Next Article in Journal
RETRACTED: Lika et al. Honeybee and Plant Products as Natural Antimicrobials in Enhancement of Poultry Health and Production. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8467
Previous Article in Journal
Meta-Heuristic Optimization for Hybrid Renewable Energy System in Durgapur: Performance Comparison of GWO, TLBO, and MOPSO
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 17
Issue 15
10.3390/su17156957
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

The Alarming Effects of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) on One Health and Interconnections with Food-Producing Animals in Circular and Sustainable Agri-Food Systems

by
Gerald C. Shurson
Department of Animal Science, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108, USA
Sustainability 2025, 17(15), 6957; https://doi.org/10.3390/su17156957
Submission received: 6 May 2025 / Revised: 15 July 2025 / Accepted: 23 July 2025 / Published: 31 July 2025
Versions Notes

Abstract

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are synthetically produced chemicals that are causing a major One Health crisis. These “forever chemicals” are widely distributed globally in air, water, and soil, and because they are highly mobile and extremely difficult to degrade in the environment. They cause additional health concerns in a circular bioeconomy and food system that recycles and reuses by-products and numerous types of waste materials. Uptake of PFAS by plants and food-producing animals ultimately leads to the consumption of PFAS-contaminated food that is associated with numerous adverse health and developmental effects in humans. Contaminated meat, milk, and eggs are some of the main sources of human PFAS exposure. Although there is no safe level of PFAS exposure, maximum tolerable PFAS consumption guidelines have been established for some countries. However, there is no international PFAS monitoring system, and there are no standardized international guidelines and mechanisms to prevent the consumption of PFAS-contaminated foods. Urgent action is needed to stop PFAS production except for critical uses, implementing effective water-purification treatments, preventing spreading sewage sludge on land and pastures used to produce food, and requiring marketers and manufacturers to use packaging that is free of PFAS.

1. Introduction

Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a group of more than 15,000 types of human-made chemicals [1] that have become another unintended consequence of human innovation and have created a major One Health crisis that is polluting all aspects of our environment and poisoning billions of people around the world. In addition, widespread PFAS contamination in the environment is linked to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) including SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production, and SDG 14 (Life Below Water). The extreme persistence and mobility of PFAS in aquatic environments makes them a significant concern for water pollution. Unfortunately, societal awareness of the significance, global prevalence, and detrimental health effects of PFAS contamination in plants, animals, humans, and the environment is not as well-known as other major One Health concerns such as antibiotic resistance, zoonotic diseases, food safety, climate change, and other environmental contamination issues. There are more than 200 applications of PFAS in industrial and consumer products involving 64 different categories and subcategories of uses including many well-known applications such as in fire-fighting foams; oil, water, and stain repellents for carpets, upholstery, and clothing; cleaning products; non-stick cookware; paints, varnishes, and sealants; personal care products including cosmetics, shampoo, lotions, and dental floss; and food packaging including fast-food containers, pizza boxes, and candy wrappers (Table 1; [2,3]). Other lesser-known PFAS use categories that have not been reported in the scientific literature include applications in consumer products such as ammunition, guitar strings, climbing ropes, and in artificial turf [2]. Because PFAS can repel water and lipids, they are extremely stable and difficult to degrade in the environment [4]. The recalcitrant nature of PFAS has resulted in them often being described as “forever chemicals” due to their ability to persist in the environment for an unknown amount of time, causing bioaccumulation and subsequent numerous toxic effects in the environment [5]. However, there is little, if any, information regarding the amounts of the many types of PFAS that have been, and will be released, transformed, and accumulated in the environment and living organisms over time [6].
The widespread use and high mobility of PFAS enables them to be transported over long distances, resulting in widespread distribution and bioaccumulation that increases concentrations of these chemicals in almost every geographic region in the world, and in all types of environmental matrices including air, groundwater, freshwater, marine water, and soil [3]. Because the atmosphere, water, and soil environments are interconnected and inseparable, there is constant PFAS movement, recycling, and exposure of plants, animals, and humans to PFAS. This interconnection creates multiple environmental exposure pathways in which PFAS contaminate food and drinking-water supplies, which are the major pathways of human exposure and toxicity [7]. Contaminated pastures, forages, grain and oilseed crops, and drinking water that are consumed by food-producing animals are the primary sources of PFAS that result in contaminated meat, milk, and eggs consumed by humans, which can lead to numerous adverse health effects [8,9]. Furthermore, PFAS chemicals are also found in wastewater [10] and landfills [11], and are concentrated in sewage sludge, which is commonly applied to agricultural soils as a fertilizer [12,13]. Dairy and beef cattle grazing pastures or consuming forages and other feedstuffs where biosolids from sewage treatment facilities have been applied have elevated PFAS concentrations in the meat and milk they produce [14]. Manure is the primary route of excretion from livestock and poultry consuming PFAS-contaminated feed and drinking water [15]. When PFAS-contaminated animal manure is applied to agricultural soils, it enables the recycling of these recalcitrant chemicals back into the food-production system [16]. Therefore, as we continue to transition from a linear “take, make, consume, dispose, and pollute” economy toward a circular bioeconomy and agri-food system that recycles and reuses waste materials (e.g., food loss and waste, agri-industrial by-products, and animal manure), in which food-producing animals play an essential role, we need to understand the multiple pathways of PFAS exposure to attempt to break their recycling and reduce human exposure. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to summarize (1) the chemical characteristics of PFAS, (2) the various types of consumer products that contain PFAS, (3) evidence that PFAS are a serious human-health threat, (4) environmental PFAS exposure routes for food-producing animals, and (5) current PFAS regulations, remediation, and exposure prevention strategies.

2. Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted using Google to identify relevant peer-reviewed publications, including original research studies, case studies, and literature reviews, along with documents from non-government organizations, government agencies, and regulatory publications associated with PFAS. Documents from PFAS manufacturers and end users and various public media sources were excluded. Additional publications were obtained by reviewing and identifying references cited and cross-referenced in the 77 systematic and scoping literature reviews, meta-analyses, data summaries, and numerous articles. Many key words were used to search for scholarly articles and other articles of relevance and interest on the extent of contamination and effects of PFAS in the atmosphere, water, soil, environment, plants, crops, fruits, vegetables, human health, food, meat, milk, eggs, livestock, and poultry. Extensive searches were conducted to identify peer-reviewed articles on applications of PFAS in consumer products and the effects of human PFAS exposure on organ toxicity and the circulatory, neural, endocrine, reproductive, and immune systems, metabolism, cancer, and epigenetics. Additional searches were conducted to identify scholarly articles involving PFAS regulations, remediation techniques for contaminated water and soil, and minimizing PFAS recycling and exposure in biosolids, wastewater, anaerobic digesters, compost, and animal manure.

3. What Are PFAS?

Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances are a large and diverse group of nearly 15,000 synthetic chemical compounds containing strong carbon–fluoride bonds in the alkyl chains of different lengths [1]. They are often classified as either legacy or emerging, long-chain or short-chain, bioaccumulation potential, water solubility, relative toxicity, and their polymer composition [5]. Long-chain PFAS consist of perfluoroalkyl carboxylates (PFCAs) that contain eight or more carbons such as perfluorooctanoate (PFOA) and perfluoroalkane sulfonates (PFSAs) that contain six or more carbons such as perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) [17]. Short-chain PFAS include PFCAs that contain seven or fewer carbons such as perfluorohexanoate (PFHxA) and perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS), along with PFSAs that have five or fewer carbons such as perfluorobutanesulfonate (PFBS) [17]. In addition to the many PFCAs and PFSAs, there are many other groups of PFAS compounds [18], and a partial list is shown in Table 2.
Identifying and measuring PFAS that are present in relatively low concentrations (parts per trillion; ng/L) in various matrices requires the use of expensive and sophisticated analytical equipment including gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) or high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS) capable of providing repeatable results across laboratories [18]. The most widely studied PFAS is PFOS, which was the initial target compound of concern and was defined as a Persistent Organic Pollutant by the 2011 Stockholm Convention as a target compound requiring monitoring because of its relative abundance, toxicity, and ability to bioaccumulate [19]. However, several other PFSAs and PFCAs, such as PFOA, are also compounds of concern for human health worldwide [6]. Unfortunately, toxicity evaluations have been limited to only a few PFAS compounds, have often been conducted by industry organizations which may not be objective, and are based on standard testing guidelines that do not usually include histopathology and carcinogenesis evaluations [6,20]. Although new shorter chain PFAS have been promoted by chemical companies as being safer and more environmentally sustainable alternatives to legacy long-chain PFAS, due to their reduced bioaccumulation potential and acute toxicity [21], there is increasing evidence from epidemiological and toxicological studies that shows that short-chain PFAS are also associated with increased human health risks including fetal development, neurodevelopment, hepatic and reproductive toxicity, and immunotoxicity similar to those of long-chain PFAS [22,23,24,25]. Short-chain PFAS are more mobile than long-chain PFAS in the environment, which makes them highly persistent and contributors to similar toxicity and health risks to long-chain PFAS. As a result of their co-existence and resilience in the environment, and with evidence of similar toxicity and health risks, ongoing risk assessments suggest that PFAS regulations should involve discontinuation and phasing out of all classes (short-chain and long-chain) PFAS compounds used in food packaging and other products due to safety concerns [26,27,28,29].

