🧪 Scientists Warn Against Narrowing PFAS Definition for Economic Reasons

A group of 20 internationally recognized scientists has raised a red flag 🛑 over recent efforts to narrow the definition of PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances). In a letter published in Environmental Science & Technology Letters, they caution that this shift appears to be driven more by economic and political interests than by sound science.

📎 Key Takeaways:

• The initiative to revise the PFAS definition, notably led by IUPAC, aims to exclude certain subgroups. This would reduce regulatory burdens, monitoring obligations, and cleanup responsibilities.
• The scientists support the current OECD definition, considering it a solid scientific foundation for identifying PFAS.
• They argue that narrowing the definition could delay regulations, weaken oversight, and increase public health risks.

⚠️ Why It Matters:

• A more restrictive definition could exclude toxic substances, creating loopholes in environmental monitoring.
• It would likely hinder progress toward stricter regulation and undermine efforts to control harmful chemicals.
• The letter emphasizes that to protect health and the environment, we need a clear and inclusive PFAS definition. Specific exemptions can still be applied without altering the overall scope.

💡 This letter serves as a strong call to maintain a scientifically coherent and comprehensive PFAS definition — and to resist economic or political pressures that risk weakening public and environmental protections.

🔗 Read the original letter in Environmental Science & Technology Letters
📰 They’re talking about it in Le Monde and The Guardian.