• Business Business

Lawmakers, military spark backlash with attempt to rewrite definition of toxic substance: 'It's completely unscientific'

"The more that they wiggle out of PFAS problems, the more worried we get."

"The more that they wiggle out of PFAS problems, the more worried we get."

Photo Credit: iStock

Environmentalists are alarmed by a defense bill in the United States Senate that aims to exclude a toxic compound from the official list of "forever chemicals," redefining how perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, are identified. 

What's happening?

The Guardian reported Sept. 12 that lawmakers and the military are advocating to keep fluorinated gases, or F-gases, from being defined as forever chemicals, ultimately allowing agencies and organizations to use the compounds without strict regulatory oversight. 

"It's completely unscientific — they're just hoping to exclude whole chunks of the PFAS class from even being considered PFAS and consideration of [regulation]," NRDC Action Fund senior adviser Erik Olson told the publication. 

The bill comes at a time when the military has pushed back against taking responsibility for PFAS cleanup in Tucson, Arizona, and other legislation efforts have aimed to alter the definition of PFAS, as the Guardian notes

Why is this concerning?

PFAS usually take hundreds or thousands of years to break down in the environment — hence the "forever chemicals" moniker. Researchers have linked exposure to PFAS with severe health problems, including cancer and tumors, liver and kidney issues, and reproductive complications. 

According to the Guardian, scientists believe F-gas chemicals may accumulate at higher rates in human blood and the environment than other types of PFAS. 

What's more, as the Environmental Protection Agency explains, F-gases include "the most potent and longest-lasting" heat-trapping gases associated with human activities.

"The more that they wiggle out of PFAS problems, the more worried we get," Olson told the Guardian. "We'll keep an eye out."

What's being done about this?

As the Guardian notes, the military uses F-gases for fire suppression and other "lifesaving products," which Olson explains are "essential uses" that regulations could make an exception for until a better alternative makes its way to market. However, language in the Senate report accompanying the defense bill instead explores exempting the subclass of chemicals from regulation. 

🗣️ Do you worry about having toxic forever chemicals in your home?

🔘 Majorly 😥

🔘 Sometimes 😟

🔘 Not really 😐

🔘 I don't know enough about them 🤷

🗳️ Click your choice to see results and speak your mind

At the time of the report, the legislation is still under review in the Senate. You can make your voice heard on issues by voting for candidates whose policies align with your values and raising community awareness through conversations with family and friends.  

Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.

Cool Divider