Bold plan to manage 'forever chemicals'

Australians may not realise it. They share their food, homes and even their bodies with potentially harmful substances dubbed forever chemicals.

Technically they’re not forever but are long-lived and don’t easily break down in the environment.

The chemicals are contained in countless everyday products and are known as per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS for short.

Experts say their use in everything from food packaging and non-stick cookware to cosmetics and carpet means they’re part of us.

“We all have some PFAS in us,” Jen Martin, involved in researching exposure in livestock, told a recent conference in Sydney.

“They are ubiquitous in the environment and humans. Many of these can bioaccumulate (become concentrated inside the bodies of living things), are persistent, and have toxic properties.”

Authorities can’t agree on how many PFAS there are, with estimates ranging from 4000 to 8000.

What’s certain is they are now present in rainwater and snow in even the world’s most remote locations, where there are no obvious sources of contamination, a Stockholm University study recently found.

Worse, they’ve been found at levels that exceed US drinking water guidelines. Scientists say there’s an urgent need to restrict their use rapidly.

Forever chemicals could impact human health

The jury is still out on human health effects. Many nations now warn of increased cancer risks and advocate limiting exposure to chemicals in use since the 1940s.

The EU’s environment agency says PFAS can lead to health problems such as liver damage, thyroid disease, obesity, fertility issues and cancer.

Of the relatively few well-studied PFAS, most are considered moderately to highly toxic.

The US Environmental Protection Agency says certain PFAS are known to cause human health risks.

The group points to studies showing certain exposure levels may heighten cancer dangers, hurt fertility and birth weights and accelerate puberty.

Australia is about to get a new draft of its national management plan and appears to be more cautious.

The federal government’s expert health panel points to “fairly consistent reports of an association with several health effects” while noting they are “generally small and within normal ranges for the whole population”.

“There is also limited to no evidence of human disease or other clinically significant harm resulting from PFAS exposure at this time,” the panel found.

It’s also concluded there’s no evidence suggesting an increase in “overall cancer risk”.

Regardless, a vast amount of work is being done to assess Australia’s PFAS problem, what levels are already locked in, and what should happen to stop an “emerging” contaminant from becoming more entrenched.

More research to be done on forever chemicals

One critical concern is how to limit further exposure. Given Australians already have at least three types of PFAS in their bodies.

Experts hope the latest draft of the PFAS plan, due for release this month, will contain improved risk management systems.

One of the many things it’s expected to address in greater detail is the PFAS in biosolids, a by-product of the wastewater treatment industry routinely repurposed as fertiliser for Australian farms.

Biosolids are essentially treated and dried sewage sludge. It is a mud-like residue that reflects everything Australian families put down the drain or sewer. Biosolids include poo and dirty water used to wash dishes, clothes and bodies.

It can also include the leftovers from water-borne trade waste.

Once the sludge is treated and dried, it’s spread over the nation’s farmlands to improve soil conditions. Last year, more than 70 per cent of the 349,000 tonnes of dried solids were disposed of in this way.

Water companies say reusing the waste has many benefits, including reducing reliance on manufactured fertilisers, but they also know it’s distributing low levels of PFAS.

They say the process is carefully managed to guard against dangerous contamination levels.

But experts say the existing system of state-based guidelines is not good enough and must be consistent nationally.

“We don’t have consistent guidelines in Australia for biosolids quality and risk management. They are all over the place,” University of NSW professor Stuart Khan said.

“In NSW, our guidelines date back to the 1990s and haven’t been updated since. There are big gaps. If we don’t sort out our risk management, we might face difficulties in the future.”

Risk of forever chemicals clear in firefighting foams

People need to look no further than the Heart Morass Wetlands in Victoria for a sobering case study about PFAS contamination.

The area is connected to the East Sale RAAF base, which historically used PFAS-loaded firefighting foams.

Wildlife in the wetlands now has concerning levels of PFAS. For some years, authorities have told duck hunters and anglers not to eat what they kill.

At a biosolids symposium in Sydney last week, PFAS researcher and University of Newcastle Professor Ravi Naidu explained how typically low and safe levels of PFAS found in Australian bodies could rise over time.

“The question is the exposure pathways. The utensils, the food you eat, the water you drink. If all of these introduce PFAS into your system, you will become an outlier,” he told delegates.

“Exposure pathways, and duration of exposure, they all play a significant role in risk.”

Last year’s Australian Total Diet Study, conducted by Food Standards Australia New Zealand, tested for 30 different types of PFAS in 112 common foods from all over Australia.

It found consumers’ exposure to PFAS through food and beverages is very low and poses no food safety concerns.