4. Why Should We Care About PFAS?

There is an overwhelming body of scientific evidence (more than 124 scientific studies) that shows that human exposure to PFAS causes detrimental health effects associated with nearly every organ (liver, kidneys, lungs, heart, brain, bones, and reproduction) and the physiological system (circulatory, neural, endocrine, reproductive, and immune) in the human body (Table 3). The most documented and diverse adverse health effects of PFAS involve brain, neurological and behavioral dysfunction (i.e., Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, Alzheimer’s dementia, reduced IQ, Parkinson’s, cerebral palsy, stroke, hand–eye coordination issues, and delayed development of linguistics, behavior, hand–eye coordination), along with endocrine-system disruption, infertility, and reproductive problems (i.e., miscarriage, reduced fetal development, premature births). Human exposure to PFAS has also been associated with kidney, testicular, breast, and liver cancer, and detrimental health effects associated with PFAS have been shown to genetically transfer to subsequent generations (Table 3). The extensive summary shown in Table 3 was compiled to emphasize the large amount of scientific evidence that consistently shows alarming, diverse, and detrimental human health effects experienced in populations around the world. Nearly all previous PFAS reviews provide only a cursory overview of selected health effects from PFAS exposure from a limited number of studies, which may give the impression that PFAS exposure is not the serious public health crisis that it truly is.
Direct human exposure to PFAS occurs by inhalation of air particles, consumption of contaminated food and drinking water, and physical skin contact [155,156,157,158]. A study conducted in China showed that indoor dust and drinking water represented <9% of PFAS exposure in humans, which is much less than the consumption of contaminated food [159]. However, in the Eastern United States, 60% of the public water supply and 20% of domestic wells contained at least one detectable type of PFAS [160]. Results from another study estimated that about 45% of drinking-water samples from unregulated private wells and regulated public supplies of tapwater in the U.S. contain at least one type of PFAS [161]. Results from these studies exemplify the widespread contamination of PFAS in drinking water, which is an essential resource for life.
Food is a primary route of human exposure to PFAS, especially contaminated animal-derived foods [162]. Unfortunately, the likelihood of human exposure to PFAS is difficult to control because of differences in the prevalence of contamination among geographic regions, along with age, eating habits, lifestyle, and ethnicity which can be highly variable [162]. Food contamination with PFAS also occurs from fast-food packaging, microwave popcorn bags, and high-temperature cooking practices such as frying [163]. Public monitoring of beverages, processed meats, and food-packaging containers is needed to identify PFAS-contaminated sources and decrease exposure in the general population [164]. People can also be exposed to PFAS by working in occupations such as firefighting, in chemicals manufacturing facilities, and using a variety of products and packaging materials made with PFAS.
The widespread contamination of PFAS in the environment, drinking water, and food supply and the extensive adverse health effects of human exposure has led to an urgent need for stricter regulations on the production and use of PFAS in consumer products to reduce contamination in food and drinking water. However, unlike other chemical hazards that are monitored as part of routine food-safety programs in many countries, there is no standardized international food safety monitoring system for PFAS. Effective regulatory frameworks for PFAS need to be established using standardized, internationally accepted guidelines for the analysis of PFAS in human serum, plasma, and urine samples to support risk assessments and identification of high-risk environments [165,166]. Most of the limited advisory guidelines for PFAS exposure from food and drinking water were established nearly 20 years ago when our knowledge about the adverse health effects of PFAS was very limited and included only PFOA and PFOS compounds [167]. Although these guidelines are often used to compare analyzed concentrations in food and drinking water with estimated “safe” daily or weekly consumption limits, they vary considerably based on the type of measure (i.e., tolerable daily or weekly intake, health advisory level, reference dose) and maximum tolerable PFOA, PFOS, perfluorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBS), or total PFAS intake due to differences in age, gender, and those living in urban versus rural environments [162,167]. Because of different total daily PFAA intake and the relative contributions from different foods for different age groups, different approaches are needed to develop policies to control human exposure for different age groups. Therefore, until more information on toxicology, amounts of daily intake, and effects of long-term exposure of more types of PFAS compounds in food and drinking water is available, and a standardized testing and monitoring system for PFAS is developed for government regulated food safety programs, it will be difficult to minimize human exposure to these hazardous PFAS chemicals. In the meantime, altering consumer behavior by avoiding high-risk consumer products can minimize PFAS exposure and the likelihood of experiencing associated adverse health effects (Table 4). However, because of the pervasiveness and resilience of PFAS in the environment, we also need to understand other sources of environmental contamination and exposure beginning with the air that we breathe.

