PFAS: INDEPENDENT SCIENTISTS DENOUNCE ATTEMPTS TO CHANGE THE DEFINITION OF ETERNAL POLLUTANTS

3 comments

1. [PFAS : des scientifiques indépendants dénoncent des manœuvres pour modifier la définition des polluants éternels](https://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2025/06/10/polluants-eternels-des-scientifiques-independants-denoncent-des-man-uvres-pour-modifier-la-definition-des-pfas_6611932_3244.html) [*PFAS: independent scientists denounce attempts to change the definition of eternal pollutants*, article in Le Monde, by Stéphane Horel, published on 10 June, Paywall]

   [Des scientifiques liés à l’industrie tentent de modifier la définition des PFAS](https://reporterre.net/Des-scientifiques-lies-a-l-industrie-tentent-de-modifier-la-definition-des-PFAS) [“*Scientists linked to industry are trying to change the definition of PFASs*”, brief news from Reporterre, independent French media, published on 10 June, free access].

   *”IUPAC has set up a “terminology and classification” working group to redefine the PFAS. [The above-mentioned article in Le Monde] points out that some of the group’s experts are working with manufacturers of eternal pollutants, without any declaration of interest on the Iupac website.*

   *This is the case of its co-chair, Pierangelo Metrangolo, who is also a member of the management committee of the joint research platform of the Politecnico di Milano and the polymers branch of Solvay, one of the main producers of eternal pollutants. The Italian researcher has written an article asserting that the OECD definition is the subject of scientific controversy, which the PFAS experts deny.*

   *He and his colleagues want to determine PFASs according to criteria other than their molecular structure alone, such as their mechanisms of action, their physicochemical properties, their toxicity profiles, and also their economic implications. This would exclude from current regulations eternal pollutants such as fluoropolymers, present in rainwear and responsible for 80% of PFAS contamination of the environment”.*

   **#pfas**

2. Here is a LinkedIn post by one of the independant whistleblowing scientists : [https://www.linkedin.com/posts/gabriel-sigmund-%F0%9F%9F%A5-71a812156_scientists-statement-on-the-chemical-definition-activity-7338213476756090881-yHaE?utm_source=social_share_send&utm_medium=member_desktop_web&rcm=ACoAABK7wYwB8TQ02i1eIMhS238cNtYSxZYaGfE](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/gabriel-sigmund-%F0%9F%9F%A5-71a812156_scientists-statement-on-the-chemical-definition-activity-7338213476756090881-yHaE?utm_source=social_share_send&utm_medium=member_desktop_web&rcm=ACoAABK7wYwB8TQ02i1eIMhS238cNtYSxZYaGfE)

   Sooo..

   * *some individuals and organizations want to re-define PFAS within IUPAC. BUT the existing OECD 2021 definition is unambiguous, clear and effective at identifying PFASs.*
   * *There is no evidence to indicate that the OECD definition is flawed or problematic, and hence, there is no need for a new PFAS definition.*
   * *To claim otherwise and/or to inlcude non chemical aspects such as bioaccumulation potential or toxicity is misleading and not driven by any flaw in the chemcial definition, but more likely motivated by economic or political interests. Such claims are also a delay tactic against action on this pressing issue, as it would be close to impossible to generate reliable data on such aspects for the thousands of PFASs that exist.*
   * *(…)*
   * *Read our statement published in ES&T Letters here:* [Scientists’ Statement on the Chemical Definition of PFASs | Environmental Science & Technology Letters](https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.estlett.5c00478)
   * *If you want to support this initiative, the International Panel on Chemical Pollution (IPCP) is hosting a sign-on campaign:* [Sign-on campaign: Scientists’ statement on the chemical definition of PFASs | IPCP](https://www.ipcp.ch/news/sign-on-campaign-scientists-statement-on-the-chemical-definition-of-pfass)

3. If proponents of these things are so assured of their safety, I’m sure they’re happy to dunk themselves in a tub of the stuff and mix PFAS into their food and beverages.

Comments are closed.