Forever chemicals: Scientists condemn massive lobbying campaign to alter PFAS definition
What if some per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS, were not, in fact, PFAS? In a letter published on June 10 in the journal Environmental Science and Technology, a group of 20 scientists specializing in forever chemicals condemned efforts to change the definition of this family of synthetic, toxic, and persistent chemicals established by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
The nature and, therefore, the number of PFAS captured by regulations depend on this chemical "identikit." The ongoing effort could weaken the many initiatives now targeting PFAS worldwide. "We are concerned that this effort is politically and/or economically, rather than scientifically, motivated," the researchers warned.
What is a PFAS? For a long time, the question was not simple for anyone, even specialists. The chemistry of PFAS is dizzyingly complex, and the devil lies in the smallest of atoms. In 2011, a group of experts proposed a first definition in a scientific article. Soon after, the OECD, which has been deeply involved with PFAS issues since the early 2000s, decided to take up the subject. In 2018, it published a definition covering 4,730 substances. Further work, led under its auspices by academic scientists, regulators, and industry representatives, resulted in 2021 in a definition identifying more than 10,000 PFAS.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
2 days ago
- Euronews
‘Forever chemicals' exposure before birth raises teenage health risks
'Forever chemicals' may be taking their toll on our health before we are even born, new research suggests. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, are a group of chemicals used in everyday products like food packaging and non-stick cookware. They're known as 'forever chemicals' because they don't degrade easily and can build up in the environment – and in our bodies. Scientists have detected PFAS in people's blood, breast milk, semen, livers, and even brains. They suspect these chemicals harm human health, with studies linking them to higher cholesterol, some cancers, and fertility problems, among other issues. The new research adds another complication to that list: high blood pressure during adolescence. The analysis followed more than 1,000 children in the US. It used maternal plasma collected shortly after they were born to identify their level of prenatal PFAS exposure, and matched it to doctors' records up until their 18th birthdays. Prenatal exposure to PFAS was linked to a higher risk of developing high blood pressure later in childhood, particularly in the teenage years, according to the study published in the Journal of the American Heart Association. The findings indicate that 'these forever chemicals can have long-lasting and potentially harmful effects that may only become apparent years after birth,' Zeyu Li, the study's lead author and a researcher at Johns Hopkins University in the US, said in a statement. The risk of elevated blood pressure was even higher for boys and Black children with higher PFAS levels at birth, the study found. In a surprise to researchers, a handful of forever chemicals were actually linked to lower diastolic, or bottom number, blood pressure in early childhood, though that changed when they entered their teenage years. Evidence on the health effects of PFAS has been mixed so far. While researchers believe these chemicals pose risks, it's difficult to pinpoint their exact impact because there are thousands of PFAS that could all interact in different ways, and because people's exposure changes over time. Even so, Li said the latest study underscores the need for researchers to track people's health and their PFAS levels over a long period of time, from early childhood to adolescence and beyond. Meanwhile, Mingyu Zhang, the study's senior author and an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School, said stronger environmental protections are needed to protect people from PFAS, given they are so ubiquitous that people cannot meaningfully limit their exposure on their own. That could include phasing out forever chemicals from consumer products and in industrial settings, he said, as well as better surveillance and limits on PFAS in water systems. 'This is not something individuals can solve on their own,' Zhang said. The Trump administration is facing backlash from climate scientists who say the US government is bungling basic facts about the impact of industrial emissions on air quality. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a new proposal this week that would roll back restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions and other pollutants for power plants that rely on fossil fuels. The agency claimed in the proposal that heat-trapping carbon gas emissions "from fossil fuel-fired power plants do not contribute significantly to dangerous air pollution". But 19 scientists – experts in climate, health, and economics – told the Associated Press the agency's statement was scientifically incorrect. Many of them called it disinformation. Here's what five of them said. "This is the scientific equivalent to saying that smoking doesn't cause lung cancer," said climate scientist Zeke Hausfather of the tech firm Stripe and the temperature monitoring group Berkeley Earth, adding that the administration's conclusion was "utterly nonsensical". "It's basic chemistry that burning coal and natural gas releases carbon dioxide, and it's basic physics that CO2 warms the planet. We've known these simple facts since the mid-19th century," said Philip Mote, an Oregon State climate scientist. Dr Howard Frumkin, former director of the US' National Center for Environmental Health and a retired public health professor at the University of Washington, said "coal-and gas-fired power plants contribute significantly to climate change," which "increases the risk of heat waves, catastrophic storms, infectious diseases, and many other health threats". 'These are indisputable facts,' he added. "Their statement is in direct conflict with evidence that has been presented by thousands of scientists from almost 200 countries for decades," University of Arizona climate scientist Kathy Jacobs said. Stanford climate scientist Chris Field, who coordinated an international report linking climate change to increasingly deadly extreme weather, summed it up this way: "It is hard to imagine a decision dumber than putting the short-term interests of oil and gas companies ahead of the long-term interests of our children and grandchildren".
