Understanding the Impact of PFAS
For the first time, the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety (Anses) has analyzed nearly 2 million data points related to 142 per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), also known as “forever chemicals.” But how is this research conducted, and what is its purpose? Nawel Bemrah, an expert in toxic risk assessment and prevention at Anses, provides insights into this significant work.
While PFAS pollution has only recently gained media attention, scientists, particularly those at Anses, have long been studying these chemical substances, especially those with high toxicity. Like all pollutants that tend to accumulate in ecosystems, it is crucial to address the source by limiting their emissions.
Developing Strong Environmental Policies
The research conducted by scientists leads to recommendations that aim to establish robust environmental policies. For instance, at the national level, France plans to adopt a PFAS law by February 2025, which will gradually ban certain products containing these compounds, such as cosmetics, textiles, and waxes, starting in 2026.
To achieve this, it is essential to have a comprehensive overview of PFAS presence in water, air, soil, food, consumer products, and human biosurveillance data. This is precisely what Anses has accomplished. In two expert reports, the agency lists PFAS contamination in France across various sub-compartments, including water, sediments, biota, food, indoor and outdoor air/dust, and soil. Based on this assessment, Anses recommends extending and enhancing the monitoring of these persistent chemical compounds.
Challenges in Monitoring PFAS
Nawel Bemrah explains that the reports were developed by a multidisciplinary team of 14 experts, including toxicologists, analysts, and specialists in water, food, and air environments. The team worked in sub-groups to conduct a literature review, aiming to utilize the vast amount of data in the most relevant way for each environment. For biosurveillance, they collaborated with Santé publique France to interpret data from the Esteban study and other similar studies in Europe and worldwide. Except for air environments, where data was lacking in France, they examined European data and international publications on occupational exposure to PFAS.
Anses recommends a monitoring strategy for 247 PFAS based on a “score” established for each molecule, considering available occurrence and toxicity data. Currently, some PFAS are closely monitored, such as 20 in water and 4 in food (PFOS, PFOA, PFHxS, PFNA). However, many PFAS are either poorly monitored or not monitored at all.
Current State of PFAS Pollution
Bemrah notes that it is difficult to determine whether the situation is alarming at this stage. For instance, it is not possible to say if there are more health issues in one region compared to another due to PFAS. Epidemiological studies are needed to explore this further. The report’s objective was to establish a baseline of concentration levels, and Santé publique France and regional health agencies are more involved in addressing this issue. Many municipalities are affected by PFAS water pollution and are seeking solutions to address the problem.
The search for PFAS in water is the most advanced area. Annual surveillance plans are conducted for all contaminants, including PFAS, in food. Four PFAS are regulated, and more could be added based on recommendations. Air environments have the least data, and more regular and exploratory monitoring is needed, as recommended.
Addressing Regrettable Substitutions
The world of PFAS is complex, as one PFAS can be a degradation product of several others. Anses did not study sewage sludge due to a lack of data. Despite calls for data, no information was received on sewage sludge, highlighting the need for such data acquisition.
It is crucial to reduce PFAS production, usage, and emissions into the environment. However, caution is needed to avoid regrettable substitutions, such as replacing bisphenol A with bisphenol S, which also poses problems.
Implementing Effective Surveillance
Efforts should focus on surveillance, and it is up to policymakers to determine how to implement and fund these recommendations. There is hope that risk managers will follow the recommendations and gradually implement surveillance. Generally, Anses’s recommendations are followed by the overseeing ministries.
Anses also recommends biosurveillance to understand population exposure to PFAS, particularly occupational exposure. Certain professionals, such as those working in PFAS production or usage facilities, paper mills, and firefighters, are highly exposed. Currently, there is no data available, but the National Institute for Research and Safety (INRS) is conducting a study on the subject.
Recent Findings on PFAS in Drinking Water
On December 3, Anses presented the results of a large-scale monitoring campaign conducted from 2023 to 2025 on PFAS presence in drinking water, detailed in a specific report. Over 600 samples of raw and distributed water were analyzed, twice as many as in previous campaigns. The presence of 35 per-and polyfluoroalkyl compounds was investigated. Anses observed that the concentrations of PFAS substances in most samples were below regulatory limits when applicable. However, eleven of the 20 PFAS listed in the European directive were detected in tap water, with three being more frequent: PFHxS (21.7% of distributed water samples), PFOS (19.1%), and PFHxA (16.1%). Trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) was detected in 92% of raw distributed water samples, with a median concentration of 780 ng/L.
Anses emphasizes that some PFAS detected during the measurement campaign could be included in the permanent water surveillance plan, as recommended by the expertise. This includes ultra-short-chain PFAS like TFA and conventional PFAS like 6:2 FTSA, which is more frequent among those not included in the directive.
🔗 **Source:** https://francais.medscape.com/viewarticle/il-essentiel-r%C3%A9duire-production-des-pfas-leur-2025a1000z34