5. PFAS in the Atmosphere

Various forms of PFAS are found in the atmosphere. Gaseous PFAS are comprised of volatile forms (FTOHs, FOSAs, FOSEs, FTACs) that have relatively low vapor pressure and higher boiling points which enable them to easily evaporate; short-chain PFAS (PFHpA, PFBS, PFBA) and secondary FTOHs formed during biotransformation of fluorotelomer-based compounds. Particulate PFAS (PFOA and PFOS) have low volatility but can adsorb to atmospheric particulate matter and be transported by air; long-chain PFAS have a greater tendency to bind to airborne particles, and ultrafine particles attract PFOA, PFNA, and PFDA. Atmospheric PFAS emissions have been detected throughout the world [168,169,170], including volatile PFAS precursors in remote regions resulting from long-range atmospheric transport of ionic forms by marine aerosols [171,172] and by air-sea exchange [173]. Airborne dust particles can adsorb and transport PFAS long distances [18]. Furthermore, volatilization of PFAS from product manufacturing, wastewater treatment facilities, and landfills [174,175] results in very high atmospheric concentrations, while deterioration of functional textiles and elevated summer temperatures also contribute to air PFAS emissions [176,177,178,179]. Air contaminated with PFAS can accumulate on plant leaves and grasses and can subsequently be consumed by livestock [14,180,181]. Animal and human exposure to PFAS can also occur by inhaling contaminated air and dust and contact exposure to skin and feathers [182,183,184,185]. Unfortunately, there are no effective technologies to remove PFAS from contaminated air, and more research is needed to understand the transport and fate of PFAS in the atmosphere to develop practical and cost-effective technologies for PFAS removal. Although PFAS may be present in air, the concentrations are much lower than those found in contaminated water and soil.

6. PFAS in Water

Natural water sources such as rivers, lakes, oceans, rain, and snow have all been shown to be contaminated with PFAS around the world. Most perfluoroalkyl acids have relatively high solubility in water which makes them quite mobile in the environment [186,187]. Water contamination of PFAS occurs from atmospheric precipitation [188], and close proximity to industrial manufacturing sites, commercial applications, and firefighting activities [189]. Because PFAS can be adsorbed on suspended particles [190], they can easily migrate to surface water and increase sediment concentrations [191]. Various PFAS have also been shown to be associated with microplastics in lake environments where sorption onto microplastics is increased in the presence of organic matter [192]. Aquatic organisms, such as fish, directly absorb PFAS through skin and gills, and indirectly through PFAS-contaminated food consumed in their digestive systems [193]. As a result, PFAS accumulate in fish and other aquatic foods which become a major source of human exposure through their consumption [194,195].
Maintaining high-quality irrigation and drainage water is essential to support ecosystem and human health in agricultural regions [196]. However, irrigation water contaminated with PFAS has been identified as a more important source of PFAS contamination in plants than the use of PFAS-contaminated biosolids as a soil amendment [13,167] because the mobility and bioavailability of PFAS is greater in irrigation water [197] due to the use of recycled water in locations with water shortages [198]. Very little research has been conducted to determine the prevalence and concentrations of PFAS in major agricultural regions (e.g., Iowa) in the U.S., but results from a recent survey showed that at least one PFAS was detected in 32% of streams sampled in Iowa, and 10 different types of PFAS were found in various streams across the entire state [199].
Wastewater-treatment facilities are used to purify water for drinking and other domestic purposes, but the conventional water-treatment methods used are generally ineffective for PFAS removal [200,201], and often result in PFAS concentrations exceeding human-health advisory limits [200,202,203]. Consequently, tap water contaminated with PFAS and used for cooking and food processing, such as making coffee and cola beverages, can be a major source of human exposure [204]. A summary of technologies that have been evaluated for removing PFAS contaminants in drinking water is shown in Table 5. Advanced filtration using reverse osmosis and nanofiltration are energy-efficient processes that are effective for separating and concentrating PFAS for subsequent disposal or treatment, but some of these techniques may be expensive. However, these removal technologies concentrate PFAS and require careful consideration of post-treatment management and disposal. Furthermore, the large-scale practical application and cost-effectiveness of most of these technologies are major limiting factors preventing their widespread use.

