Chapter 3: PFCs
In 1935 Dupont adopted a new advertising slogan, “Better Things for Better Living . . . Through Chemistry,” which heralded a new age of chemical invention and production. One of the best-known products introduced by Dupont in the 1950s is Teflon®, a non-stick coating for cookware, made with a chemical of remarkable persistence known as perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). Around the same time, another well-known chemical company, 3M, introduced the popular product Scotchgard®, a water and grease repellant for clothing and textiles that relies on a similar chemical known as perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS). PFOA and PFOS are part of a family of PFC chemicals that are used in protective coatings of all sorts—paper wraps, containers for food, fire-fighting foams, pesticides, textiles including clothing, upholstery, carpets, and personal care products.
While it had been known since the 1960s that PFCs build up in the bodies of workers at Teflon® and Scotchgard® production facilities, by 2000 scientists had found PFCs almost everywhere – in soil, water, sediment, animals, food, people, and even newborn babies. These chemicals are extremely persistent. Even if production were to end today, levels of the breakdown product PFOA would continue to increase in the environment for many years to come. 3M has disclosed that “perfluorinated compounds are extremely resistant to biodegradation.”47
PFOA is particularly resistant to the breakdown process. It has been found not to degrade in the environment at all, even when boiled in nitric acid for a hour.48 Once in a human body, PFCs remain in the body for many years. The half-life (time required for half the amount of a chemical to be eliminated from the body) of PFOA in our bodies is estimated to be more than four years,49 and the half life of PFOS in our bodies is estimated to be over eight years.50 When other PFCs break down they turn into the non-biodegradable PFOA, adding to the environmental burden of these chemicals.
PFCs are detectable in the blood of most humans and animals worldwide. Studies done by 3M have found PFOA and 14 other PFCs in the bodies of the general population, especially in children.51 A 2001 3M study found PFOA in 96% of children tested in 23 states and the District of Columbia.52 Researchers at Johns Hopkins University found PFOA in 100% and PFOS in 99% of 297 serum samples collected in 2004 and 2005 from umbilical cords of newborn babies.53
It is believed that we are most likely exposed to PFCs through contaminated water and food, including fish,54 and by breathing contaminated air.55 When Teflon® pans are heated to high temperatures, such as during cooking or when discarded products are burned in incinerators, toxic PFC-containing gases are produced. Grease-resistant food packaging and paper products, such as microwave popcorn bags and pizza boxes, also contain PFCs. PFCs build up in our bloodstream and liver, umbilical cord blood, and breast milk.
PFCs in Oregonians
All ten of the Oregon participants were found to have PFCs in their blood. We found six different perfluorinated chemicals of the 13 PFCs that we tested. PFOS and PFOA were detected in every participant. See Table 2 in the appendix for the complete results.
PFOS, which was detected in all ten Oregonians, was the highest PFC for every participant. PFOS levels in our participants ranged from 5.77 ppb to 35.4 ppb, with a median value of 13.55 ppb (see Figure 4). This is lower than the mean estimate for PFOS from a CDC study of more than 900 people tested in 2001 and 2002.56 This could reflect a decline in PFOS exposure since production and its use in Scotchgard ceased in 2001. See Table 3 in the appendix for comparisons. Three of our participants—Don Sampson, Donalda Dodson and Alan Bates—with PFOS levels at 24.6, 35.4, and 29.6 ppb respectively, were within the national mean estimate of 23.4 to 40.2 ppb.
Figure 4. Levels of PFOS measured in participant blood serum.
PFOA levels in our participants ranged from 1.25 ppb to 7.64 ppb, with a median of 3.22 ppb (see Figure 5). This median PFOA level is below the national average range of 3.97 ppb to 6.98 ppb. While these levels are lower than our participants’ levels of PFOS, PFOA levels may well be on the rise as other PFCs continue to break down into PFOA. One participant, Doug Stamm, had a PFOA median level that was not only higher than the national average range, but also more than twice the Oregon median. While we do not know the source of Doug’s exposure to PFOA, it is used in Teflon® and is a breakdown product of stain- and grease-proof coatings found in microwave popcorn bags and pizza box liners.
Figure 5. Levels of PFOA measured in participant blood serum.
PFNA, another PFC detected in eight of the participants, was detected in Danya Rumore, Doug Stamm, Donalda Dodson, and Alan Bates at levels above the median estimate reported in the CDC’s national study. See Table 2 in the appendix for complete results.
