Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39046250›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental health perspectives2024

Forever Pesticides: A Growing Source of PFAS Contamination in the Environment.

Nathan Donley, Caroline Cox, Kyla Bennett, Alexis M Temkin, David Q Andrews, Olga V Naidenko

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental health perspectives, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
–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

40 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Integrated thermal and phytoremediation of agricultural soils impacted by PFAS.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

6 authors.

Nathan DonleyCenter for Biological Diversity, Portland, Oregon, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9935-261X
Caroline CoxCenter for Environmental Health (retired), Oakland, California, USA.
Kyla BennettPublic Employees for Environmental Responsibility, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Alexis M TemkinEnvironmental Working Group, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
David Q AndrewsEnvironmental Working Group, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Olga V NaidenkoEnvironmental Working Group, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEnvironmental contamination by fluorinated chemicals, in particular chemicals from the per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) class, has raised concerns around the globe because of documented adverse impacts on human health, wildlife, and ecosystem quality. Recent studies have indicated that pesticide products may contain a variety of chemicals that meet the PFAS definition, including the active pesticide ingredients themselves. Given that pesticides are some of the most widely distributed pollutants across the world, the legacy impacts of PFAS addition into pesticide products could be widespread and have wide-ranging implications on agriculture and food and water contamination, as well as the presence of PFAS in rural environments.

objectivesThe purpose of this commentary is to explore different ways that PFAS can be introduced into pesticide products, the extent of PFAS contamination of pesticide products, and the implications this could have for human and environmental health.

methodsWe submitted multiple public records requests to state and federal agencies in the United States and Canada and extracted relevant data from those records. We also compiled data from publicly accessible databases for our analyses. DISCUSSION: We found that the biggest contributor to PFAS in pesticide products was active ingredients and their degradates. Nearly a quarter of all US conventional pesticide active ingredients were organofluorines and 14% were PFAS, and for active ingredients approved in the last 10 y, this had increased to 61% organofluorines and 30% PFAS. Another major contributing source was through PFAS leaching from fluorinated containers into pesticide products. Fluorination of adjuvant products and "inert" ingredients appeared to be limited, although this represents a major knowledge gap. We explored aspects of immunotoxicity, persistence, water contamination, and total fluorine load in the environment and conclude that the recent trend of using fluorinated active ingredients in pesticides may be having effects on chemical toxicity and persistence that are not given adequate oversight in the United States. We recommend a more stringent risk assessment approach for fluorinated pesticides, transparent disclosure of "inert" ingredients on pesticide labels, a complete phase-out of post-mold fluorination of plastic containers, and greater monitoring in the United States. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP13954.

Indexed as

FluorocarbonsPesticidesCanadaEnvironmental ExposureEnvironmental MonitoringEnvironmental PollutantsEnvironmental PollutionHumansUnited StatesEnvironmental PollutantsFluorocarbonsPesticides

Identifiers

PMID39046250
PMCPMC11268133

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.