Cease persistently dealing with perpetual chemicals, akin to whac-a-mole gameplay
In a significant stride towards environmental protection, major economies are tightening the reins on Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS), often referred to as "forever chemicals." These substances, used in various products from nonstick cookware to fire-fighting foam, have raised concerns due to their persistent nature and widespread presence in the environment.
The Nordic Council of Ministers estimates that the health-care costs associated with PFAS are at least €52 billion annually. Yet, progress in addressing PFAS contamination is described as "pitiful."
Denmark, for instance, has banned the import and sale of PFAS-treated clothing, shoes, waterproofing agents, and paper and board food packaging since 2020 and 2026, respectively. A 2023 study showed that blood concentrations of PFOS and PFOA, two chemicals already banned in Europe, have declined substantially over time in Denmark due to restrictions.
The European Union is considering a universal ban on PFAS, covering both consumer and industrial applications, with time-limited exemptions for some uses where there are no alternatives. This move is significant because under the current rate of regulation, it would take more than 40,000 years to get through all the PFAS chemicals.
Meanwhile, Australia has banned the manufacture, import, export, and use of three specific PFAS chemicals—PFOS, PFOA, and PFHxS—effective July 1, 2025. Japan has enacted a comprehensive ban on 138 PFAS chemicals effective January 10, 2025.
However, a universal global ban on all PFAS remains an aspiration rather than a reality. The PFAS chemical class is large and diverse, complicating rapid universal restriction. Individual countries and regions are taking incremental steps towards reducing PFAS risks, focusing so far mainly on the most harmful and well-studied PFAS compounds.
The European Union's REACH regulation is actively progressing towards a broad PFAS restriction, evaluating uses sector-by-sector, recently focusing on medical devices, lubricants, and transport sectors. There is rising advocacy, including from healthcare professionals, calling for a full PFAS ban—including medical applications—to address significant emission concerns.
Despite these regulatory strides, the cost of cleaning up all the related pollution in the UK and Europe could be €100 billion ($116 billion) a year if nothing is done to stem the chemicals' steady flow into the environment. The UK government has published an interim position on PFAS management, but it has been criticized for opting not to target all chemicals at once and instead creating its own groupings.
The Trump administration in the U.S. has pulled nearly $15 million in research into PFAS contamination of farmland, and the Environmental Protection Agency has announced plans to rescind drinking water limits for four forever chemicals.
Internal documents from 3M Co. and chemical firm DuPont de Nemours Inc. revealed that the companies knew the substances were accumulating in people and showing signs of toxicity for decades without telling anyone. As a result, 3M has announced it will discontinue the use of PFAS by the end of 2025, and together, the firms have had to pay billions in lawsuit settlements related to their pollution.
Lara Williams, a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering climate change, writes about the health implications of PFAS, linking them to increased risk of various types of cancer, fertility problems, birth complications, delays to puberty, weakened immune systems, increased cholesterol levels, and kidney problems.
In the Netherlands, people have been warned not to eat the eggs from their backyard chickens due to high levels of PFAS. France has banned tap water in 16 communes due to PFAS contamination, and investigative journalism located 23,000 contaminated sites across Europe and a further 21,500 sites of presumptive contamination.
As we move towards mid-2025, the battle against PFAS continues, with significant national and regional regulations being implemented or progressing towards broad restrictions. Yet, a global universal ban on all PFAS remains an aspiration, underscoring the need for continued advocacy and action.
- The rising concerns about PFAS make health-and-wellness a top priority, as these substances have been linked to increased risk of various types of cancer, fertility problems, birth complications, delays to puberty, weakened immune systems, increased cholesterol levels, and kidney problems.
- As governments worldwide implement environmental-science research to address PFAS contamination, it's crucial for the assessment of health risks to encompass a wide range of PFAS compounds, not just the most harmful and well-studied ones, to ensure the full protection of wildlife and human health.
- In a remarkable collaboration to safeguard the environment and public health, healthcare professionals are advocating for a full ban on PFAS, demanding that their use is restricted in all applications, including medical ones, to curb significant emission concerns related to these "forever chemicals."
