A recent meeting of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Science Advisory Board (SAB) to discuss PFAS in drinking water has brought this ongoing public health debate into renewed focus once again. It is part of a broader effort by the Biden Administration and Congress to regulate all PFAS chemicals out of existence and such a de-facto blanket ban could ultimately harm the overall well-being of the American people.
Polyfluoroalkyl Substances, or PFAS, are a group of over 5,000 man-made identified fluorinated compounds. Produced since the 1940s, they function as an effective repellant and because of this capability PFAS have been used in the manufacture of many consumer products such as firefighting foams, semiconductors, and medical devices as well as for personal protective equipment (PPE) and protective gear for law enforcement and military.
Much of the concern around PFAS today stems from the existence of two compounds known as Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS) and Perflurooctaneoic Acid (PFOA). Previously identified as having a potentially negative impact on health, their use has been in decline due to private sector efforts starting in the early 2000s to phase them out of production. Remediation efforts have also decreased their levels in the environment dramatically as evidenced by a Centers for Disease Control (CDC) report that shows that?since 2000, “mean blood levels of PFOS have declined approximately 84 percent and mean blood levels of PFOA have declined about 70 percent.”
Yet in the face of these marked improvements and the fact that scientific research concerning the impact of other PFAS compounds on health is still uncertain – at the aforementioned SAB meeting EPA official Colleen Flaherty noted that “human health risks associated with exposure to mixtures of PFAS has not been well characterized; a formal PFAS mixtures assessment has not been conducted by federal government entities" – the Biden Administration recently identified all PFAS as a significant environmental concern. This comes in spite of the fact that PFAS are not on the list of primary concerns developed by the CDC or the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the fact that the rest of the world continues to utilize these substances.
Corresponding Congressional action on PFAS has led to the introduction and passage by the House of Representatives of H.R. 2467, the PFAS Action Act of 2021. This sweeping piece of legislation attempts to regulate and limit the use of all PFAS substances while failing to recognize the reality that each of these compounds are very different. Even though PFOA and PFOS chemicals are being phased out of manufacturing, this aggressive expansion of federal control lumps them together in one blanket ban with other PFAS substances that have not been found to be harmful.
H.R. 2467 is now under review in the Senate and lawmakers have started to highlight the inherent flaws in the legislation. In particular, Rep. Larry Bucshon (R-Ind.), a heart surgeon, has criticized the bill for failing to include an amendment that would provide an exemption for PFAS in medical settings – suggesting that the law as written could jeopardize patient access to crucial lifesaving medical equipment and devices.
It is impossible to imagine the panic and chaos that would ensue in the medical community from such a blanket PFAS ban. Suddenly, personal protective equipment (PPE) that has been invaluable during the COVID-19 crisis, such as disposable medical gowns and drapes that use fluorinated polymers to reduce infection rates would become even scarcer than they were at the start of the pandemic. Lifesaving medical devices, such as infant heart valves and certain surgical instruments would be outlawed and no longer available. Vascular grafts, which can replace damaged vessels and stent grafts used to repair cardiac tissues, such as aortic aneurisms or holes in the cardiac septum, would be unobtainable. Surgical meshes made of fluoropolymers used for repairing hernia, implants made with fluoropolymers that reduce the risks associated with infection, catheter tubes, needle retrieval systems, inhaler canisters that use PFAS coatings, along with many other crucial lifesaving medical devices and equipment, would all be banned in this country.
Nothing less than American public health is at stake if the PFAS Action Act passes Congress. The rest of the world is and will continue to use PFAS products. However, America will no longer be able to access necessary medical equipment and devices to provide lifesaving assistance to many of our citizens. A measured and carefully thought-out approach to studying PFAS should be encouraged, and we must not jump to rash and devastating decisions that are not based on solid scientific research and knowledge. In reviewing current and future legislation, we need to adopt such an approach that prioritizes Americans’ health and doesn’t send more resources chasing after the wrong public health solution.
Vickie Yates Brown Glisson is the former Kentucky Secretary of the Cabinet for Health and Family Services and a nationally recognized health lawyer.