Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31204421›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental science. Processes & impacts2019

The concept of essential use for determining when uses of PFASs can be phased out.

Ian T Cousins, Gretta Goldenman, Dorte Herzke, Rainer Lohmann, Mark Miller, Carla A Ng, Sharyle Patton, Martin Scheringer, Xenia Trier, Lena Vierke and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental science. Processes & impacts, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 89 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
89citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

89 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Can Knowledge Counteract Conflict? A Partial Replication Study of PFAS Science Communication.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. The PFAS roadmap-Navigating a path together to improved management.Sustainability science and technology · 2026
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

29 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Ian T CousinsDepartment of Environmental Science and Analytical Chemistry (ACES), Stockholm University, SE-10691, Sweden. ian.cousins@aces.su.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7035-8660
Gretta GoldenmanMilieu, Brussels, Belgium.
Dorte HerzkeNILU, Norwegian Institute for Air Research, Tromsø, Norway.
Rainer LohmannGraduate School of Oceanography, University of Rhode Island, Narragansett, RI, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8796-3229
Mark MillerNational Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, U.S. Public Health Service, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Carla A NgDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15261, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5521-7862
Sharyle PattonHealth and Environment Program Commonweal, CA, USA.
Martin ScheringerInstitute of Biogeochemistry and Pollutant Dynamics, ETH Zürich, 8092 Zürich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0809-7826
Xenia TrierDTU Technical University of Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Lena VierkeGerman Environment Agency (UBA), Dessau-Roßlau, Germany.
Zhanyun WangChair of Ecological Systems Design, Institute of Environmental Engineering, ETH Zürich, 8093 Zürich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9914-7659
Jamie C DeWittEast Carolina University, Greenville, NC, USA.

Funding

Sources, Transport, Exposure & Effects of PFAS (STEEP) Center - RENEWALP42ES027706 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND · PI Harrison Dekker · 2017 to 2026
$18.9M
NIEHS NIH HHS P42 ES027706
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Because of the extreme persistence of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) and their associated risks, the Madrid Statement argues for stopping their use where they are deemed not essential or when safer alternatives exist. To determine when uses of PFASs have an essential function in modern society, and when they do not, is not an easy task. Here, we: (1) develop the concept of "essential use" based on an existing approach described in the Montreal Protocol, (2) apply the concept to various uses of PFASs to determine the feasibility of elimination or substitution of PFASs in each use category, and (3) outline the challenges for phasing out uses of PFASs in society. In brief, we developed three distinct categories to describe the different levels of essentiality of individual uses. A phase-out of many uses of PFASs can be implemented because they are not necessary for the betterment of society in terms of health and safety, or because functional alternatives are currently available that can be substituted into these products or applications. Some specific uses of PFASs would be considered essential because they provide for vital functions and are currently without established alternatives. However, this essentiality should not be considered as permanent; rather, constant efforts are needed to search for alternatives. We provide a description of several ongoing uses of PFASs and discuss whether these uses are essential or non-essential according to the three essentiality categories. It is not possible to describe each use case of PFASs in detail in this single article. For follow-up work, we suggest further refining the assessment of the use cases of PFASs covered here, where necessary, and expanding the application of this concept to all other uses of PFASs. The concept of essential use can also be applied in the management of other chemicals, or groups of chemicals, of concern.

Indexed as

Environmental ExposureEnvironmental PollutantsEnvironmental PollutionFluorocarbonsHumansEnvironmental PollutantsFluorocarbons

Identifiers

PMID31204421
PMCPMC6992415

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.