7. PFAS in Soil

Soil is a global reservoir and long-term source of PFAS contamination because its organic matter serves as a sink to collect and store PFAS originating from industrial sources and provides a route in which to transfer PFAS to rivers, lakes, surface water, and groundwater [224]. Soil structure plays an important role in the chemical and physical transformation of PFAS and movement within and between environmental matrices [9]. However, it is important to recognize that the relative impacts of PFAS in soil depends on interactions between many soil types, land uses, and types of PFAS (i.e., long-chain versus short-chain). Soil absorbs PFAS from the atmosphere and water at different rates depending on soil type and the extent of contaminated irrigation water use [225,226]. The persistence of PFAS in soils involves its ability to partition in the soil matrix [16], and the proteins present in soil organic matter provide a sorption site and reservoir for PFAS [227]. Soils with high amounts of total organic carbon, iron oxide, and aluminum oxide concentrations have greater relative adsorption of PFAS, and long-chain PFAS compounds appear to adsorb to soil more readily than short-chain compounds [225]. Once soil is contaminated with PFAS, the solubility of these forever chemicals enables them to be transported to surface water or leach into groundwater, leading to bioaccumulation in plants and animals and creating a circular exposure pathway [228]. The movement of PFAS in the environment and its subsequent bioaccumulation and toxicity is dependent on carbon-chain length and chemical characteristics (solubility, bioavailability), along with soil texture, enzymes, and fertilization conditions [189]. Soils contaminated with PFAS adversely affect soil function, threaten drinking-water safety, and lead to contaminated plant- and animal-derived foods that cause many detrimental human-health effects [189]. In general, PFAS contamination in soils from the application of aqueous film-forming foam (a type of foam used by fire departments to fight fires started by oil, gasoline, or other flammable liquids) is more severe than contaminated soils from fluorochemical manufacturing and biosolids from sewage-treatment facilities, landfills, and irrigation [189]. Several technologies have been developed for removing or destroying PFAS in soil and are summarized in Table 6. However, most of these methods are extremely expensive, disruptive to land being treated, and are associated with risks of chemical contamination. Of these various approaches, ball milling is an energy-efficient and cost-effective method for removing PFAS from contaminated soil, but there is considerable interest and potential for using bioremediation processes involving specific bacteria, fungi, and plant species to acquire, transform, degrade, and stabilize PFAS in contaminated soil.

