Carlos de Prada is one of Spain’s leading experts on harmful compounds and author of Hogar sin Tóxicos, the book of the same name as his campaign to report a very unknown truth.
If PFAS is so harmful, why isn’t it banned?
According to the European Environment Agency, only 0.5% of the more than 100,000 synthetic substances circulating in the EU have received a more or less complete toxicity assessment. The rate at which these new substances enter the market exceeds the rate at which their risks are properly assessed and regulated. Unfortunately, pressure from some major industries is putting the EU at risk to improve existing regulations, which are currently very inadequate.
Where do we find the most toxic substances in everyday life?
PFAS is widely used. Some non-stick pans, some paper and cardboard food packaging (in some cases fast food or pizza boxes), water-repellent or stain-resistant textiles, rugs, carpets, some cosmetics or personal hygiene products. , electronics etc.
Many of these substances act as endocrine disruptors, what does that mean?
A few years ago, the Spanish Public Health Association (SESPAS) stated that endocrine disruptors such as hormones act at extremely low doses, and safe exposure thresholds for these substances cannot be scientifically determined for a number of very obvious reasons. This is well known to the scientific community, although the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) or other organizations remain ostensibly committed to setting safe thresholds.
The most harmful, it seems, is the combined effect of these substances…
Risk is often measured formally without taking into account the “cocktail effect”, but the (erroneous) assumption that we are only exposed to each substance individually. As recognized by reports such as those conducted by the WHO or the European Commission, these substances cause effects at doses much lower than those normally used in regulatory testing. And these organizations add that the current risk assessment paradigm requires a change or is out of date.
As explained, is there any chance of the EU suddenly banning thousands of these substances?
Yes, that’s historical, because up until now the trend has been to edit items one by one, and when this was finally accomplished, the industry limited itself to replacing the item with another similar item, and it eventually ceased to exist. produce similar adverse effects. existing risk [ante esta restricción masiva en curso] It is the business of industry to resist as it has traditionally done and, for example, seek exemptions for the use of some or many PFASs by claiming that their use is supposedly “necessary”.