Latest news with #PFAS-free
Forbes
30-04-2025
- Health
- Forbes
PFAS-Free Revolution: How Consumer Demand Outpaces Regulation
Only three labs in the country can rigorously test down to the part-per-trillion level and help ... More brands validate PFAS-free claims with real, third party validated data. (Photo by DAVID PINTENS/BELGA MAG/AFP via Getty Images) Forever chemicals (Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances, known as PFAS) are pervasive synthetic compounds found in everything from water-resistant fabrics to food packaging. They pose alarming health risks, including cancer and organ damage. With these persistent toxins detected in 99% of Americans' bloodstreams primarily through contaminated water and food, regulatory agencies like the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are now racing to establish protective limits and reduce environmental contamination of these virtually indestructible substances. Real change, however, will be driven by the growing consumer demand for PFAS-free non-essential products. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin outlined upcoming agency actions to address PFAS concerns. His long list of actions included the designation of an agency lead for PFAS, the creation of effluent limitations guidelines (ELGs) for certain PFAS to stop these forever chemicals from entering drinking water systems, and initiatives to engage with Congress and industry to establish a clear liability framework that ensures the polluter pays and passive receivers are protected. 'I have long been concerned about PFAS and the efforts to help states and communities dealing with legacy contamination in their backyards. We are tackling PFAS from all of EPA's program offices, advancing research and testing, stopping PFAS from getting into drinking water systems, holding polluters accountable, and providing certainty for passive receivers. This is just a start of the work we will do on PFAS to ensure Americans have the cleanest air, land, and water,' said Zeldin. However, government cuts in the EPA and the recent dismissal of hundreds of scientists and experts who had been working on the federal government's global warming report may impact the agency's ability to deal with PFAS usage and regulation. A recent study by the U.S. Geological Survey found that at least 45% of US drinking water samples ... More contained at least one type of PFAS 'But here is the reality: In the U.S. and globally for that matter, regulation isn't solely what's driving industry action. It's multi-faceted; The three recurring factors often discussed are: (1) increased consumer awareness of the PFAS issue; (2) genuine commitment to sustainability demanded by shareholders who are also consumers; and (3) the sheer scale of PFAS related legal action,' said Michelle Bellanca, Chief Executive Officer at Claros Technologies Incorporated in an exclusive interview. Retailers and brands want to proactively address the PFAS issue and stay ahead of the growing consumer concerns over forever chemicals. 'Regulation helps, but it's more tailwind than tip of the spear,' said Bellanca. There are approximately 14,000 PFAS compounds with properties valued for durability and lubrication. Essential uses of PFAS may include products necessary for health and safety purposes where alternatives have not yet been established, such as medical devices or occupational protective clothing (firefighter clothing and equipment). PFAS are found in microprocessors and semiconductor devices, which may be considered essential or nonessential based on the use cases of the product. PFAS can be found in many consumer products used every day, such as nonstick cookware, stain and water-resistant coatings for clothing, upholstery, carpets, umbrellas, food packaging (for ready-made-foods), cleaning products, personal care products (beauty products, dental floss, and sunscreens). All of these may be deemed nonessential uses of forever chemicals. As consumers become more aware of PFAS in non-essential items, they may become more demanding in terms of purchasing items that have proven to be PFAS-free. Reports have indicated that kitchenware sales have spiked due to growing concerns about PFAS chemicals. Minnesota became the first to ban the sale of cookware containing PFAS early this year, while six states have enacted phase-outs of PFAS in cookware, including Colorado, Connecticut, Maine, Rhode Island, and Vermont. Retailers may find that PFAS-free labels in the retail industry will probably become more important than GMO, organic, green, or other labels in consumer importance in terms of sustainability. Product labels can specify that products are made without added PFAS, rather than being truly PFAS-free, which can be misleading for consumers. 'When brands claim to be PFAS-free, they had better be ready to back it up. Most can't,' stated Bellanca. What makes PFAS labeling different from a vague green or organic label is that PFAS is scientifically detectable, even at parts per trillion. One part per trillion is like a single drop in 20 Olympic-sized pools, explains Bellanca. There are only three labs in the country that can rigorously test down to the part-per-trillion level and help brands confirm PFAS-free claims with real, third-party validated data. 'Bottom line: it's about transparency over taglines. If you're not testing, you're guessing,' said Bellanca. Some companies are being proactive, and have been for years, especially in the outdoor apparel and accessories market. Fenix Outdoor International AG, with brands such as Fjällräven, a company known for quality backpacks and outdoor gear, has a Chemical Guideline and Restricted Substances List that all partners and suppliers must adhere to. It includes a broad ban on non-essential uses of fluorochemicals (PFAS). Patagonia has been working on reducing and eliminating the use of PFAS in its products for the past fifteen years. The company just announced that for the Spring 2025 season and beyond, 100% of new products are made without intentionally added PFAS. Patagonia states that while there are more than 14,000 PFAS chemistries regulated by the new laws, only a few of these chemistries are used for a functional or technical purpose in clothing. These few are the chemistries the company is not adding to its products. Patagonia recognizes that there is a possibility with the amount of chemistries (over 14,000) that some of these might show up in different components of apparel and manufacturing processes, hence the use of the terminology, 'not intentionally added.' 