Rain jackets, shampoo, meat, and cookware might wear out and go away, but they might never leave you. Perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are integrated into almost every aspect of daily life. Given their strong carbon-fluorine chemical bonds, PFAS take an extremely long time to break down, lingering in the environment and the human body, and thus coined “Forever Chemicals.” These persisting forever chemicals can be found in water and soil, especially near waste sites as they enter the environment through production or waste streams.

Although their water-repellent properties make PFAS a commonly used component in nonstick and waterproof coatings on many products we use everyday, forever chemicals pose a health risk to those exposed. The United States Environmental Protection Agency says risks associated with the chemicals include those to infant development as well hormonal interference and weakening of the body’s immune system. Long-term exposure increases the likelihood of harmful health effects. With the widespread production and use of forever chemicals, PFAS was found in the blood of 97% of Americans by 2015, according to a report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The pervasive use of PFAS in manufacturing enables the chemicals to seep into the soil, water, and air, causing greater exposure through PFAS-contaminated products. Water quality has been an area of major concern, prompting the Biden-Harris Administration and EPA to limit PFAS exposure in drinking water to reduce associated risks. A $1 billion investment as part of President Biden’s Investing in America agenda aims to protect communities by securing clean water for people across the country, the EPA said in April.
In addition to this funding, the EPA announced the National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) for six PFAS. This regulation sets a national drinking water standard by requiring public water systems to monitor the PFAS levels, while also providing the public with relevant information affecting drinking water beginning in 2027. In 2029, public water systems are obliged to take action and notify the public if PFAS levels exceed the maximum contaminant levels. By carrying out plans to combat PFAS pollution, public water systems will reduce exposure to PFAS in drinking water.

“I think current policies are moving in the right direction, but are still not entirely mitigating PFAS exposure,” Dr. Stephanie Eick, an environmental and reproductive epidemiologist and assistant professor at Emory University’s Rollins School of Public Health, told Sampan. “For example, EPA (establishing) legally enforceable levels for six PFAS in drinking water … is a great first step and definitely moving in the right direction, but I think there can still be other PFAS that are harmful to health and have been detected in drinking water, particularly those that were phased in as industry phased out perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonate.”

Locally, all the communities served by the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) are below the state and federal maximum standards of PFAS in drinking water, said Jennifer Pederson, executive director at MWRA. Boston’s source of drinking water comes from MWRA’s Quabbin and Wachusetts Reservoirs, which show PFAS levels too low to be quantified. MWRA continues to conduct monthly water quality tests, maintaining a low contaminant level to meet state and federal requirements.

Pederson added, “Probably more of a concern in that area is older homes which may have lead service lines.” Older homes, typically those built before 1940, can be a source of lead exposure, a chemical also known to be difficult to biodegrade and contribute to water contamination.

In an effort to encourage a lead-free community, the Boston Water and Sewer Commission (BWSC) started offering private lead service line replacement at no cost to property owners in August of 2023.
“Boston’s ahead of the curve. The community as a whole is set to have an inventory by October 16,” noted Pederson. EPA had introduced a requirement for this inventory in the Revised Lead and Copper Rule set in 2021.

Although the effects of PFAS on water quality are drawing attention since the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) requires public water systems to test all new sources of drinking water, contamination can also come from oil-resistant food packaging.

“PFAS are more widespread, [and there is] a lack of addressing around other areas of exposure, such as food packing, treated clothing, treated carpet,” Pederson emphasized.

In February, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration released a press announcement, noting that “grease-proofing materials containing PFAS are no longer being sold for use in food packaging in the U.S… [eliminating] the major source of dietary exposure to PFAS from food packaging.”

PFAS in pesticide formulations and containers can also put farm workers at a higher risk of contamination. In a recent study from July, the Environmental Working Group (EWG) had found PFAS in 14 percent of all U.S. pesticide active ingredients. Forms of pest control, whether applied to crops or used in pet flea treatments and insect-killing sprays at homes, PFAS find ways to transport across surfaces, accumulating in the environment that can eventually cross the skin barrier and travel to the bloodstream.

Disposal of cleaning chemicals, waste, and many other household products serve as a direct link between PFAS in houses to sewage systems. At sewage treatment plants, PFAS are not broken down and can remain in fertilizers sold to farmers.

The effects of forever chemicals can be especially harmful to poorer communities, increasing health risks on those without proper filtration and resources.

“I think socioeconomic factors influence who is most exposed to PFAS,” Dr. Eick pointed out, noting drinking water is particularly a problem. “Additionally, some of my research has also shown that those who experience stress and are of lower socioeconomic status are more susceptive to health problems associated with PFAS exposure compared to those who experience fewer stressors.”

Scientists around the world have been developing innovative methods to successfully break down PFAS, finding ways to effectively break chemical bonds.

A scientific method tested by scientists at Ritsumeikan University in Japan focused on breaking down PFAS under more efficient temperature conditions.

The test exposed a solution consisting of PFAS chemicals to LED lights, removing fluorine ions from the carbon-fluorine bonds that make up PFAS, which can be recovered and reused. The tests were met with 100% and 81% success rates when using two different types of PFAS—perfluorooctanesulfonate and Nafion respectively. This method was successfully conducted under 38 °C conditions, a noticeable difference from the usual required temperature of 500 °C to break the bonds.

Another method conducted by researchers at the University of Bath used 3D printing to create monoliths and remove PFAS from water. So far, the testing has achieved a 75% success rate in PFAS removal.
A convenient solution to remove microplastics in drinking water at home is as simple as boiling water. Researchers from Guangzhou Medical University and Jinan University in China found that boiling water can remove up to 90 percent of nanoplastics and microplastics. This quick filtration practice is an effective strategy to decontaminate drinking water in households.

Exposure to forever chemicals puts everyone at risk. National and local governments are continuing to refine policies targeting PFAS reduction. Community organizations, such as PFAS Hub and PFAS-Reach, have been compiling relevant information and support resources for the public.

“I think advocacy is very important. Community organizations and local governments can play a really important role in advocating for policy changes and stricter regulations that could help mitigate PFAS exposure in sources such as drinking water,” Dr. Eick said, “I also think these types of organizations can also help to inform vulnerable populations about the health effects of PFAS and provide them with information on actions they could take to help reduce their PFAS exposures (e.g., through eating less processed foods, eating less red meat, cooking with cast iron or stainless stain as opposed to non-stick pans).”