Determining “chemicals forever” is a function of science alone

Digest opened free editor

Rola Khaleda, FT editor, chooses her favorite stories in this weekly newsletter.

She has everything that makes poisonous controversy. The increasing evidence indicates that the molecules known as the chemicals forever-used in daily elements such as cosmetics, non-adhesive pans and water clothing-can accumulate in the environment and in the body, at the expense of both.

Last year, the world’s prominent chemistry organization announced that a committee will again look at how to define chemicals- more clearly known as PER-Polyfluoroylkyl, or PFAS-. This misery has disturbed some researchers, who doubt that rethinking, which will be implemented by the International Federation of Pure and Applied Chemistry, may end up narrowing the definition and leaving some chemicals forever from the organizational hook. The current definition, who protest, is based on science and works well; They argue that the new initiative is driven by political or economic considerations, Instead of science.

Their objections are worth a hearing. By defining its reasons for redefining a group of chemicals that were present for decades, the Chemistry Union greatly mentions the European organization and declares that it is “almost possible” to about 9000 PFA to face a possible ban in 2026. Unlike chemistry.

Chemicals have been developed forever, which feature a carbon atoms with the attached fluorine atoms, for the first time in the 1940s. Their resistance to oil, hospitalization and water made them a commercial success. But these same qualities allowed molecules to survive cannot be graduated – in water, soil and air, in the food chain, in the blood and human organs. The materials were differently involved in cancer, obesity and fertility. Manufacturers, including 3M and Dupont, have paid huge sums to settle PFAs for health and environment.

The exact number of PFAs and the novel is not certain because some of them were manufactured, but it was never documented; The numbers are often transferred between 5,000 and 12,000. Its spread, along with the increasing health and environmental concerns, led to the Consulting of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development on A. Definition of the pendant review It aims to capture a full range of luxurious molecules. This ended in 2021, with chemical agencies inputs all over the world.

In the environmental magazine sciences Technological messages, and the 20 -year -old circles expressed their concern this month that any new IUPAC maneuver can “can” exclude some of the filled chemical sub -groups from the scope of the current definition. “Given that the union is the final ruling on everything ChemicalIncluding the names of the new periodic schedule elements, his rule will bear influence. The message continues: “The PFAS definition that is likely to be narrower IUPAC can be adopted.

The protest speech was coordinated by Gabriel Sigmund, a researcher at the University of Waginingn, in the Netherlands. It was signed, among other things, scientists in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Sweden and Switzerland, some of whom worked to define the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. More than 200 scientists since then added their signatures, I learned FT.

Alex Ford, a marine ecosystem at the University of Pleimouth in the United Kingdom, said that it has occurred because changing definitions could “sow suspicion and create confusion” and the precautionary principle must prevail. “We still see the harmful effects in the wildlife of the chemicals that we have banned decades ago … It is a chemical and very mobile stable, and whenever we look at them, toxic.”

As it is somewhat common with academic researchers, at least two members in the new IUPAC list in the past or current links with the industry. Piengelo Metranglo, a chemist based in Milan, reveals a consultant Solvay Solexis consultant on his autobiography available to the public. In 2023, her mother company has paid nearly $ 400 million to settle a PFAS suit in New Jersey.

There is no indication that Metrangola was involved. He previously said that the new committee “did not end with any conclusion, and there are no indications that certain sub -groups of chemicals will be excluded.” IUPAC did not respond to a comment.

It is tempting to sparkle the class as technician, dark or unrelated. But the definition of chemical issues forever for all of us: such as the chemicals themselves, can continue to influence – on research, industrial practice, organization and legal responsibility issues – for decades to come.

[email protected]