Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35916421›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental science & technology2022

Outside the Safe Operating Space of a New Planetary Boundary for Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS).

Ian T Cousins, Jana H Johansson, Matthew E Salter, Bo Sha, Martin Scheringer

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental science & technology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07391397 (Reducing Rural Health Disparities by Empowering People to Minimize PFAS Exposure and Improve Cardiovascular Health), which is not on this map. Cited by 108 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
108citing papers in PubMed, 3 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.

NCT07391397 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Reducing Rural Health Disparities by Empowering People to Minimize PFAS Exposure and Improve Cardiovascular Health

TypeinterventionalSponsorMillion Marker Wellness, Inc.Ran2025 to 2026Enrolled183ConditionsEnvironmental Health EffectsArmsBlood Test and Report Back
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

108 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Is drinking water with low PFAS a significant source of human exposure? Evidence summary.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2026
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Environmental science & technology · 2026
    Article

48 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

5 authors.

Ian T CousinsDepartment of Environmental Science, Stockholm University, SE-10691 Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-7035-8660
Jana H JohanssonDepartment of Environmental Science, Stockholm University, SE-10691 Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-6194-1491
Matthew E SalterDepartment of Environmental Science, Stockholm University, SE-10691 Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-0645-3265
Bo ShaDepartment of Environmental Science, Stockholm University, SE-10691 Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-2176-0709
Martin ScheringerInstitute of Biogeochemistry and Pollutant Dynamics, ETH Zürich, 8092 Zürich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-0809-7826

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is hypothesized that environmental contamination by per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) defines a separate planetary boundary and that this boundary has been exceeded. This hypothesis is tested by comparing the levels of four selected perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) (i.e., perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS), and perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA)) in various global environmental media (i.e., rainwater, soils, and surface waters) with recently proposed guideline levels. On the basis of the four PFAAs considered, it is concluded that (1) levels of PFOA and PFOS in rainwater often greatly exceed US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Lifetime Drinking Water Health Advisory levels and the sum of the aforementioned four PFAAs (Σ4 PFAS) in rainwater is often above Danish drinking water limit values also based on Σ4 PFAS; (2) levels of PFOS in rainwater are often above Environmental Quality Standard for Inland European Union Surface Water; and (3) atmospheric deposition also leads to global soils being ubiquitously contaminated and to be often above proposed Dutch guideline values. It is, therefore, concluded that the global spread of these four PFAAs in the atmosphere has led to the planetary boundary for chemical pollution being exceeded. Levels of PFAAs in atmospheric deposition are especially poorly reversible because of the high persistence of PFAAs and their ability to continuously cycle in the hydrosphere, including on sea spray aerosols emitted from the oceans. Because of the poor reversibility of environmental exposure to PFAS and their associated effects, it is vitally important that PFAS uses and emissions are rapidly restricted.

Indexed as

Alkanesulfonic AcidsDrinking WaterFluorocarbonsWater Pollutants, ChemicalEnvironmental ExposureSoilAlkanesulfonic AcidsDrinking WaterFluorocarbonsSoilWater Pollutants, Chemicalchemical pollutionenvironmental exposurePFASplanetary boundary

Identifiers

PMID35916421
PMCPMC9387091

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.