Officially called PFAS, the substances are a group of more than 10,000 chemicals used in things like non-stick pans, stain-proof carpets, cosmetics and other common products — and often end up tainting food, water and wildlife. As these chemicals break down extremely slowly, they earned the nickname “eternal pollutants.”

Two committees of EU experts – the Risk Assessment Committee (RAC), in its final opinion, and the Socio-Economic Analysis Committee (SEAC), in its draft opinion, published on Thursday findings that highlighted their effects and that called for an EU-wide restriction on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), subject to specific derogations.

“Growing risks”

Scientists from the first committee, the Risk Assessment Committee (RAC), found the chemicals posed growing risks and said that the EU needed new regulations to address them.

"PFAS pose growing risks to people and the environment. They are highly persistent, remaining in the environment for long periods, travelling long distances, contaminating groundwater and soil, while some cause serious health issues, such as cancer and reproductive harm,” they said in a statement accompanying its findings.

Environmental groups welcomed the report. “Our policymakers owe it to people and our ecosystems across Europe to act now and prevent this emerging large-scale public health disaster,” said the NGO ClientEarth.

But how far should the ban extend? The European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) said it was “deeply concerned by the opinions” published Thursday. "The absence of clear and durable derogations for medicines would compromise patient access to critical treatments and drive manufacturing out of Europe," they said.

Balancing act

Within the European Chemicals Agency itself, two divergent views have emerged on how far the new restrictions should go.

Scientific risk assessment experts of the RAC said a total ban on "forever chemicals’ would be the most effective way to minimise their impact, saying that exemptions would cause additional "emissions, leading to an uncontrolled risk."

But, the Socio-Economic Analysis Committee (SEAC) said a blanket ban is "likely not proportionate," given the lack of alternatives to the chemicals in several fields.

Still supporting a "broad restriction", scientists thus stressed the need for a "balanced approach" in light of the wide use of the chemicals, and recommended "targeted" exemptions. The RAC recommended that risks be minimised through clear labelling on products containing "forever chemicals" and site-specific management plans for each industrial facility.

A first step toward broad legislation

The release of these reports marks a first step, but the EU proposal for legislation is not expected before 2027. In the meantime, Brussels has already taken sector-specific action against certain PFAS.

A directive imposed since January has set a maximum threshold of 0.1 micrograms per litre for the combined concentration of 20 PFAS for "water intended for human consumption".

The European Parliament has also adopted rules on food packaging, introducing maximum PFAS concentrations from August, and on toys, in which forever chemicals and endocrine disruptors will be banned by 2030.

France, meanwhile, has led the way, banning certain PFAS in clothing, shoes, cosmetics and ski waxes since January, with some exceptions.

In Brussels, environmental organisations accuse the European Union of being slow to legislate, under pressure from industrial lobbies.

European Union environment chief Jessika Roswall also welcomed the findings. "We support the transition away from forever chemicals. As always, any new rules need to be simple by design and give certainty, clarity and predictability for consumers as well as businesses," Roswall said in a statement to AFP.

In January, an EU-commissioned report found that continued use of PFAS could cost Europe up to 1.7 trillion euros (USD2 trillion) by 2050 because of their impact on people’s health and the environment.

Chronic exposure to even low levels of the chemicals has been linked to liver damage, high cholesterol, reduced immune responses, low birth weights and several kinds of cancer.