Health Effects of PFC Exposure
Since the 1950s significant amounts of PFCs have been produced, used and disposed of without any regulation, oversight, or testing for environmental or health effects. Only recently have these chemicals come under scrutiny, and there are few studies addressing the potential health effects of PFC exposure in people. However, animal studies show that PFOA and PFOS damage the liver and other organs, cause immune disruption, endocrine effects, reproductive harm, and developmental defects.57 PFOA also causes liver, pancreatic, testicular, and mammary gland tumors in laboratory animals.58 Research on men with occupational exposure to PFCs found an increased risk of death due to bladder cancer for those exposed to PFOS59 and higher cancer deaths, with possible links to prostate and testicular cancer for men, with occupational exposures to PFOA.60 In response to these studies and others, in January 2006 the EPA upgraded PFOA to a likely human carcinogen.61
Recent research has demonstrated a statistically significant link between higher levels of PFOA and PFOS in cord blood and decreased birth weight and head circumference.62 In addition, this same study found a correlation between PFC levels and the scores babies earned on the ponderal index, which measures fetal body mass and can serve as a rough approximation of nutritional status. Higher PFOS and PFOA cord blood levels were correlated with a lower ponderal index. Other studies have suggested that low birth weight may be a risk factor for obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease later in life.63
Policy Changes Needed
Even though PFCs permeate our water, soil, and food, until very recently there were no limitations of PFC emissions or disposal under the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, or the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Similarly the FDA has no authority to assure safe levels of PFCs in food or personal care products. The only bulwark against PFCs (and tens of thousands of other chemicals produced since the 1950s that were grandfathered in under TSCA) is regulatory action by the EPA that first requires them to prove that the chemicals are harmful. Since chemical producers are not required to provide health effects information to the EPA or the public about the chemicals, proving them harmful has been a difficult task.
In 2001, after intense media attention and pressure from the EPA, the 3M Company stopped production of PFOS-containing products and reformulated their Scotchgard® product to minimize the release of PFCs into the environment. Unfortunately, non-U.S. producers continue to manufacture PFOS. In 2006 the EPA signed a voluntary agreement with DuPont, 3M, and six other chemical companies to reduce PFOA use and emissions by 95% by 2010, with complete phase out by 2015. PFOA and related chemicals are still used to manufacture Teflon® and Gore-Tex®.
While these actions are important, they will not fully protect public health and the environment from PFCs. Further steps are necessary to eliminate the toxic threat of PFCs ato our environment and consumer products and to guard against similarly persistent and potentially dangerous chemicals that are yet to be introduced.
Phase out the use of all persistent PFCs. Many concerned people and organizations around the world have called for the phase-out of PFCs. Sweden has proposed that PFOS be banned globally under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants and, along with Britain, has applied to the European Commission for a national ban on the substance. Oregon should review PFCs and take action to phase out persistent or potentially persistent PFCs.
Support research on the health impacts of PFC exposure. While there is some research on the health impacts of PFC exposures, additional information is needed. Under our current system of chemical regulation, until there is proof of harm, the EPA has no authority to set standards and regulations pertaining to PFCs.
Establish maximum allowable limits for PFCs in drinking water. In response to concerns over the health effects of PFCS, West Virginia established a water ‘screening level’ of 150 ppb maximum allowed for PFOA. In February 2007, New Jersey moved to adopt a limit of 0.4 ppb of PFOA in drinking water. There is currently no federal limit for PFOA in drinking water. Oregon should follow the lead of New Jersey and establish a similar limit for PFOA in water.
Reducing Your Exposure to PFCs
To reduce personal exposure, avoid purchasing or at least minimize use of products containing PFCs. Consider the following tips:
Reduce greasy packaged foods and fast foods in your diet. Not only is the nutritional quality of these foods questionable, but the packaging for greasy foods such as microwave popcorn, French fries, and pizza are often treated with PFOA-laden grease-resistant coatings.
Avoid stain-resistant furniture and carpets. Choose furniture and carpets that aren’t marked “stain-resistant.” Decline treatments and ask for products that have not been pretreated with products such as Stainmaster®.
Avoid Teflon® and other non-stick cookware. If you do choose to use non-stick cookware, do not overheat or burn them. PFCs are released when the cookware reaches 450°F.64 Discard products when the non-stick coatings show signs of deterioration.
Choose alternatives to clothing with Teflon® labels or otherwise known to be treated for water or stain-resistance. Many of the treated outerwear and gear are coated with PFCs.
Read the labels of your personal care products. Avoid personal care products made with Teflon® or polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), a Teflon-like PFC. PFCs can be found in shaving cream, dental floss, and a variety of cosmetics, including nail polish, facial moisturizers, and eye makeup.