8. PFAS in Plants and Plant-Derived Foods

Plants become contaminated with PFAS through exposure to contaminated air, water, and soil. Irrigation water and biosolids from sewage sludge applied to agricultural land are the most problematic because of their high PFAS concentrations [10,12,13], but other localized hotspots such as effluents from wastewater treatment plants, industrial purification facilities, landfills, and areas treated with firefighting foams are specific areas where PFAS are concentrated and bioaccumulate, and should be avoided to break their recurring circulation in the environment. Several factors contribute to PFAS bioavailability, bioaccumulation, and phytotoxicity in plants including soil organic carbon, cation exchange capacity, temperature, salinity, pH, and the presence of earthworms [256,257,258,259,260].
A limited number of studies have been conducted to collect samples of various types and parts of plants, fruit and vegetables, and tubers produced under various conditions and regions around the world and to determine concentrations and the extent of PFAS bioaccumulation [261,262,263,264,265,266,267,268,269,270,271,272]. The results from these studies showed that PFAS distribution varies across roots, stems, leaves, fruits, and heads, and among species. For example, carrots accumulate greater amounts of PFAS than potatoes and cucumbers because they absorb water and nutrients for the entire plant compared with potatoes, which are primarily storage tubers, and cucumbers, which are fruits. Shoots appear to be the main parts of plants that accumulate PFAS compared to edible portions. For lettuce, radishes, celery, tomato, and pea plants, some types of PFAS were found to have increasing concentrations from roots to above-ground edible parts, while lower concentrations of other types of PFAS (PFOA and PFOS) were found in above-ground parts of the plants. Vegetables grown on soils contaminated with sewage sludge contain relatively high concentrations of PFAS compared with those grown on uncontaminated soils, but the extent of bioaccumulation depends on the type of biosolids from sewage sludge and anaerobic digestates applied to soils [13]. Likewise, concentrations of PFAS in fruits vary by species and origin and are generally greater in concentrations than those found in other plant-based food groups such as cereals [270].
A comprehensive review of studies evaluating the source, bioaccumulation, and food-safety risk assessments of PFAS in vegetables indicated that they can contain significant concentrations of PFOA, PFOS, and some short-chain PFAS primarily derived from atmospheric deposition, grown on biosolids amended soil, and from using contaminated irrigation water [167]. Geographic location and proximity to point source PFAS production is a major determining factor for the likelihood of consuming foods exceeding advisory PFAS dietary intake guidelines. Although the prevalence and concentrations of PFAS vary among different types of vegetables, dietary-exposure risk assessments for PFAS uptake based on current guidelines for human exposure have generally been reported to be below current human-health toxicity reference values for most plant-based foods in many countries [167,265,273,274,275]. However, this conclusion may underestimate the long-term health risks due to limited data, synergistic and interactive effects of exposure to complex PFAS mixtures, and insufficient understanding of chronic low-dose dietary exposure, especially for sensitive populations. Furthermore, these evaluations were based on using different analytical methods for measuring a limited number of PFAS compounds and calculating human consumption based on limited toxicity guidelines. Other studies have shown that growing vegetables at homes near a fluorochemical industrial park [276], and vegetables grown using irrigation water containing PFOA and PFOS concentrations below the U.S. EPA lifetime health advisory for drinking water, may not be adequate to protect exposure to vegetables [277]. Furthermore, models have shown that using real-world concentrations of PFAS in contaminated ground water to irrigate vegetable production on farms would result in exceeding current human-health toxicity reference values [277].
Similar to vegetables and fruits, a limited number of studies have been conducted to assess the PFAS concentrations in cereal grains (maize, oats, wheat, canola, and perennial ryegrass) and associated plant compartments including straw, leaves, roots, husks, and stover [261,266,272,278,279,280,281,282,283,284]. In general, there are large differences in PFAS concentrations among plant species, but greater accumulation occurs in the vegetative portions of plants, especially straw, compared with grains, and PFAS concentrations increase with increasing concentrations of PFAS in soils. Several factors affect the uptake of PFAS in cereals including soil PFAS concentration and organic matter, the surface area of root systems, the amount of biomass accumulation, the amount of water transpired, irradiance, temperature, humidity, and PFAS chain length.
Soybeans are the most important oilseed crop worldwide and the fourth most abundant cultivated crop after wheat, corn, and rice [285]. Studies have shown that applying biosolids contaminated with PFAS to soil used to grow soybeans resulted in significant uptake of PFOA and PFOS in soybeans [283]. Uptake of perfluorooctane sulfonamide readily occurs in soybean plants where it is metabolized to other PFAS forms and activates their antioxidant defense system [286]. Jiang et al. [287] studied the effects of a PFAS mixture on the soil–microbe–soybean plant system and showed significant effects on the abundance of nitrification and denitrification genes in microbial communities in soil, rhizomes, and root nodules which alter the nitrogen cycle in soil and may require nitrogen fertilization to maximize soybean yields. The effects of PFAS on altering microbial communities in soil and plants that lead to changes in the nitrogen cycle is an example of the type of complex interactions between PFAS and the environment that are poorly understood and require extensive investigation.
Integrated crop and livestock systems are essential for a sustainable, circular, One Health agri-food system because of the complementary effects of practices that improve soil health, reduce pathogens, pests, and weeds, and recycle nutrients (i.e., animal manure) to minimize nutrient losses from the system [9]. As we transition toward a more circular bioeconomy, the amplifying effects of PFAS throughout the food chain is a major One Health concern. Contamination levels of PFAS in the atmosphere, groundwater, and soil become more concentrated in pastures and forages, major cereal and oilseed crops and their co-products used in animal feeds, and crop residues (e.g., straw and stover) used as animal bedding materials, which further bioaccumulate and concentrate in food-producing animals where PFAS are concentrated in meat, milk, and eggs to ultimately cause adverse effects on human health when consuming these animal-derived foods. Furthermore, in a circular bioeconomy, manure excreted from animals consuming PFAS in feed and drinking water is applied to cropland which further promotes continuing cycling of PFAS and its detrimental health effects on ecosystems and food production. Therefore, one of the unintended detrimental consequences of circular agri-food systems is perpetuating PFAS contamination. This important aspect needs to be addressed as a key component of global-health risk-management strategies.

