PFAS - Chemicals in Pizza Boxes, Cosmetics - Dangerous to Health? Polyfluoroalkyl, Perfluoroalkyl Linked to Kidney Cancer, Thyroid Disease

• comments
• 
• 

Chemicals found in common materials, such as pizza boxes, cosmetics, and microwavable popcorn bags, could lead to potential health problems.

A study published online last Friday at the Environmental Health Perspectives website warns that chemicals known as polyfluoroalkyl and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) may be linked to health issues such as kidney cancer and thyroid disease. These chemicals are used in various consumer products to increase its durability.

"We call on the international community to cooperate in limiting the production and use of PFASs," the Madrid Statement said. It is signed by over 200 international scientists, health experts, epidemiologists, toxicologists, and many others are calling to stop the use of the chemicals until other alternatives are found, according to New York Times.

"Research is needed to find safe alternatives for all current uses of PFASs," said Linda S. Birnbaum of the toxicology program at the Department of Health and Human Services in the commentary piece.

"The question is, should these chemicals continue to be used in consumer products in the meantime, given their persistence in the environment?" she added. "And, in the absence of indisputably safe alternatives, are consumers willing to give up certain product functionalities, such as stain resistance, to protect themselves against potential health risks?"

PFASs are used in many products worldwide including electronics, footwear, apparel, seats, carpets, and insulators for hospital electrics. Manufacturers of the chemical insist that the usage of these chemicals is safe. Scientists are not reassured, according to International Business Times, previous studies from 2005 to 2013 have shown that PFASs lingered in the bodies for many years and may increase health problems.

Thomas H. Sample, head of risk management from the company DuPont, an American chemical company argued with the scientists' concerns.

"We don't dismiss the right of folks to debate this," Samples said via the NY Times article. "But we just believe based on the 10-year history of extensive studies done on the alternatives, that the regulatory agencies have done their job of determining that these things are safe for their intended uses."

Dr. Paul Brooks, a scientist that helped with a West Virginia case against DuPont, said in the same article, "When you have something that is a first cousin or brother-in-law to a chemical that we are certain is carcinogenic, you have to somehow prove that it is safe before you use it - that it is not injurious," he said. "You just have to be cautious."