Scientists Warn: UK Trails Behind EU in Battle Against ‘Forever Chemicals’

Scientists are calling out the UK government for not taking stronger action against “forever chemicals” known as PFAS. These chemicals are a big concern because they don’t break down naturally. Last year, 59 experts urged the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) to take the issue seriously. They argued that all PFAS should be treated together, given their persistence in the environment, despite differences in toxicity.

PFAS pollution is everywhere. Many people around the world even have these chemicals in their blood. Out of over 10,000 known PFAS, only two have been banned due to clear links to cancer and other serious health issues.

Five EU member states have proposed a group ban on PFAS, but the industry is pushing back. In response to the scientists, Defra laid out its plans to manage these chemicals. However, many experts feel these plans are not enough.

Professor Ian Cousins, who organized the letter from the scientists, argued that Defra is wrong to suggest that some PFAS are harmless. He highlighted that their enduring nature makes all PFAS a problem. fluoropolymers, a type of plastic, have also been fighting to stay exempt from regulations. The UK government has chosen not to follow the OECD’s definition of PFAS, which includes fluoropolymers. Instead, they plan to create smaller groups, which Cousins believes may benefit the industry.

He warned that using a risk-based approach could lead to increasing levels of these chemicals in the environment. If they continue to be released, there might come a point when it’s too late to remove them from drinking water.

Professor Crispin Halsall from Lancaster University questioned the rationale behind Defra’s decision to form its own groups. He suggested it might be more prudent to align with EU definitions rather than create a new classification.

Professor Patrick Byrne from Liverpool John Moores University expressed concern over the government’s underestimation of the number of PFAS. He pointed out that just because some chemicals are not yet studied does not mean they pose no risk. Defra acknowledged the need to review evidence before deciding if drinking water limits should be reduced, moving towards stricter measures like those in Europe and the US.

However, Dr. David Megson from Manchester Metropolitan University criticized this approach. He believes that the government is avoiding urgent action despite the pressing nature of the problem.

Halsall mentioned that finding alternatives to PFAS could promote innovation within the chemical industry. He appreciated the government’s response but felt they were delaying necessary actions.

Dr. Shubhi Sharma from the charity Chem was shocked by the lack of urgency displayed by Defra. She noted that every day without action contributes to a growing toxic problem. The evidence is there for the government to act swiftly to protect people and the environment from these harmful chemicals.

A spokesperson for Defra stated that the government is committed to addressing the risks posed by chemicals, including PFAS, and is currently reviewing its environmental plans.

Source link