'Made without added PFAS' just means the manufacturer didn't intentionally add it during production. But PFAS can sneak in upstream—like in untreated cotton or coatings from third-party raw material suppliers," explains Bellanca. Brands may still be held accountable, especially as consumer activism continues to grow. In the U.S., mass awareness has not caught on with consumers, but the awakening is coming as a swell of legal action comes into play. More and more cases like the $12.5 billion 3M settlement are being noticed. 'Those payout settlement numbers—nine, ten, eleven figures—get attention. And with more than 300,000 U.S. companies using PFAS, we're only just beginning to see the impact,' claims Bellanca. Phasing out PFAS in nonessential products is already underway, with the European Union (EU) leading legislative action with its mandate that went into effect in February 2025 specifying restrictions to be in effect by August 2026. One of the provisions is to minimize the use of substances of concern (including the placement of restrictions on their pervasive use in packaging materials), requiring that concentrations not exceed certain threshold levels. 'In Europe, informed consumers have driven real change, which is why the EU is way ahead on PFAS regulations and in the process of enacting EU-wide PFAS regulations under REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation, and Restriction of Chemicals),' stated Bellanca. The PFAS issue represents both a challenge and an opportunity for retailers. The battle against forever chemicals represents a pivotal shift in consumer-corporate dynamics. Addressing it requires supply chain scrutiny and potential product reformulation. It also presents a chance for companies to lead on an important consumer health issue before regulations force action. As consumer awareness grows, PFAS-free products will likely gain a competitive advantage and provide retailers the opportunity to build trust with consumers. Retailers and brands must take the lead when it comes to protecting public health from persistent toxins, waiting for government action is no longer viable.
Yahoo
23-04-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Leading health organization makes bold move to address threats lurking in household products: 'A significant leap forward'
The National Sanitation Foundation has launched a new PFAS-free certification that, provided they meet the criteria, manufacturers of common household items can label their products with. According to the NSF, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, also known as PFAS or "forever chemicals," are synthetic or man-made materials that don't break down easily. PFAS are unfortunately found in both everyday household products and contaminated water and food. The NSF's Guideline 537, however, can make it easier to avoid PFAS in products we use to consume food and clean food spaces. The NSF has put a great deal of thought into creating this certification. In addition to an official certification mark, NSF 537 requires a full product ingredient review and yearly testing of the product's total organic fluorine levels. Approved nonfood compounds, like sanitizers, and food equipment materials are also listed publicly. Certifications like NSF 537 can help us keep our families and communities safer and healthier. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, PFAS can increase a person's risk of cancers, interfere with their hormones, decrease fertility, and more. Things like artificial turf and skincare products commonly contain PFAS as well. Communities and researchers have come together to recognize the negative effects PFAS in these products can have on people. Continuing to speak out against their use helps keep us safer. The EU is currently working toward banning PFAS in various products. While it will take a while to phase out forever chemicals effectively, doing so will yield many health and environmental benefits in the long run. NSF 537 is just the beginning of what could exist in the U.S. NSF 537 is based on decades of food safety knowledge and experience. When buying an item with the NSF 537 mark, you can be sure you are purchasing a reputable product that is good for you and won't pollute the environment. Do you worry about having toxic forever chemicals in your home? Majorly Sometimes Not really I don't know enough about them Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. "With growing concerns and new regulations being introduced on PFAS in our environment and food supply, NSF 537 represents a significant leap forward in consumer safety and transparency," said Sam Cole, the NSF's director of food contact evaluation. "This certification will empower forward-thinking manufacturers to clearly distinguish PFAS-free products, giving both retail and food businesses and consumers confidence and peace of mind." Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Yahoo
20-04-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Landfill sparks alarm after test reveals toxic chemicals exceed safe limits: 'The plume size is completely unknown'
