STORY AT-A-GLANCE
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), widely used
chemicals that make products water-, oil-, grease- and
stain-resistant, are associated with significant health
hazards
PFAS chemicals take thousands of years to degrade,
which is why many refer to them as forever chemicals.
Disturbingly, these toxic chemicals have become
ubiquitous in our environment
One source of environmental contamination is PFAS-
treated food wrappers and containers. Testing reveals
all so-called biodegradable food containers contain
PFAS, making them unsuitable for composting
Using toxic nondegradable chemicals in a biodegradable
product is a tremendous oversight that has led to a PR
nightmare
Research confirms that compost in which food packaging
was included had a toxic load ranging from 28.7
micrograms per kilo to 75.9 mcg/kg. Compost samples
that did not include food packaging had a PFOA
contamination level ranging between 2.38 and 7.6 mcg/kg
------------
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances1,2 (PFAS) are
widely used chemicals that make products water-, oil-,
grease- and stain-resistant. Perfluorooctanoic acid
(PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) are
associated with a wide array of health problems even
at very low exposure levels including:
Immune dysfunction3
Low birth weight4
Thyroid dysfunction5
High cholesterol6
Ulcerative colitis7
Pregnancy-induced hypertension8
Testicular cancer9
Kidney cancer10
In May 2015, 200 scientists from 38 countries signed
the so-called Madrid Statement on PFASs,11,12 which
warns about the harms of all PFAS chemicals, both old
and new. According to the Madrid Statement, health
effects associated with the older, long-chain PFAS's
such as PFOA, include:13
Liver toxicity
Disruption of lipid metabolism, and the immune- and
endocrine systems
Adverse neurobehavioral effects
Neonatal toxicity and death
Tumors in multiple organ systems
Testicular and kidney cancers
Liver malfunction
Hypothyroidism
High cholesterol
Ulcerative colitis
Reduced birth weight and size
Obesity
Decreased immune response to vaccines
Reduced hormone levels and delayed puberty
PFAS Are 'Everywhere'
PFAS chemicals take thousands of years to degrade,
which is why many refer to them as "forever chemicals."
Disturbingly, these toxic chemicals have become
ubiquitous in our environment, including
groundwater.14,15
PFAS are also found in the U.S. food supply and at
levels far exceeding the advisory limit for PFOA and
PFAS in drinking water (there's currently no limits in
food).
Of the 91 foods tested by the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration in 2017 as part of its Total Diet
Study16 (presented17 at the 2019 meeting of the Society
of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry), 10 were
found to contain PFAS.18,19,20,21 How do they get
there?
Food Wrappers A Significant Source of PFAS
Industrial production is just one route by which PFAS
enter our environment and food supply. Another is
through everyday waste, such as fast food wrappers and
containers that end up in landfills, from where they
continue to contaminate soil and water.
Disturbingly, findings reveal that even so-called
"biodegradable" food containers contain these "forever
chemicals," which may create an even greater problem.
Thinking the containers are biodegradable and safe,
people will place them in their compost, creating a
vicious circle where the chemicals contaminate and ruin
the compost, which is then mixed into the soil, where
they contaminate the food grown in it. Ultimately, the
chemicals end up on your plate again, now inside the
food.
Research22 by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention published in 2007 found PFAS chemicals in
the blood of more than 98% of Americans tested.
Considering their current prevalence in our food
supply, it seems reasonable to assume everyone is
exposed to some degree, and that blood levels have
likely increased in the years since the CDC's testing.
Biodegradable Bowls Contain PFAS
Concerns over mounting plastic waste pushed fast food
companies to invest in safer wrappers and containers,
but recent findings reveal a truly remarkable lack of
understanding on behalf of some manufacturers. Writing
for New Food Economy, Joe Fassler reports the
disappointing news:23
"The biggest culinary star of the past five years isn't
a chef, or a restaurant group, or the author of a
cookbook. It's a bowl, a humble piece of take-out
packaging that's taken the world of commercial
foodservice by storm, rising so quickly that few have
noted its troubling secret
If molded fiber bowls have become a kind of status
symbol in the restaurant world
it's probably because
they've been positioned as an antidote to the
industry's alarming take-out waste problem.
