By Patricia Houser
For Nature’s Sake
Patricia Houser
Per and polyfluoroalkyl substances, commonly known as PFAS, is a group of manufactured chemicals (there are more than 9,000 PFAS according to the Environmental Protection Agency), several of which have been found to pose significant threats to human health. This issue affects air, water and soil quality as well as human health.
Consider some PFAS basics: nearly all Americans have been exposed to dangerous versions of PFAS at various times in their life, including before they were born. In fact, according to a study from the Centers for Disease Control, PFAS can be found in the blood of 97 percent of Americans.
This ghoulish experiment in human chemistry has happened for several reasons. PFAS, while widely produced and allowed into the marketplace, have been under-regulated and insufficiently vetted for safety for more than half a century. PFAS have attractive properties (waterproof and grease resistance) that have led to widespread use in a variety of consumer products and industries. They don’t degrade easily (they’re sometimes called “forever chemicals” for that reason). And because of their pervasive use and persistence, they now can be found in air, water, soil, fish and wildlife as well as our homes.
But how can we avoid exposure to PFAS? What are the risks, and what are governments doing about the problem? The quiz and answers that follow offer further explanations.
- Which of the following categories of consumer products can be sources of human exposure to PFAS?
a) Nonstick cookware
b) Stain-proof rugs and furniture
c) Waterproof and stain resistant clothing
d) Microwave popcorn bags
e) Take-out food containers and wrappers
f) Dental floss
g) All of the above - Which one of the following problems has not been linked to PFAS?
a) Certain types of cancer
b) Thyroid disease
c) High cholesterol
d) Bone spurs
e) Immunosuppression
f) Reduced fertility and birth weight - True or false: All take-out food packaging contains PFAS.
- True or false: The federal government currently does not set enforceable limits on PFAS in public water supplies.
- Of the following states that have decided to create their own rules about PFAS in drinking water, which has the strictest standard?
a) New York
b) New Hampshire
c) Massachusetts
d) Vermont
e) Connecticut
The answer to question one is “all of the above.” These sources of PFAS exposure, and more, can be found on the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection and federal CDC websites. PFAS, which among other things is a common ingredient in waterproofing (including Gore-Tex) and stain resistant treatments, not only coat the carpets and clothing with which they are treated – they also enter the air of the places where these items are sold and used. A Sept. 1 article in the Providence Journal cites a University of Rhode Island study that found high concentrations of PFAS in the air of outdoor clothing stores but also kindergarten classrooms with stain resistant carpets and, highest of all, carpet stores.
While not all brands of dental floss contain PFAS (stores do carry PFAS-free dental floss), a study of middle-aged women and PFAS exposure related in a 2019 issue of the Journal of Environmental Exposure & Environmental Epidemiology found that flossing with Oral-B Glide, for instance, was associated with 24.9 percent higher blood levels of a particular PFAS chemical.
In question two, the only health risk not associated with PFAS in human blood of those listed here is bone spurs. The links with cancer, endocrine and immune system problems and more are well-documented and cited by public health resources including the National Cancer Institute, the CDC, and the Connecticut Department of Public Health.
Statement three is false. However, research shows this is still a significant source of human exposure and water contamination (when these materials accumulate in landfills). For instance, a 2017 study by the Silent Spring Institute found grease-proof PFAS coatings on 46 percent of food-contact papers (such as hamburger wrappers) and 20 percent of paperboard samples (including French fry boxes) from samples around the country.
Happily, for Connecticut residents, Gov. Ned Lamont signed a law this past July to ban PFAS in food packaging, effective in 2023. As of October of this year, there are seven states that have banned PFAS in food packaging: California, Connecticut, Maine, Minnesota, New York, Vermont and Washington.
Statement four is true. The federal government currently offers an advisory guideline of 70 parts per trillion for water supplies, but that is not the same as an outright restriction. Meanwhile, a Harvard University study has suggested a better number to ensure “safe” levels of PFAS would be only one part per trillion.
In the absence of current federally enforceable limits on PFAS in water, several states across the country have stepped in to better protect their public water supplies. Of those listed in question five, New York now has the strictest standard for PFAS, with an enforceable limit (more than an advisory) of 10 parts per trillion for two PFAS chemicals.
Much of what governments are doing now to protect the public amounts to damage control for a situation that must ultimately be addressed by banning the manufacture and sale of the most dangerous forms of PFAS. While consumers can switch out their old dental floss, Teflon pans and rain jackets for safer models, we all, for our health and the sake of future generations, should support state and federal representatives (from both parties) who are leading efforts to shut off the stream of these chemicals at their source and require safe replacements.
Patricia Houser, PhD, AICP, shares her exploration of local and regional environmental issues in this column as a member of the nonpartisan Milford Environmental Concerns Coalition.