LeMonde
5 days ago
- LeMonde
Forever chemicals: Scientists condemn massive lobbying campaign to alter PFAS definition
What if some per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS, were not, in fact, PFAS? In a letter published on June 10 in the journal Environmental Science and Technology, a group of 20 scientists specializing in forever chemicals condemned efforts to change the definition of this family of synthetic, toxic, and persistent chemicals established by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The nature and, therefore, the number of PFAS captured by regulations depend on this chemical "identikit." The ongoing effort could weaken the many initiatives now targeting PFAS worldwide. "We are concerned that this effort is politically and/or economically, rather than scientifically, motivated," the researchers warned. What is a PFAS? For a long time, the question was not simple for anyone, even specialists. The chemistry of PFAS is dizzyingly complex, and the devil lies in the smallest of atoms. In 2011, a group of experts proposed a first definition in a scientific article. Soon after, the OECD, which has been deeply involved with PFAS issues since the early 2000s, decided to take up the subject. In 2018, it published a definition covering 4,730 substances. Further work, led under its auspices by academic scientists, regulators, and industry representatives, resulted in 2021 in a definition identifying more than 10,000 PFAS.
Euronews
06-06-2025
- Euronews
Danish PM calls for full-face veil ban in educational institutions
The European Commission plans to launch a vast operation to clean up PFAS (Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances), also known as "forever chemicals" in water through the creation of public-private partnerships. These were the conclusions of the European Water Resilience Strategy, adopted on Wednesday in Brussels. In 2022, out of 1,300 monitoring sites in Europe, 59% of rivers, 35% of lakes and 73% of coastal waters exceeded the environmental quality standard for perfluorooctanesulphonic acid (PFOS), a type of PFAS, according to the European Environment Agency (EEA). In Europe, only 37% of surface waters are in good or very good ecological health and 29% have achieved good chemical status, according to the agency. Environmental associations, which are campaigning for a ban on PFAS at the source, are denouncing this as a "missed opportunity". "We expected to see more ambition to reduce pollution at the source," said Angeliki Lyssimachou, head of science and policy at the Pesticide Action Network (PAN) Europe. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances are dubbed "forever chemicals" because they don't easily break down in the environment and accumulate in humans and animals over time. Health costs are estimated at €52 to €84 billion a year and some of the chemicals have been classified as carcinogenic. These chemical compounds are non-stick, waterproof and resistant to high temperatures. They are also present in many everyday items such as non-stick frying pans, fire-fighting foams and medical devices. Jessika Roswall, the European Commissioner for the Environment and Water Resilience said she was in favour of banning PFAS in consumer products such as cosmetics and food packaging. However, she stressed that it would be difficult to ban all PFASs, as some do not yet have an effective alternative. "The problem is that we need PFASs for many different products. For example, medical products like inhalers (...) or many things for which there is no substitution. In terms of the ecological transition, semiconductors, digitisation or the defence industry," Roswall told Euronews. In a leaked document, the Commission's estimated range for the annual cost of PFAS decontamination in Europe was wide, at anywhere from €5 all the way to €100 billion. For the water sector alone, the cost could increase to up to €18 billion annually for drinking water treatment. For some pollutants, such as TFA (trifluoroacetic acid, a type of PFAS), the clean-up is not so simple. "According to the water companies, it's a very expensive process that involves extracting all the minerals from the water and adding them back. At the end of the day, you're going to lose a lot of water," says Angeliki Lyssimachou. "So you're going to consume a lot more energy. The Commission wants to apply the "polluter pays" principle and reserve public funding for sites where it has not been possible to identify who is responsible. The European Water Resilience Strategy aims to restore the water cycle and ensure access to clean, affordable water at a time when Europe is facing extreme weather events such as floods and droughts. 