Many varieties are explicitly pitched to food-service
buyers as compostable, certified by third-party
assessors like the Biodegradable Products Institute
(BPI). Unlike styrofoam clamshells or wax-lined soup
cups, fiber products feel like they'd turn into mush on
a leaf pile
But these products
are instead contributing to a
growing environmental crisis. According to experts
consulted for this story, all molded fiber bowls
contain PFAS
This means that the bowls used at restaurants like
Chipotle and Sweetgreen aren't truly compostable, as
has been claimed. Instead, they are likely making
compost more toxic, adding to the chemical load of the
very soil and water they were supposed to help
improve."
All Compostable Bowls Found to Contain PFAS
For its report, New Food Economy tested 18
biodegradable fiber bowls from eight restaurants at 14
locations in New York City, including Chipotle,
Sweetgreen and Dig three restaurants that claim to
compost its waste.
All were found to contain high levels of fluorine,24
which is indicative of PFAS being used. The inside
(food contact side) of the bowls averaged 1,599 parts
per million (ppm) of fluorine, a level far higher than
what you'd find in an accidentally contaminated sample.
Now, the test used only measures total fluorine, not
individual PFAS chemicals, and the total level of any
given PFAS is likely to be higher than the total
fluorine level. Fassler explains:25
"
[A] bowl containing 1,670 ppm fluorine will contain
more total PFAS, since every molecule of the chemical
compound contains multiple atoms not just of
fluorine, but of carbon, and other elements.
Though it's impossible to say for sure due to the wide
variety of PFAS chemicals
according to a rough
calculation, a bowl with 1,670 ppm fluorine would
likely contain about 2,000 ppm total PFAS.
Put another way: A bowl with 2,000 ppm total PFAS might
be mostly made from sugarcane fiber, but 0.2 percent of
its total material would be made from fluorinated
chemicals
That might not sound like very much. But due to the
unique properties of fluorinated chemicals, it turns
out to be a significant number, and an alarming one.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
maintain that drinking water can only contain
infinitesimal amounts of fluorinated chemicals before
health concerns arise."
Do Not Compost 'Biodegradable' Bowls
Research26,27 published in 2017 found fluorine in 46%
of the fast food wrappers and takeout containers
tested, and studies28,29,30 have confirmed fluorinated
chemicals can migrate from the packaging into the food.
If it's true that 100% of so-called "biodegradable"
fiber bowls contain PFAS, then they would actually be a
far more hazardous choice than other "standard"
wrappers and containers at least as far as PFAS
exposure is concerned. As noted by Fassler, it is the
surface treatment with PFAS that prevents the fiber
bowls from falling apart when filled with hot, wet or
greasy food.
Using toxic nondegradable chemicals in a biodegradable
product is a tremendous oversight. Clearly, restaurants
should not advertise these containers as compostable,
yet many do just that. It's not surprising then that
the revelation has become a PR nightmare. As noted by
Fassler:31
"
[A]ny product that contains PFAS can't really be
compostable, let alone biodegradable, despite
restaurants' claims to the contrary. Though fiber
products have benefits from a greenhouse gas emissions
standpoint, the bowls we tested are likely making soil
and water quality worse."
Indeed, recent research confirms this warning. Tipped
off about the presence of PFAS in compostable
containers, the authors of a 2019 paper32,33 decided to
assess the presence of these chemicals in municipal
compost. In all, samples from nine commercial compost
stations and one backyard compost pile were tested for
17 different PFAS.
Confirming suspicions, compost in which food packaging
was included had a toxic load ranging from 28.7
micrograms per kilo to 75.9 mcg/kg. Compost samples
that did not include food packaging, on the other hand,
had a contamination level ranging between just 2.38 and
7.6 mcg/kg.
While it's disturbing that all compost samples
contained PFOA and PFOS the older, long-chained PFAS
that are no longer in use compost with food packaging
was clearly more heavily contaminated with a variety of
PFAS. If there's any good news here, it's that some
states are starting to take action against PFAS.
As noted by Fassler,34 San Francisco is banning bowls
manufactured with PFAS as of January 1, 2020, and
Washington's Healthy Food Packaging Act35 enacted in
2018 bans all PFAS in paper food packaging, effective
2022.36 A drawback of the Act is that the ban will not
take effect until or unless a safer alternative is
commercially available.