A landfill in Central Washington that was tested for elevated levels of toxic "forever chemicals" could be contaminating the local water supply and endangering residents. Advocacy group Friends of Rocky Top had previously called out other environmental problems at the Rocky Top Environmental landfill near Yakima, per Northwest Public Broadcasting. The concerns included fire, pungent odors, and airborne litter. Now, it's worried that soil tainted with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances and dumped at the site has contaminated groundwater. In response to protests by the group, the landfill set up monitoring wells, and testing showed PFAS levels surpassed cleanup levels. One well tested at 21 nanograms per liter; the Environmental Protection Agency considers levels of 4 nanograms per liter too high, per the report. "The amount of the contamination and the plume size is completely unknown," said Scott Cave, a consultant for Friends of Rocky Top, according to Northwest Public Broadcasting. "We have no idea where that plume is gone or if we're even going to find it in neighbors' wells." PFAS are a group of human-made chemicals that are found in a variety of consumer products including nonstick cookware and water-repellent clothing along with firefighting foams. Exposure to these substances has been associated with a number of negative health impacts. For instance, one study found that exposure to PFAS through drinking water before birth could lead to an increased risk of childhood cancers. Another paper tied these chemicals to an increased risk of cardiovascular diseases in postmenopausal women. Meanwhile, these chemicals are all around us. For instance, one study found that over 20% of Americans may be exposed to detectable levels of PFAS in their tap water, and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry says most Americans have been exposed to PFAS and have it in their blood. In April 2024, the EPA issued its first national and legally enforceable drinking water standard for PFAS, part of the agency's PFAS Strategic Roadmap. However, it is unknown how the EPA will move forward with PFAS regulations under the Trump administration. For instance, in February, the administration rescinded a proposed rule that would have set national limits on the discharge of PFAS into waterways. However, some states are taking action to protect residents. For one, Minnesota recently enacted a law that prohibits the willful addition of PFAS to 11 product categories, including cleaners, mattresses, automotive maintenance products, cookware, and other items. The law will expand to ban nearly all uses of PFAS by 2032. You can help reduce your exposure by opting for PFAS-free brands and limiting your purchases of nonstick cookware as well as stain- and water-resistant clothing. What source of air pollution do you worry most about at home? Wildfires Gas stove Fireplace Something else Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Yahoo
02-04-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
State updates hazardous substances list to include harmful forever chemicals, begins rulemaking
Firefighting foam 'unintentionally released' in an aircraft hangar at Travis Air Force Base in California on Sept. 24, 2013. Firefighting foam contains PFAS or "forever chemicals" that have gotten into the environment and groundwater. Oregon and other states are required to test for the contaminants during the next two years under guidance from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (Ken Wright/U.S. Air Force) Oregon's list of regulated hazardous substances is getting its first update in nearly two decades with the addition of six 'forever chemicals' known to harm human health. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality on Tuesday announced it would add six perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, to the state's list of more than 800 regulated contaminants and begin creating regulations to limit Oregonians' exposure to them. 'We need this rulemaking to hold parties responsible for contamination and to address that contamination,' said Sarah Van Glubt, a manager in DEQ's environmental cleanup program who is leading the rulemaking. 'Otherwise, right now, everything is voluntary. We can't require parties to test and treat for these chemicals.'. The Environmental Quality Commission is expected to vote on adding the chemicals to the state's list and adopting new regulations on or after May 21. Email comments to: PFAS2025@ Join a public hearing on April 22 at 11 a.m. here or 6 p.m. here PFAS are human-made chemical chains used in products such as flame retardants, nonstick cookware and waterproof clothing that do not break down or go away naturally but instead have for decades leached into rivers and streams and contaminated soil, water and even air. They are thought to now be in the blood of everyone in the U.S., according to research and testing from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and can lead to increased risks for cancers, heart damage, high cholesterol and birth defects, among other adverse health effects. Suspected sources of past or ongoing PFAS pollution in Oregon include 139 commercial airports that are or were required to maintain PFAS-containing firefighting foam on site, as well as 18 municipal fire training facilities near 20 of the most populous cities in the state, according to rulemaking documents from DEQ. Officials at Portland International Airport began testing for PFAS in 2017 in and around a firefighter training ground there used by the Air National Guard. They identified PFAS contamination adjacent to the nearby Columbia Slough and found PFAS-impaired fish and aquatic species. They've since switched to using PFAS-free firefighting foam and have begun initial stages of cleanup. Oregon lawmakers are considering a bill — Senate Bill 91 — that would ban PFAS from firefighting foam used on the ground by firefighters. The Oregon Senate voted to pass the bill nearly unanimously in February, but a vote in the House has not yet been scheduled. Other sites to potentially test for PFAS contamination include 22 bulk fuel facilities and 93 metal plating facilities in Oregon. In 2024, the U.S. Envionmental Protection Agency added several PFAS to the federal list of regulated hazardous substances, and mandated states begin testing for them in drinking water systems. The Oregon Health Authority has identified PFAS in 35 Oregon public drinking water systems, with 24 of those exceeding the EPA's new drinking water standards for the compounds. The state has until April 2026 to adopt the federal agency's new PFAS standards and public water systems have until April 2029 to comply with those standards. DEQ's new regulations would apply to PFAS pollution in rivers, lakes, soil and groundwater but would not address potential contamination released through the air, such as when biosolids and sewage sludge containing PFAS are burned, releasing PFAS into the air, or potential PFAS contamination from those biosolids being spread on farm fields as fertilizer. Biosolids filtered from Portland's sewer and wastewater get heated and dried out in anaerobic digestors and sent to farms in eastern Oregon as fertilizer. The department doesn't test those biosolids, which likely contain PFAS. Department spokesman Antony Sparrow said the EPA is developing a risk assessment for sewage sludge that will inform future state regulations. Van Glubt said the department is working on a strategic plan that would combine the work of DEQ's air, water, biosolids and other teams, as well as work being done at other agencies, to deal with ongoing PFAS issues. 