Search

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) are a class of synthetic organic chemicals of global concern. A group of 36 scientists and regulators from 18 countries held a hybrid workshop in 2022 in Zürich, Switzerland. The workshop, a sequel to a previous Zürich workshop held in 2017, deliberated on progress in the last five years and discussed further needs for cooperative scientific research and regulatory action on PFASs. This review reflects discussion and insights gained during and after this workshop and summarizes key signs of progress in science and policy, ongoing critical issues to be addressed, and possible ways forward. Some key take home messages include: 1) understanding of human health effects continues to develop dramatically, 2) regulatory guidelines continue to drop, 3) better understanding of emissions and contamination levels is needed in more parts of the world, 4) analytical methods, while improving, still only cover around 50 PFASs, and 5) discussions of how to group PFASs for regulation (including subgroupings) have gathered momentum with several jurisdictions proposing restricting a large proportion of PFAS uses. It was concluded that more multi-group exchanges are needed in the future and that there should be a greater diversity of participants at future workshops.

Hazardous chemicals in building and construction plastics can lead to health risks due to indoor exposure and may contaminate recycled materials. We systematically sampled new polyvinyl chloride floorings on the Swiss market (n = 151). We performed elemental analysis by X-ray fluorescence, targeted and suspect gas chromatography–mass spectrometry analysis of ortho-phthalates and alternative plasticizers, and bioassay tests for cytotoxicity and oxidative stress, and endocrine, mutagenic, and genotoxic activities (for selected samples). Surprisingly, 16% of the samples contained regulated chemicals above 0.1 wt %, mainly lead and bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP). Their presence is likely related to the use of recycled PVC in new flooring, highlighting that uncontrolled recycling can delay the phase-out of hazardous chemicals. Besides DEHP, 29% of the samples contained other ortho-phthalates (mainly diisononyl and diisodecyl phthalates, DiNP and DiDP) above 0.1 wt %, and 17% of the samples indicated a potential to cause biological effects. Considering some overlap between these groups, they together make up an additional 35% of the samples of potential concern. Moreover, both suspect screening and bioassay results indicate the presence of additional potentially hazardous substances. Overall, our study highlights the urgent need to accelerate the phase-out of hazardous substances, increase the transparency of chemical compositions in plastics to protect human and ecosystem health, and enable the transition to a safe and sustainable circular economy.

© The Author(s), 2022. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Landrigan, P., Raps, H., Symeonides, C., Chiles, T., Cropper, M., Enck, J., Hahn, M., Hixson, R., Kumar, P., Mustapha, A., Park, Y., Spring, M., Stegeman, J., Thompson, R., Wang, Z., Wolff, M., Yousuf, A., & Dunlop, S. Announcing the Minderoo – Monaco Commission on Plastics and Human Health. Annals of Global Health, 88(1), (2022): 73, https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.3916., Plastic is the signature material of our age. In the 75 years since large-scale production began in the aftermath of World War II, plastic has transformed our world, supported many of the most significant advances of modern civilization, and enabled breakthroughs in virtually every field of human endeavor. But plastic also poses great and growing dangers to human health and the environment, harms that fall disproportionately on the world’s poorest and most vulnerable populations. The extent and magnitude of these dangers are only beginning to be understood., The funding is from the Minderoo Foundation, the Centre Scientifique de Monaco, and the Prince Albert II of Monaco Foundation.

Polymers are the main constituents of many materials and products in our modern world. However, their environmental safety is not assessed with the same level of detail as done for non-polymeric chemical substances. Moreover, the fundamentals of contemporary regulatory approaches for polymers were developed in the early 1990s, with little change occurring since then. Currently, the European Commission is working on a proposal to initiate registration of polymers under the European Union's (EU) chemicals legislation REACH. This provides a unique opportunity for regulation to catch up on recent scientific advances. To inform this process, we here critically appraise the suggested regulatory approaches to the environmental assessment and management of polymers against the latest scientific findings regarding their environmental fate, exposure, and effects, and identify the remaining critical knowledge gaps. While we use the EU draft proposal as an example, our findings are broadly applicable to other polymer legislations worldwide, due to the similarity of polymer assessment criteria being used. We emphasize four major aspects that require more attention in the regulation of polymers: (i) increased transparency about chemical identities, physical characteristics and grouping approaches for in-use polymers; (ii) improved understanding of the environmental fate of polymers and materials composed of polymers across size and density categories and exposure profiles; (iii) comprehensive assessment of the environmental hazards of polymers, considering the effects of degradation and weathering and taking into account the actual uptake, long-term toxicity, and geophysical impacts; and (iv) consideration of the production volume and use/release patterns in determining regulatory data and testing requirements. Transitioning toward a toxic-free and sustainable circular economy will likely require additional policy instruments that will reduce the overall complexity and diversity