Sewage Sludge A Major Source of PFAS on Farms
As reported by The Intercept37 in June 2019, sewage
sludge appears to be a major source of PFAS.
Documents38 obtained by The Intercept reveal 44 samples
of sewage sludge tested by the Maine Department of
Environmental Protection all contained at least one
PFAS chemical, and "In all but two of the samples, the
chemicals exceeded safety thresholds for sludge that
Maine set early last year."
Maine's tolerance levels for PFAS are set at 2.5 parts
per billion (ppb) for PFOA, 5.2 ppb for PFOS, and 1,900
ppb for PFBS. Mike Belliveau, executive director of the
Environmental Health Strategy Center in Portland, told
The Intercept these levels are "probably about 10 times
weaker than they should be," adding that "Even low
parts-per-billion levels of PFAS in sludge can threaten
the health of the food supply."
You can learn more about the hazards of sewage sludge
in the featured documentary, "Biosludged,"39 and the
scientific fraud perpetrated by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency that legalizes the pollution of
agricultural soils through the usage of contaminated
industrial and human waste as fertilizer.
DuPont Shirks Cleanup Duty
In related news, DuPont, a longtime maker of PFAS
chemicals stands accused of creating a fraudulent
spinoff, Chemours, in an effort to shirk environmental
liabilities caused by its chemical manufacturing.
(Chemours is the name of the spinoff company created
through DuPont's merger with Dow Chemical Inc. in
2015.40) Chemours lawyers told Bloomberg:41
"The separation agreement was the product of a one-
sided process that lacked any of the hallmarks of
arm's-length bargaining. DuPont unilaterally dictated
the terms of the separation agreement and imposed them
on Chemours."
One of DuPont's environmental liabilities is the
cleanup of Pompton Lakes in New Jersey. As reported by
NorthJersey.com July 15, 2019:42
"The new claims by the state attorney general's office
were quietly added as amendments to a lawsuit filed
against DuPont and Chemours seeking financial damages
for widespread pollution in Pompton Lakes.
This includes a neighborhood where residents have had
to endure cancer-causing solvents that migrated for
decades beneath their homes from a now-shuttered DuPont
explosives factory.
Like dozens of sites across the U.S., the cleanup in
Pompton Lakes had long been DuPont's responsibility.
That changed in July 2015, when DuPont created Chemours
as a spinoff company that took over the bulk of the
DuPont's environmental liabilities.
But two separate lawsuits against DuPont one by New
Jersey officials and another by Chemours itself
allege what many in Pompton Lakes feared at the time of
the spinoff:
DuPont created Chemours to insulate itself from future
cleanup and natural resource damage claims, and left
Chemours vulnerable to financial problems that could
put cleanup efforts at risk in New Jersey and across
the country."
Indeed, Chemours' lawsuit against DuPont claims DuPont
set up the company to fail from the start, allowing
DuPont to simply walk away from all of its cleanup
responsibilities.
Chemours is now asking the court to deny DuPont's
request for unlimited indemnity for its environmental
liabilities.43 (Chemours, meanwhile, claims it has now
stopped making three PFAS products used in the making
of grease-resistant packaging.44)
North Jersey reports that, according to Chemours, the
company received only 19% of DuPont's business lines at
the company's inception, while taking on two-thirds of
the environmental liabilities and 90% of all pending
litigation against DuPont.
In all, Chemours liabilities exceeded earnings by 5.5-
to-1 right from the get-go, yet its management team was
not fully informed about the company's financial
situation. Chemours also claims DuPont systematically
underestimated the legal and environmental cleanup
costs.
"For instance, DuPont estimated that three lawsuits
against it over contamination from the toxic chemical
PFOA would cost no more than $128 million. They were
settled by Chemours for $671 million less than two
years later," North Jersey reports.45
Lawmakers Promise to Pursue Corporate Accountability
As attention on PFAS pollution increases, PFAS
manufacturers such as DuPont and 3M are ramping up
lobbying efforts to prevent tighter regulations.
