shows forever chemicals are in the blood of most people. A University of Newcastle paper, published last year, said mounting epidemiological evidence supports "negative associations between PFAS exposure and an array of human health conditions". The paper acknowledged that it was "challenging to definitively link PFAS exposure to impacts on human health". However, it found that "the balance of evidence" supports the potential for PFAS exposure to lead to adverse health outcomes. The Newcastle Herald reported in June that Hunter Water had welcomed revised Australian drinking water guidelines for PFAS. Tests confirmed that Hunter Water-supplied drinking water was safe and met the revised guidelines. Dr Kerry Chant, the chief health officer, said "updated NSW Health advice provides consumers with guidance on how to reduce PFAS exposure". "There is considerable concern, particularly in the Blue Mountains community, about exposure to PFAS through drinking water, and NSW Health takes these concerns very seriously," Dr Chant said. Nonetheless, NSW Health said it accepted all the expert panel's recommendations, which included "how to communicate risk in the context of evolving evidence". The health effects of PFAS "appear to be small", a NSW Health expert panel has found. The panel, which released its recommendations on Tuesday, found "there is no clinical benefit for an individual to have a blood test for PFAS". The panel has 13 members, including Hunter New England Health public health physician Tony Merritt. John Hunter Hospital clinical director of endocrinology Shamasunder Acharya was also on the panel. PFAS contamination has been an issue at Williamtown since 2012. In more recent years, health concerns have risen across the country, amid reports of PFAS contamination of drinking water and the food chain. The panel's report said "many health conditions potentially associated with PFAS are common in the community and associated with well-established risk factors". Nonetheless, the report noted that studies had "reported an association between PFAS exposure and high cholesterol and reduced kidney function". Further associations were made between PFAS exposure and changes to the immune system, hormone levels, liver enzymes and menstruation. Additionally, these "forever chemicals" had been linked to "lower birthweight, high blood pressure in pregnancy and some cancers". But the panel said there were "inconsistent findings across different studies, with limited evidence of a dose-response relationship". "The amount of PFAS measured in some studies was low, similar to levels found in the general population. "These studies are unable to distinguish any effects of PFAS from the many other factors that can affect health." The report said there were "few high-quality studies of workers exposed to high levels of PFAS". It added that health effects associated with PFAS "may instead result from factors such as poor kidney function". "PFAS are partly excreted by the kidneys. This means people with poor kidney function will have higher levels of PFAS, which may result in apparent associations between PFAS and other health conditions." The International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified PFOA as carcinogenic to humans and PFOS as possibly carcinogenic. The panel examined these findings, but said it was "confident that the absolute cancer risk from PFAS was low". It also stated that authorities should avoid using "currently available human epidemiological studies" to obtain PFAS threshold levels due to a high risk of bias. Research shows forever chemicals are in the blood of most people. A University of Newcastle paper, published last year, said mounting epidemiological evidence supports "negative associations between PFAS exposure and an array of human health conditions". The paper acknowledged that it was "challenging to definitively link PFAS exposure to impacts on human health". However, it found that "the balance of evidence" supports the potential for PFAS exposure to lead to adverse health outcomes. The Newcastle Herald reported in June that Hunter Water had welcomed revised Australian drinking water guidelines for PFAS. Tests confirmed that Hunter Water-supplied drinking water was safe and met the revised guidelines. Dr Kerry Chant, the chief health officer, said "updated NSW Health advice provides consumers with guidance on how to reduce PFAS exposure". "There is considerable concern, particularly in the Blue Mountains community, about exposure to PFAS through drinking water, and NSW Health takes these concerns very seriously," Dr Chant said. Nonetheless, NSW Health said it accepted all the expert panel's recommendations, which included "how to communicate risk in the context of evolving evidence". The health effects of PFAS "appear to be small", a NSW Health expert panel has found. The panel, which released its recommendations on Tuesday, found "there is no clinical benefit for an individual to have a blood test for PFAS". The panel has 13 members, including Hunter New England Health public health physician Tony Merritt. John Hunter Hospital clinical director of endocrinology Shamasunder Acharya was also on the panel. PFAS contamination has been an issue at Williamtown since 2012. In more recent years, health concerns have risen across the country, amid reports of PFAS contamination of drinking water and the food chain. The panel's report said "many health conditions potentially associated with PFAS are common in the community and associated with well-established risk factors". Nonetheless, the report noted that studies had "reported an association between PFAS exposure and high cholesterol and reduced kidney function". Further associations were made between PFAS exposure and changes to the immune system, hormone levels, liver enzymes and menstruation. Additionally, these "forever chemicals" had been linked to "lower birthweight, high blood pressure in pregnancy and some cancers". But the panel said there were "inconsistent findings across different studies, with limited evidence of a dose-response relationship". "The amount of PFAS measured in some studies was low, similar to levels found in the general population. "These studies are unable to distinguish any effects of PFAS from the many other factors that can affect health." The report said there were "few high-quality studies of workers exposed to high levels of PFAS". It added that health effects associated with PFAS "may instead result from factors such as poor kidney function". "PFAS are partly excreted by the kidneys. This means people with poor kidney function will have higher levels of PFAS, which may result in apparent associations between PFAS and other health conditions." The International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified PFOA as carcinogenic to humans and PFOS as possibly carcinogenic. The panel examined these findings, but said it was "confident that the absolute cancer risk from PFAS was low". It also stated that authorities should avoid using "currently available human epidemiological studies" to obtain PFAS threshold levels due to a high risk of bias. Research shows forever chemicals are in the blood of most people. A University of Newcastle paper, published last year, said mounting epidemiological evidence supports "negative associations between PFAS exposure and an array of human health conditions". The paper acknowledged that it was "challenging to definitively link PFAS exposure to impacts on human health". However, it found that "the balance of evidence" supports the potential for PFAS exposure to lead to adverse health outcomes. The Newcastle Herald reported in June that Hunter Water had welcomed revised Australian drinking water guidelines for PFAS. Tests confirmed that Hunter Water-supplied drinking water was safe and met the revised guidelines. Dr Kerry Chant, the chief health officer, said "updated NSW Health advice provides consumers with guidance on how to reduce PFAS exposure". "There is considerable concern, particularly in the Blue Mountains community, about exposure to PFAS through drinking water, and NSW Health takes these concerns very seriously," Dr Chant said. Nonetheless, NSW Health said it accepted all the expert panel's recommendations, which included "how to communicate risk in the context of evolving evidence".
