3 days ago
PFAS Blood Results: Hype or Hope?
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a large group of synthetic chemicals used in numerous industrial and consumer products. Known as 'forever pollutants,' PFAS break down very slowly in water and soil. Consequently, they can enter the food chain and end up in what we eat and drink, making exposure unavoidable.
PFAS have drawn increased attention, with public concern pushing policymakers and health experts to respond. However, without clear, science-based recommendations, efforts to act may cause more harm than good.
To guide healthcare professionals caring for individuals with potential PFAS exposure, the Inter-Ministerial Conference on Public Health asked the Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre (KCE) to issue national recommendations for individual blood screening. Based on the current evidence, KCE experts have advised that routine PFAS screening is not justified and should be limited to scientific studies. They emphasised the need for stronger evidence before broader measures are introduced.
PFAS and Health
Concerns regarding the potential health risks for PFAS exposure have steadily increased. Studies have linked certain types of PFAS to immune disruption, higher cholesterol levels, and an increased risk for certain cancers. While much remains unknown, such as the influence of exposure duration, dose, specific PFAS compounds, and individual susceptibility, the available evidence supports precautionary steps. In recent years, several countries have imposed limits on PFAS in drinking water or banned the production and use of specific PFAS.
Against this backdrop, offering blood tests to individuals suspected of PFAS exposure may seem like a logical measure, particularly if the goal is to provide targeted medical care and reduce potential health risks to the population. However, experts have stated that such an approach raises more questions than answers.
Four Key Questions
To evaluate whether individual blood testing for PFAS levels in blood at the individual level makes sense, experts at the KCE considered four key questions:
Is there solid evidence that PFAS exposure is associated with one or more serious health conditions?
Do we know the blood concentration thresholds at which PFAS become a health risk?
Are there reliable, accurate, and validated tests, and do we know which specific PFAS compounds should be measured, given the thousands that exist?
If high PFAS levels are found, are there proven medical treatments that can reduce health risks?
So far, there is no robust evidence to answer the four key questions with a confident 'yes.' Scientists still lack reliable data to show how an individual's risk of developing serious illnesses changes based on PFAS blood levels. There is no standard method for measuring PFAS in the blood, and no clear agreement on which PFAS should be assessed.
Currently, there is no solid evidence on how to manage individuals with elevated PFAS levels in the blood. Therefore, the KCE does not recommend blood tests for measuring PFAS levels in individuals. The chances of such a test offering real medical benefits are low, while the risks, including financial costs, anxiety, and a series of potentially unnecessary follow-up tests, are significant.
Focus on Research
This does not imply that no action should be taken. Conversely, it is crucial to expand our understanding of PFAS, especially when it comes to identifying the health risks and determining the blood levels at which those risks become serious on a population scale.
Although the human body gradually eliminates PFAS, this process can take several years.
Notably, individual screening differs from biomonitoring. Biomonitoring focuses on tracking exposure and potential health effects across populations to guide effective prevention, medical monitoring, and intervention strategies.
The KCE recommends that authorities invest in a well-funded, structured, and coordinated inter-federal scientific research program — ideally in collaboration with other European countries because this is a global problem. In this research context, blood tests can be genuinely valuable, not only for assessing individual health risks but also for building the evidence needed to protect public health.