Several recent hearings46,47,48 have been held on PFAS,
however, and Democratic lawmakers have promised to
"continue pursuing corporate accountability," Think
Progress reports.49 As noted by the Union of Concerned
Scientists in a May 15, 2019, press release:50
"Today, the Energy and Commerce Committee of the U.S.
House of Representatives held a hearing on
perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), a
widely-used family of chemicals that contaminate the
drinking water of millions of Americans.
Representatives also introduced a number of bills to
manage the threat of PFAS pollution, including
legislation that would require the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency to designate PFAS as hazardous
chemicals, as well as bills to expand water testing,
improve water infrastructure, assist communities facing
PFAS contamination issues and limit the use of these
chemicals in the future. This effort to tackle a common
and dangerous class of pollutant is long overdue
"
Certain states are also taking matters into their own
hands. Michigan, for example, where PFAS is a common
water contaminant, says it's planning to start
regulating certain PFAS to protect residents rather
than waiting for the EPA to take action.51
The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
also has its sights on corporate accountability.
Commissioner Catherine McCabe told Think Progress,52
"New Jersey believes that the manufacturers
should be
held responsible to the public for the costs and
damages of the drinking water contamination and other
harmful consequences of their actions and negligence."
How to Avoid PFAS Chemicals
The Madrid Statement recommends avoiding any and all
products manufactured using PFASs, noting they include
products that are stain-resistant, waterproof or
nonstick. Helpful tips can also be found in the EWG's
"Guide to Avoiding PFCS."53 Other suggestions that will
help you avoid these dangerous chemicals include
avoiding:
Items that have been pretreated with stain repellants,
and opt out of such treatments when buying new
furniture and carpets
Water- and/or stain-repellant clothing One tipoff is
when an item made with artificial fibers is described
as "breathable." These are typically treated with
polytetrafluoroethylene, a synthetic fluoropolymer
Items treated with flame retardant chemicals54 This
includes a wide variety of baby items, padded
furniture, mattresses and pillows. Instead, opt for
naturally less flammable materials such as leather,
wool and cotton
Fast food and carry out foods The wrappers are
typically treated with PFCs
Microwave popcorn PFCs may not only present in the
inner coating of the bag, it also may migrate to the
oil from the packaging during heating. Instead, use
"old-fashioned" stovetop popcorn
Nonstick cookware and other treated kitchen utensils
Healthier options include ceramic and enameled cast
iron cookware, both of which are durable, easy to clean
and completely inert, which means they won't release
any harmful chemicals into your home.
A newer type of nonstick cookware called Duralon uses a
nonfluoridated nylon polymer for its nonstick coating.
While this appears to be safe, your safest bet is still
ceramic and enameled cast iron.
While some recommend using aluminum, stainless steel
and copper cookware, I don't for the following reasons:
Aluminum is a strongly suspected causal factor in
Alzheimer's disease, and stainless steel has alloys
containing nickel, chromium, molybdenum and carbon.
For those with nickel allergies, this may be a
particularly important consideration. Copper cookware
is also not recommended because most copper pans come
lined with other metals, creating the same concerns
noted above. (Copper cookware must be lined due to the
possibility of copper poisoning)
Oral-B Glide floss and any other personal care products
containing PTFE or "fluoro" or "perfluoro" ingredients
The EWG has an excellent database called Skin Deep55
you can peruse to find healthier options
Unfiltered tap water Unfortunately, your choices are
limited when it comes to avoiding PFASs in drinking
water. Either you must filter your water or obtain
water from a clean source. Both solutions can be
problematic and/or costly.
While many opt for bottled water, it's important to
realize that PFASs are not regulated in bottled water,
so there's absolutely no guarantee that it'll be free
of these or other chemicals. Bottled water also
increases your risk of exposure to hazardous plastic
chemicals such as bisphenol-A, which has its own set of
health risks.
Most common water filters available in supermarkets
will not remove PFASs. You really need a high-quality
carbon filtration system. The New Jersey Drinking Water
Quality Institute recommends using granulated activated
carbon "or an equally efficient technology" to remove
PFC chemicals such as PFOA and PFOS from your drinking
water.56 Activated carbon has been shown to remove
about 90% of these chemicals
+ Sources and References
|
|