34% of the EU is affected by water shortages. "Water is life. Water resilience is essential for our citizens, our farmers, the environment and businesses. The Commission's Water Resilience Strategy sets out the path towards a sustainable, resilient, smart and competitive water economy. We must act now to protect this resource," said European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in a statement. The European action plan also includes raising awareness for these issues through public debates, increasing European funding for infrastructure modernisation, supporting digitisation through the EU's Copernicus Earth observation programme, and supporting innovation. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has called on Thursday for stricter measures limiting religious symbols and rituals in education, asking for a ban on full-coverage veils worn by some Muslim women to be extended to schools and universities. The country's overall ban on burkas and niqabs in public places, introduced in 2018, has not been applied to educational institutions. However, Frederiksen, who is also the leader of the country's Social Democrats party, wants to change this, stating that limiting the ban in this way had been a mistake. "There are gaps in the legislation that allow Muslim social control and oppression of women at educational institutions in Denmark," Frederiksen told domestic media. "You have the right to be a person of faith and practice your religion, but democracy takes precedence." Meanwhile, opponents of the general ban, including civil society organisations such as Amnesty International, said it infringes on women's right to dress as they choose. "All women should be free to dress as they please and to wear clothing that expresses their identity or beliefs," the NGO said in 2018. The announcement is a direct response to recommendations from the Commission for the Forgotten Women's Struggle, which earlier this year called for action. In 2022, the same government-formed commission proposed to impose a ban on the wearing of hijabs in primary schools to ensure 'that women with minority backgrounds can enjoy the same rights and freedoms as other Danish women'. At the time, the ban proposal sparked a backlash and protests in Denmark. The plan was rejected in 2023. Frederiksen also wants prayer rooms to be removed from educational institutions, objecting to the fact that they have been set up at several universities and colleges. The Danish PM does not believe these rooms create inclusiveness, but rather "provide a breeding ground for discrimination and pressure", she explained. While Frederiksen is not asking for an outright ban, she said that Minister for Education and Children Mattias Tesfaye and Minister for Higher Education Christina Egelund will enter into a dialogue with schools and universities about finding a common solution, and "clarify that prayer rooms do not belong there". The Danish society cannot allow itself to be ruled by religious conservatism, Frederiksen told the domestic press. "You're welcome to have your religion, but when you're at school, you're there to be at school and take part in your education," she concluded. North Korea's dictator Kim Jong-un has once again affirmed his "unconditional support" for Russia's all-out war against Ukraine during a meeting with a top Russian official. The authoritarian ruler made the comment during talks with Russian Security Council Secretary Sergei Shoigu in Pyongyang on Wednesday, according to the state-run Korean Central News Agency (KCNA). Kim reiterated his 'unconditional support for the stand of Russia and its foreign policies in all the crucial international political issues including the Ukrainian issue", KCNA reported. The two countries' ties have strengthened in recent years, with Pyongyang sending thousands of troops to Russia to participate in its war against Ukraine. The North Korean soldiers have been deployed in Russia's Kursk region, parts of which were seized by the Ukrainian army in a surprise offensive last August. Speculation about North Korea's deployment of troops to Russia first arose at the end of 2024, with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and South Korean officials accusing Pyongyang of sending soldiers to support Moscow's war efforts. However, it wasn't until April that Moscow and Pyongyang officially confirmed the presence of North Korean troops on the battlefield. A monitoring group comprising South Korea, the US, Japan and eight other countries last week classified Russia and North Korea's military alliance as 'illegal", saying it flagrantly violates UN sanctions. The report said their pact was allowing North Korea to fund its banned ballistic missile programme. The group also expressed concern that Russia might also transfer sophisticated technologies to help North Korea enhance its nuclear weapons programme. In late April, North Korea unveiled the country's first naval destroyer, named the Choe Hyon, which experts say was likely built with Russian assistance, in further proof of growing military cooperation between Pyongyang and Moscow.
