The so-called "forever chemicals”: the global challenge of PFAS among public health, politics and restoration

Translated by Francesca Valsecchi 

For decades, they stayed invisible to the general public, hidden behind everyday objects and products: nonstick cookware, waterproof fabrics, cosmetics, food packaging, and firefighting foams. 

However, the PFAS - per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances - have become one of the most urgent and controversial environmental issue in the world nowadays. Not only because of their universal spreading, but above all because once released into the environment, they can persist for years, if not decades.

It is this characteristic that has earned them the nickname of “forever chemicals.” These compounds were developed to resist water, fat, and high temperatures, which today represent one of the clearest symbols of the contradictions of the industrial modernity: materials designed to last that do not disappear anymore. 

The reason why PFAS are so difficult to eliminate

PFAS constitute a vast family of synthetic organic compounds in which the hydrogen atoms in the carbon chains are replaced by fluorine. It is precisely the carbon-fluorine bond, one of the strongest in organic chemistry, that makes these substances extraordinarily stable and resistant to chemical, biological, and thermal degradation.

This stability has facilitated their large industrial use for decades. PFAS are, in fact, water-repellent, oil-repellent, and resistant to high temperatures. These qualities have made them particularly useful in different production and manufacturing sectors. However, the same characteristic that led to their industrial success is now the source of an environmental problem.

Once released into the environment, these substances tend in fact to accumulate progressively in water, soil, animal organisms, and in the human body. Unlike other contaminants, they do not degrade easily and continue to circulate through ecosystems and food chains.

A widespread contamination

Humans can be exposed to PFAS through numerous sources: contaminated drinking water, food, air, consumer products, or closeness to industrial sites and landfills. These substances can be released from manufacturing facilities, wastewater treatment systems, or firefighting foams used in industrial and military settings.

One of the main channels of contamination is food. PFAS tend to bioaccumulate in fish, shellfish, livestock, and crops irrigated with contaminated water. Some types of food packaging can also contribute to their spread, although in an inferior way than other sources.

In recent years, scientific research has progressively strengthened the link between PFAS exposure and health risks. Several studies have linked these substances to immune system problems, endocrine disruption, reproductive disorders, elevated cholesterol levels, and an increased risk of certain cancers.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reports the findings of researchs conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which demonstrate that certain PFAS can accumulate in the body over time, causing significant effects on human health, such as a reduced immune response, hormonal disruption, and an increased risk of kidney, testicular, and prostate cancers.

The extent of the phenomenon is even more evident from the most recent epidemiological data. A study published in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, based on more than 10,500 biological samples collected in the United States, found at least one PFAS substance in 98.8% of the analysed samples. Even more relevant is the fact that 98.5% of people were simultaneously exposed to multiple compounds belonging to the PFAS family.

Among the most frequently detected substances there is linear PFOA, which is associated with potential effects on the liver, thyroid, and the immune system. This data confirms an increasingly central point in the scientific debate: the problem does not concern exposure to a single substance, but rather complex combinations of persistent contaminants.

The global race for reclamation technologies

If limiting the use of PFAS is already complex, eliminating them from the environment is even more challenging. The extraordinary stability of the carbon-fluorine bond makes it extremely difficult to degrade these substances.

The main technologies used today can be divided into two categories: separation and destruction. Separation methods include systems such as activated carbon, ion exchange resin, nanofiltration, and reverse osmosis. These processes remove PFAS from contaminated water but do not truly eliminate the problem, as the substances are simply concentrated in other materials that require further treatments.

Destruction techniques try to break the carbon-fluorine bond through advanced processes such as electrochemical oxidation, photochemical treatments, ultrasound, or high temperatures. However, many of these technologies still have significant limitations, including high costs, substantial energy consumption, and difficulties in large-scale application.

In order to overcome these limitations, several research groups are studying alternative approaches. Among the most promising is the one developed by a team at the Collège de France, based on silicon catalysis.

The goal is not only to destroy PFAS, but also to transform them into less dangerous and potentially reusable compounds. In chemical terms, the process aims to remove the fluorine atoms responsible for the persistence of these substances.

This represents a significant paradigm change: the goal is no longer to simply eliminate the pollutant, but rather to integrate them into a circular economy and chemical recycling framework. This approach also reflects a broader transformation in contemporary chemistry, which is increasingly focused not only on production but also on reparation and on sustainability of industrial processes.

Europe is stepping up restrictions, while the United States is backtracking

In recent years, the European Union has taken an increasingly strict position on PFAS, working with member states to gradually limit their use and adopting some of the strictest regulations in the world. Underlying this strategy is also an increasingly clear economic assessment of the costs of inaction: according to a report by the EU’s Directorate-General for the Environment, without effective action, the cost of PFAS pollution could reach approximately 440 billion euros by 2050. At the same time, Brussels has already banned several PFAS substances considered particularly dangerous, while the European Chemicals Agency is evaluating a proposal for a general restriction.

In the United States the debate is taking a different point. Although data released by the United States Environmental Protection Agency confirm the health risks associated with PFAS exposure, Trump administration has launched a review of the restrictions introduced during Biden administration.

Under the leadership of the new Administrator Lee Zeldin, the EPA has announced its intention to revoke or postpone certain national limits on PFAS in drinking water, particularly for substances such as PFNA, PFHxS, and GenX. The decision represents a sharp reversal of the approach taken by the Biden administration, which had set extremely low limits, arguing that there is no exposure level that is completely risk free. 

According to environmental organizations, this decision reflects the growing influence of chemical and industrial lobbies on U.S. policy. The contrast between Brussels and Washington highlights two increasingly divergent approaches: on the one hand, a strategy based on the precautionary principle; on the other, an approach aimed at reducing regulatory burdens on industry and water systems. 

A challenge influencing the future of chemistry

The PFAS case illustrates how the contemporary environmental crisis does not concern only CO₂ emissions or climate change but also involves the deeper relationship between industrial innovation and sustainability.

For decades, these substances have been regarded as a symbol of technological progress. Today, however, they represent one of the clearest examples of the limitations of a production model that has prioritized performance and durability without fully assessing their long-term effects.

The challenge will not only be to remediate contaminated land and water, but also to rethink the way in which chemicals are designed and approved. In this sense, PFAS are becoming a decisive environmental test for 21st-century policies: a complex balance between innovation, public health, economic sustainability, and industrial responsibility.

Mondo Internazionale APS - Riproduzione Riservata ® 2026