9. PFAS in Food-Producing Animals and Animal-Derived Foods

Animal-derived foods including fish, seafood, meat, milk, and eggs are one of the main routes of human exposure to PFAS [162,288,289]. In fact, results from a few large sampling surveys that determined the presence and concentrations of selected PFAS compounds in a wide variety of foods showed that fish and seafood had the greatest amount of PFAS in all countries, but the concentrations detected did not exceed current standards for the maximum tolerable daily intake [273,274,290,291,292]. The results from some studies have shown that some samples of meat, milk, and eggs contain PFAS concentrations comparable to fish and seafood, and that animal-derived foods generally contain greater concentrations of PFAS than foods of non-animal origin [273,293]. However, the accurate quantification of various PFAS compounds in these food matrices is often a major analytical challenge because of their chemical complexity, relatively low PFAS concentrations, and environmental contamination of blanks, laboratory materials, and equipment [294].
Livestock and poultry play an essential role in a circular food system by recycling plant-based nutrients in biomass and agri-industrial by-products into valuable, nutrient-dense food products and manure, which reduces the environmental burden that would have been associated with their disposal if these materials had not been diverted toward productive use in animal feed [295]. The PFAS in contaminated soil, water, and plant-based feedstuffs have a substantial direct effect on PFAS exposure and bioaccumulation in food-producing animals and their subsequent production of meat, milk, and eggs. In addition, in many parts of the world, feed crops and associated by-products and co-products are produced in one geographic region and fed to livestock and poultry in another region of the global economy and agri-food system [296]. This decoupling of local feed production with livestock production not only disrupts nutrient cycles by depleting resources (land, water, nutrients) in feed production regions and accumulating nutrient resources (manure) in livestock production regions, but it also facilitates the transfer of PFAS from one geographic region to another. Therefore, there are substantial benefits in recoupling livestock and feed production at the local level, especially in areas with low environmental PFAS contamination, to prevent the perpetual recycling of PFAS through feed ingredients in global circular agri-food systems.
Although livestock and poultry play an essential role and provide important benefits in a circular agri-food system, they also contribute to unintended consequences by serving as a key recycler and bioaccumulator of PFAS, resulting in the production of contaminated meat, milk, and eggs, which are a main source of human PFAS exposure. Livestock and poultry can be directly exposed to PFAS from contaminated air, water, soil, and consumption of crop biomass grown on contaminated soil. Several studies have shown that the main exposure pathways to PFAS are from consuming contaminated feed and drinking water [297,298,299,300,301,302,303]. Models have estimated that 78% of ruminant exposure to PFAS is from the consumption of forages, and more than 80% of PFAS in poultry and pigs raised in outdoor production systems is from soil contamination [19]. Furthermore, the use of contaminated recycled materials (i.e., wood shavings, shredded cardboard, dried paper pulp, poultry litter ash, meat and bone meal ash) for livestock and poultry bedding can also be a major source of PFAS exposure [304,305]. When food-producing animals are exposed to contaminated recycled materials, the short- and long-chain compounds accumulate at different rates in different tissues that may not only lead to adverse health and reproductive effects in animals, but are also transferred into meat, milk, and eggs for human consumption.
In general, the distribution of PFAS in body organs and tissues is similar among species, with the main differences associated with PFAS chain length, dose, and sex [14]. Liver and blood contain the greatest concentrations of PFAS among various body tissues and organs, but the proportion varies between animal species [14]. Concentrations of PFAS in kidney are generally less than in the blood and liver, while concentrations in muscles are consistently less than those in liver, blood, offal, and kidney across animal species [14]. Although PFAS elimination rates appear to be longer in pigs than most animals, cattle studies have shown wide variation in PFAS elimination rates due to chemical form, dose, age, and sex [14]. Poultry appear