'This rule making really is just addressing one piece of the puzzle,' she said. 'There are other issues at play with PFAS that will need to be addressed.'. Oregon's hazardous substances list was last updated in 2006, when environmental regulators added methane to the list. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
17-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Lawmakers weigh bills to exclude nonstick pans, farm equipment from PFAS product ban
Using too high of heat, abrasive cleaners or other materials that cause the coating on a nonstick pan to chip can increase the risk for PFAS exposure, said Anne Sedlack with the Maine Medical Association. The Maine Legislature is taking up two proposals to carve out exceptions for the state's ban on products containing intentionally added forever chemicals. 'Cookware containing specific FDA-approved fluoropolymers should not be subject to an overly broad ban,' said Sen. Jeff Timberlake (R-Androscoggin), when introducing LD 827, which would modify the pending ban on cookware containing PFAS. The bill would not eliminate the prohibition set to take effect in January 2026, but amend it to allow for certain cookware containing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS, that are authorized for use by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration such as nonstick pans. Though critics pointed out there are plenty of PFAS-free alternatives including cast iron and stainless steel. In addition to Timberlake's bill, the Environment and Natural Resources Committee held a public hearing Monday for LD 987, which would expand an exemption to heavy machinery and other equipment used by the farming, forestry and construction industries. These products will not be subject to the state's ban until 2032 or later. Kerri Farris, who manages the Department of Environmental Protection's Safer Chemicals Program, said the language in both bills is broad and counterproductive to the legislative intent behind the product ban. Sen. Brad Farrin (R-Somerset), who introduced the farm equipment carve-out, said his bill could be amended to take a simpler approach than what's laid out in the current language. Testifying against both proposals, Farris said the department is in the process of developing rules to implement the ban, which will further clarify what products will be included. Multiple lawmakers who testified in opposition to the bills, including Sen. Henry Ingwersen (D-York), who sponsored several bills regulating the toxic chemicals as well as legislation last session that led to certain exemptions, said passing new exclusions would delay rulemaking and thus implementation of the products ban. The environment committee spent two years working on Ingwersen's bill to amend the PFAS products law. The cookware industry didn't ask for an exemption during those discussions and the farm sector showed up on the last day of a well-reported, multi-year discussion, Ingwersen said in his testimony Monday. Many people who spoke against the bills also pointed out that state law already includes a process for industries to seek permission to keep using certain products through what's called a Currently Unavoidable Use exemption. While environmental and public health advocacy groups were disapproving of the bills, organizations from the farming, forestry and cookware industries, as well as the Maine State Chamber of Commerce, testified in support. Representatives from the cookware industry argued the PFAS used in the cookware outlined in LD 827 do not pose the same public health and safety risks that perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances do. They also argued that prohibiting this sort of cookware would harm small businesses that currently sell those products. Committee co-chair Sen. Denise Tepler (D-Sagadahoc) said this argument reminded her of the tobacco industry citing worries about hurting businesses who sell products that pose a public health risk. However, the Cookware Sustainability Alliance said its argument differed because the PFAS contained in the specific cookware that would be exempt under LD 827 is different from the variations that can cause serious long-term health complications including cancer. Proponents of the bill also repeatedly pointed out that the FDA has not restricted use of this type of cookware. To this point, Tepler asked a representative from the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers if they believe the FDA is always on the cutting edge of understanding the dangers posed to consumers. Though they argued that is the role of the FDA, opponents of the bill pointed out many instances where the federal agency has allowed the use of certain products known to pose health risks, such as red dye 3 which was banned earlier this year. 'We cannot wait for the FDA,' said Rep. Lori Gramlich (D-Old Orchard Beach), who sponsored the original legislation creating the PFAS products ban law. Though the products in question may be considered safe under 'normal use' conditions, many consumers don't use them this way. Using too high of heat, abrasive cleaners or other materials that cause the nonstick coating to chip can increase the risk for PFAS exposure, said Anne Sedlack, in testimony against LD 827 on behalf of the Maine Medical Association. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
