Read the full article by Rebecca Trager (Chemistry World)
“A controversial project to redefine the family of environmentally persistent chemicalsknown as per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) continues to divide opinions among the chemistry community. While some believe that standardising the language used to define PFAS will enable clearer and more effective regulation of the substances, others are concerned that any new definitions will be too narrow and have questioned the motives of those behind the initiative.
Back in June, 20 world experts in PFAS issued a public statement expressing serious concerns about the project, which is being led by the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (Iupac). The statement’s authors were worried that the effort is ‘politically and/or economically, rather than scientifically motivated’ and that any new definitions could be used by ‘parties with vested interests to influence regulations’.
At the American Chemical Society (ACS) meeting in Washington, DC on 19 August the ACS invited attendees to participate in a townhall discussion about the definition of PFAS and hear about the status of this Iupac initiative.” …