popular belief “chemistry is invading us” and also poisoning us, often remains a simple but disturbing suspicion for the majority of the population. And yet science not only confirms these fears, but also shows that the situation is worse than we thought. Thousands of different substances, utensils, objects, food and all kinds of everyday items are silently hidden, driven by the powerful chemical industry.. From there, they pass into our bodies and impair our health.
This PFAS They are not as well known as they are harmful. These are English abbreviations for compounds known as Perfluorinated and Polyfluorinated Substances, compounds already known as “”.endless pollutants(chemicals forever, in English), given its practically indestructible nature. Moreover, the problem is that these are not a dozen or two substances, they form a family of at least 4,700 compounds, and according to experts, many are marketed without time for rigorous evaluation. organizations. .
Toys, cosmetics, raincoats, non-stick pans, pesticides, plastics, paints, personal hygiene products and long and so on. The amount of chemicals in circulation is so great that the industry develops a new one every 1.4 seconds, so it is nearly impossible for the European Union’s regulatory agencies to test or even monitor such a flood of chemicals. It is estimated that between 100,000 and 200,000 chemicals are used in the EU and a high percentage can be hazardous.
In the same year, a report from the Environmental Working Group (EWG) was published, showing for the first time the global scope of PFAS. In short, the problem is bigger than you think.
The industry develops a new chemical compound every 1.4 seconds, making it nearly impossible for EU regulators to keep track of them.
According to the study, these eternal pollutants are found in at least 17,000 regions of the European Union, of which more than 2,000 are classified as dangerous to human health. However, the most serious thing is that the pollution in question spreads beyond these places. «Only heavily soiled spots should not attract our attention, because These are substances that can actually be found in everyday environments, commonly used products and articles, or that reach us, for example, through food.» points out that Carlos de Prada, expert and manager of the Hogar sin Tóxicos campaign, specializes in the fight against this type of pollution.
In the blood of European youth
Therefore, these compounds reach human blood. The aforementioned study evaluated the extent to which these PFAS concentrations reach the blood of EU residents. An analysis of adolescents from EU countries, In some countries, such as France, at least 23.78% of the youth analyzed had a PFAS concentration in their blood above safe levels.. This rate was 23% in Sweden, 18% in Germany and 17% in Norway and Belgium. Spain has a lower rate of 1.34%, but it is no less worrying because it means that more than one in 100 young people have more PFAS in their blood than they should. However, the study evaluated only four of the thousands of PFASs available.
In reality, “most people carry a mixture of chemicals in their blood”says study.
So what are the effects on human health? EWG report reveals exposure to multiple PFASs can cause developmental disorders, cardiovascular diseases and various types of cancer. But in addition, how the combination of all these substances affects has not yet been seriously studied.
A UN report published a year ago now concludes: Chemical contamination could cause more deaths than Covid-19 itself. Its authors called for “urgent and ambitious action” to ban certain toxic substances.
questioned security
The problem, according to Carlos de Prada, was that the EU has so far restricted items one by one, but quickly. industry manages to replace them with similar ones, thus rendering the existing control system ineffective.
Regardless, even when one of these compounds is considered ‘safe’, it may be discovered after a few years that it is not safe. An example is bisphenol A, which isn’t exactly a PFAS but acts similarly. European authorities confirm that, after decades of use, the maximum safety concentration is 100,000 times lower than what has been in effect since 2015 and 1,250,000 times lower than that set before that year.
Instead of restricting these substances one by one, the EU wants to ban hundreds or even thousands of them at once, which is not possible at all.
But things can change. In April 2022, the European Environment Agency (EEA) decided to reduce its losses and carry out the so-called “major detoxification” process.. Spaniard Tatiana Santos, responsible for the field of chemicals at the European Environment Office (EBB), said that the European Commission has opened a “new chapter” on this issue. What will it consist of?
Basically, the simultaneous banning of hundreds or even thousands of these substances., something completely ineffective, rather than restricting them one by one. This ban may be on the verge of being implemented by the European Commission after five countries (Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Norway and Sweden) submit a joint proposal on this issue.
The proposal was submitted to the competent body, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) in early January, and experts from that organization are scheduled to conduct the first assessments this March. Again, the process is long and can take more than a year. It could be “the largest ever ban on toxic chemicals,” says the European Environment Office.
…….
REPORT. Charles de Prada. Director of Hogar sin Toxicos
Carlos de Prada is one of Spain’s leading experts on harmful compounds and author of the book ‘Hogar sin Tóxicos’ of the same name as his campaign to report a very unknown truth.
“Many of the compounds are not well evaluated”
-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 speed with which these new substances enter the market exceeds the speed 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 are endocrine disruptors, what does that mean?
– A few years ago, the Spanish Public Health Association (SESPAS) said that endocrine disruptors such as hormones act at extremely low doses, and safe thresholds for exposure to these substances cannot be determined scientifically 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 combined effect of these substances is apparently the most harmful…
-Risk is often measured formally without taking into account the ‘cocktail effect’, but instead taking into account the (erroneous) assumption that we are only exposing ourselves 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.
-Is there a chance that the EU will suddenly ban thousands of these substances as announced?
-Yes. This is historical because until now the trend has been to arrange items one at a time, and when this was eventually achieved, the industry limited itself to replacing the item with a similar item and produced similar items over time. negative 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”.
…….
Contact address of the environment department: [email protected]