We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Strategies for grouping per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) to protect human and environmental health
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers reviewed various strategies for grouping the more than 4,700 per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) on the global market to inform regulatory and risk assessment actions. The most precautionary approach suggests restricting all PFAS based on their extreme environmental persistence alone, while the least precautionary requires detailed toxicological data for grouping. The study highlights that no single grouping strategy will be universally accepted, and the appropriate approach depends on the regulatory purpose.
Grouping strategies are needed for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), in part, because it would be time and resource intensive to test and evaluate the more than 4700 PFAS on the global market on a chemical-by-chemical basis. In this paper we review various grouping strategies that could be used to inform actions on these chemicals and outline the motivations, advantages and disadvantages for each. Grouping strategies are subdivided into (1) those based on the intrinsic properties of the PFAS (e.g. persistence, bioaccumulation potential, toxicity, mobility, molecular size) and (2) those that inform risk assessment through estimation of cumulative exposure and/or effects. The most precautionary grouping approach of those reviewed within this article suggests phasing out PFAS based on their high persistence alone (the so-called "P-sufficient" approach). The least precautionary grouping approach reviewed advocates only grouping PFAS for risk assessment that have the same toxicological effects, modes and mechanisms of action, and elimination kinetics, which would need to be well documented across different PFAS. It is recognised that, given jurisdictional differences in chemical assessment philosophies and methodologies, no one strategy will be generally acceptable. The guiding question we apply to the reviewed grouping strategies is: grouping for what purpose? The motivation behind the grouping (e.g. determining use in products vs. setting guideline levels for contaminated environments) may lead to different grouping decisions. This assessment provides the necessary context for grouping strategies such that they can be adopted as they are, or built on further, to protect human and environmental health from potential PFAS-related effects.
More Papers Like This
The high persistence of PFAS is sufficient for their management as a chemical class
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers argue that the extreme environmental persistence of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) is reason enough to regulate them as a single chemical class and phase out all non-essential uses. Because PFAS contain perfluoroalkyl groups that resist virtually all forms of environmental and biological breakdown, their continued release leads to irreversibly increasing concentrations in the environment. The study warns that once harmful effects are confirmed, reversing PFAS contamination will be extremely difficult and costly for society.
What Do We Know About Per- or Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs)? Issues, Challenges, Regulations, and Possible Alternatives
AI summary Read the abstract
This review distinguishes between low-molecular-weight PFAS compounds, which are toxic, mobile, and bioaccumulative, and high-molecular-weight fluoropolymers classified as low-concern, while surveying the evolving regulatory landscape in Europe and the US and exploring potential alternatives as restrictions tighten globally.
Why Aim Toward a PFAS-free Future?
AI summary Read the abstract
This paper is not about microplastics — it reviews the environmental persistence, toxicity, and regulatory challenges associated with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), the so-called 'forever chemicals,' and argues for transitioning industry toward safer substitutes using green chemistry principles.
Regulation and remediation of 'forever' chemicals
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers summarized ongoing regulatory debates around per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), commonly called 'forever chemicals,' examining different policy approaches to managing the environmental persistence and health risks of these compounds that resist degradation in natural environments.
The High Persistence of PFAS is Sufficient for their Management as a Chemical Class
AI summary Read the abstract
This perspective argues that the extreme environmental persistence of all per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) — stemming from their resistant perfluoroalkyl moieties — is alone sufficient justification to phase out all non-essential uses of the entire chemical class. The authors warn that continued PFAS release leads to irreversible accumulation, and that remediation of contaminated land and drinking water is already proving technically challenging and costly.
Research digests by email
When a large batch of papers lands in the Atlas, we read through it and send a short write-up of what stood out.