Herald Sun
10 hours ago
- Herald Sun
Forever chemicals: NSW Health findings defy public concerns
Don't miss out on the headlines from Illness. Followed categories will be added to My News. There is 'considerable concern' among communities about exposure to so-called 'forever chemicals' found in everyday products and their potential health risks. However, after thoroughly reviewing the evidence, experts say the health effects appear to be small and individual blood testing offers no clear medical benefit. The NSW Health Expert Advisory Panel on PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) has released its final report, delivering clear guidance on the health effects of these widely found 'forever chemicals', the value of blood testing, and the best ways to communicate risks to communities. PFAS have been used since the 1940s in products resistant to heat, stains, grease, and water, but concerns have grown worldwide about their presence in the environment and potential health impacts. The panel, made up of leading clinical experts across toxicology, oncology, cardiology, public health, and risk communication, evaluated the latest Australian and global research to inform health advice. While acknowledging the body of research for health effects related to PFAS is 'large and still growing', the panel concluded that the health effects of PFAS 'appear to be small'. It noted links between PFAS exposure and conditions including high cholesterol, reduced kidney function, immune system changes, hormone alterations, liver enzyme changes, menstruation issues, lower birthweight, pregnancy high blood pressure, and some cancers. However, the panel stressed the evidence was inconsistent, with 'limited evidence of a dose-response relationship' and difficulty separating PFAS effects from other factors that can affect health, especially in studies with PFAS levels similar to the general population. It also highlighted the influence of bias and confounding factors such as smoking, diet, and age. A $3.5 million mobile PFAS treatment system installed at the Cascade Water Filtration Plant on the outskirts of Sydney. Picture: Supplied Addressing widespread public concern about cancer, the panel said it remained confident that the absolute cancer risk from PFAS was low based on the human epidemiological studies and levels of exposure in the Australian population. The panel noted that while the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified PFOA as 'cancer causing' and PFOS as 'possibly cancer causing', IARC's findings didn't specify safe exposure levels, how much exposure increases risk, or how big that risk might be. PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid) and PFOS (perfluorooctane sulfonate) are specific types of PFAS. The panel stressed that, despite these hazard classifications, the actual cancer risk from PFAS in Australia was low based on studies and typical exposure levels. One of the panel's strongest messages is that there is 'no clinical benefit' for an individual to have a blood test for PFAS. The report stated that PFAS chemicals appeared in more than 95 per cent of people tested, showing widespread exposure from multiple sources. PFAS contamination in water sources remains a key concern. Picture: NewsWire / Gaye Gerard Because PFAS are so common, the expert panel said blood tests were hard to interpret and didn't predict health outcomes, so it didn't recommend individual testing. Although levels have been declining over the past 20 years, high background exposure makes studying health effects challenging. The panel supports ongoing population monitoring to track changes This stance differs from 2022 guidance by the US National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM), which suggested blood testing might guide clinical care. The NSW panel pointed out limitations in NASEM's approach, including reliance on studies with small effects and possible bias, and noted that US agencies like the CDC and ATSDR have not adopted NASEM's recommendations for individual blood testing. PFOA, PFOS, and PFHxS (perfluorohexane sulfonic acid) are the three main PFAS types historically used in aqueous firefighting foams. The panel also advised against interventions such as phlebotomy or cholesterol-lowering medications to reduce PFAS in the blood, calling their benefits 'uncertain' and warning they 'may cause harm' like anaemia or medication interactions. Instead, clinicians are urged to focus on 'usual preventative health interventions' to support patients. Recognising 'genuine concern' in parts of the community about exposure to PFAS and the potential health impacts, the panel stressed that risk communication must be 'tailored to the diverse levels of concern' and continued transparency maintained. The panel stated that reliable epidemiological studies required 'well characterised' exposures, measured confounders, and sufficiently large populations; conditions 'not currently met in the Blue Mountains population or in other communities in NSW'. It urged authorities to avoid using currently available human epidemiological studies to derive threshold levels due to the higher risk of bias and confounding. Instead, it supported continuing Australia's conservative approach of setting exposure limits based on animal studies with safety factors, such as those by the National Health and Medical Research Council. NSW chief health officer Kerry Chant said updated NSW Health advice provided consumers with guidance on how to reduce PFAS exposure. 'There is considerable concern, particularly in the Blue Mountains community, about exposure to PFAS through drinking water, and NSW Health takes these concerns very seriously,' Dr Chant said. 'NSW Health will continue to support local clinicians with information for GPs who may be managing patients with concerns about PFAS exposure, including evidence about potential adverse health effects, counselling patients, the utility of blood tests for PFAS and the role of further investigations.' Originally published as Widespread PFAS exposure, but cancer risk 'low,' experts confirm
