Recent academic analysis of previously secret documents from major PFAS-producers DuPont and 3M shows that companies knew PFAS were “highly toxic when inhaled and moderately toxic when ingested” by 1970, 40 years before the public health community.
The companies used several strategies to influence science and regulation, including “suppressing unfavourable research and distorting public discourse”.
The parallels between the PFAS industry and the denial tactics of the Big Tobacco and fossil fuel industries are clear, and now we can see the legacy of that approach. Today in the Netherlands it is recommended not to eat fruit or vegetables coming from gardens within a one kilometre radius of a DuPont PFAS factory.
Now the regulation of ‘forever chemicals’ is firmly on the EU political agenda, with a proposal for an EU-wide PFAS ban on the manufacture, sale, and use of PFAS. And the industry has wised up.
Desperate to take the heat off their products, PFAS polluters are going out of their way to recognise public concern about ‘forever chemicals’, while simultaneously trying to persuade decision-makers that they are willing to sort it out themselves.
Having established this narrative, the PFAS public relations operation moves into phase two, with a much more ‘business as usual’ approach i.e.: to argue that a producer or user’s own PFAS are in a special class and therefore need special treatment, such as an opt-out to the ban.
Apparently the five or 12 year temporary opt-outs already included in the EU proposal are not enough.
Instead the new game in town is to attach your PFAS product to an EU strategic priority, whether it is the remnants of Ursula von der Leyen’s Green Deal or the EU Chips Act which aims to boost European competitiveness in the field of semiconductors.
The industry’s hyperbolic insistence that PFAS are critical to these sectors denies how regulation can be a key driver to finding sustainable alternatives. After all, replacements for PFAS are being found for various supply chains, and many consumer-focused companies are demanding a comprehensive ban.
Nonetheless, PFAS polluters are largely sticking to these strategies – presenting themselves as reasonable, concerned actors, and then demanding a special opt-out for their products. And following these chemical producers and their corporate clients into battle are a legion of bespoke PFAS lobby groups, PR consultancies, and law firms.