Climate change, biodiversity loss, and chemical pollution are planetary-scale emergencies requiring urgent mitigation actions. As these “triple crises” are deeply interlinked, they need to be tackled in an integrative manner. However, while climate change and biodiversity are often studied together, chemical pollution as a global change factor contributing to worldwide biodiversity loss has received much less attention in biodiversity research so far. Here, we review evidence showing that the multifaceted effects of anthropogenic chemicals in the environment are posing a growing threat to biodiversity and ecosystems. Therefore, failure to account for pollution effects may significantly undermine the success of biodiversity protection efforts. We argue that progress in understanding and counteracting the negative impact of chemical pollution on biodiversity requires collective efforts of scientists from different disciplines, including but not limited to ecology, ecotoxicology, and environmental chemistry. Importantly, recent developments in these fields have now enabled comprehensive studies that could efficiently address the manifold interactions between chemicals and ecosystems. Based on their experience with intricate studies of biodiversity, ecologists are well equipped to embrace the additional challenge of chemical complexity through interdisciplinary collaborations. This offers a unique opportunity to jointly advance a seminal frontier in pollution ecology and facilitate the development of innovative solutions for environmental protection.

Chemical pollution poses a threat to biodiversity on a global scale. This has been acknowledged in the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, which proposes to regulate the release of chemicals to the environment and names specific indicators focusing on pesticides, nutrients and plastic waste. We fully welcome the inclusion of these substances but would like to further emphasize that in order to protect biodiversity from hazardous chemicals, the scope of Target 7 should feature a wider range of pollutants that can contribute to biodiversity loss. We propose the inclusion of non-agricultural biocides, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs), toxic metal(loid)s, and endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs). Furthermore, data on emerging pollutants (e.g., rare earth elements, toxic and persistent industrial chemicals, liquid crystal monomers, pharmaceuticals, personal care products) need to be regularly reviewed with the aim to integrate additional pollutants to Target 7 in the case of biodiversity risk. We suggest to amend Target 7 to postulate the aim for the overall reduction of chemical production and emissions, as well as the addition of the aforementioned substance groups of high concern to biodiversity for integration in the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. We further elaborate on different strategies for the reduction of emissions of hazardous chemicals through chemical simplification and grouping, reduction of chemicals with non-essential use, and innovative synthesis strategies (e.g., “benign-by-design”). In this context, the full life cycle of chemicals (i.e., production, use, and end of life) needs to be considered. Lastly, we propose to set up transparent data inventories, in cooperation with the industry, to inform about the production, transport and emissions of chemicals, which can serve as a basis for indicators related to monitoring the progress towards achieving the goals set under Target 7.

Polar regions should be given greater consideration with respect to the monitoring, risk assessment, and management of potentially harmful chemicals, consistent with requirements of the precautionary principle. Protecting the vulnerable polar environments requires (i) raising political and public awareness and (ii) restricting and preventing global emissions of harmful chemicals at their sources. The Berlin Statement is the outcome of an international workshop with representatives of the European Commission, the Arctic Council, the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting, the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), environmental specimen banks, and data centers, as well as scientists from various international research institutions. The statement addresses urgent chemical pollution issues in the polar regions and provides recommendations for improving screening, monitoring, risk assessment, research cooperation, and open data sharing to provide environmental policy makers and chemicals management decision-makers with relevant and reliable contaminant data to better protect the polar environments. The consensus reached at the workshop can be summarized in just two words: “Act now!” Specifically, “Act now!” to reduce the presence and impact of anthropogenic chemical pollution in polar regions by. •Establishing participatory co-development frameworks in a permanent multi-disciplinary platform for Arctic-Antarctic collaborations and establishing exchanges between the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program (AMAP) of the Arctic Council and the Antarctic Monitoring and Assessment Program (AnMAP) of the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR) to increase the visibility and exchange of contaminant data and to support the development of harmonized monitoring programs. •Integrating environmental specimen banking, innovative screening approaches and archiving systems, to provide opportunities for improved assessment of contaminants to protect pol