A constant dilemma because of 2 different arguments used to determine the Safe dose of Perfluorooctanaote (PFOA) in the human body?

The latest meeting of the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) established that government agencies everywhere in the world are facing crises: a widespread on the safety evaluation of these chemistries, therefore, making interaction with the general audience very hard or almost hopeless.

This issue is linked to the one open message from the SETAC meeting: the evaluation of Perfluorinated chemicals is very difficult. This message was repeated in every session of the 2019 SETAC meeting. The message includes Environmental Sources, Exposure Assessment, Ecological Toxicity, Risk Characterization, Chemistry, Fate and Transport, and Human Health Toxicity.

To mention one example, according to the survey from government agencies, the harmless dosage of chemical Perfluorooctanoate (PFOA) is around 750-fold. The scientists associated with these agencies are knowledgeable and professional. So, why is there such variance in the estimation of the PFOA harmless dose?

This difference in assessment as explained by Dr. Jenifer Health is because the basic science in perseverance of PFOA’s first harmful effect is not direct and the government agencies disagree Moreover, the projection from experimental animals to humans requires knowing for how much time these chemicals stay in our bodies, this is called half-time.  Humans are expected to have half-time greater than that of the experimented animals used for testing the secure doses. The greater the dissimilarity in half-time, the higher the risk.  Not all agencies believe in this half-time difference for two reasons

  • The educated guess of the half-time in humans is dependent on the factual studies in humans.
  • All sources of PFOA exposure are not necessarily cautiously checked.

Both arguments results in the wide divergence in PFOA safe doses. Further research needs to be conducted to get to a solution.