to have the fastest rate of PFAS elimination among farm animals, and PFOS has been shown to be the predominant PFAS transferred to egg yolk [306]. In contrast, although studies have shown that PFAS is transferred to cow and sheep milk, it is not preferentially secreted or concentrated in milk [14]. However, despite the ability of animals to bioaccumulate PFAS after the consumption of contaminated feed and drinking water, detrimental health effects from PFAS exposure in livestock and poultry have not been reported. This lack of observed adverse health effects may be due to several factors including the relatively short productive life span (i.e., 6 weeks for broilers, 6 months for pigs, 2 years for cattle) of animals before slaughter; lack of detailed metabolomics, microbiome, immunology, gastrointestinal physiology, and epigenetics evaluations; limited sample size; and differences in relative toxicity and doses of specific PFAS compounds.
Most of the studies conducted to evaluate PFAS bioaccumulation in body tissues and organs, metabolism, excretion, and deposition in meat, milk, and eggs have involved only a few animals that were administered PFAS during a relatively short period of time (Table 7), which likely resulted in a lack of detrimental animal health effects being reported [14]. Only a few studies have evaluated naturally contaminated feed, water, and environmental conditions on PFAS concentrations in meat [307,308,309], milk [297,299,310,311], and eggs [312,313,314,315]. These surveys provide more realistic assessments of real-world, longer-term PFAS exposure of livestock and poultry, and the extent of transfer into animal-derived food products. As a result, models have been developed to estimate the transfer of PFAS from feed, water, and the environment to animal-derived food products while also providing a basis for seasonal cattle and sheep-grazing management strategies to reduce exposure [316,317,318]. Furthermore, some analytical methods that use key biomarkers for specific chemical forms of PFAS have been developed for detection in meat [319] and milk [320]. However, depending on the specific PFAS compound and the maximum tolerable PFAS limit guidelines for a specific country, some studies have suggested that the concentrations of PFAS in some animal-derived food products are human-health concerns, while other types of PFAS and concentrations detected indicate consumption below threshold levels of concern. However, as previously mentioned, current standards or threshold levels of concern may underestimate the long-term health risks due to limited data, synergistic and interactive effects of exposure to complex PFAS mixtures, and insufficient understanding of chronic low-dose dietary exposure, especially for sensitive populations. Because of these inconsistencies and deficiencies in current standards, it is essential to harmonize the maximum tolerable food-safety standards globally to provide clear guidance.
Although animal-feed ingredients are a major source of PFAS exposure for livestock and poultry, very few studies have been conducted to evaluate the presence and concentration of various types of PFAS contaminants in common ingredients. The analysis of 18 different animal feeds containing mixtures of plant- and animal-based ingredients for various species (amphibian, fish, invertebrate, and mammal) showed that (1) PFOS, PFHxS, PFOA, and short-chain PFCAs were in the highest concentrations and were the most frequent forms found in all feeds, (2) different ingredients had different PFAS profiles, and (3) plant-based ingredients contained mainly short-chain PFSAs, while animal-based ingredients contained longer-chain PFSAs [340]. Based on these results, PFAS contamination in lab and experimental animal feed can cause numerous potential challenges for interpreting results from PFAS toxicology studies because of (1) the unintended introduction of PFAS during animal-exposure experiments that can lead to premature toxicity and misinterpretation of results, (2) multiple PFAS that may be present in contaminated feeds that can interfere with measuring responses from the target PFAS of interest, (3) contaminated controls that can make it difficult to interpret PFAS exposure results, and (4) difficulties in evaluating low and environmentally relevant PFAS doses [340].
Feeding rendered animal by-products to food-producing animals is another essential part of recycling nutrients from food waste in a circular bioeconomy and food system [341]. Several types of protein meals, including blood meal, meat and bone meal, meat meal, poultry by-product meal, poultry meal, hydrolyzed feather meal, and fish meal, are sources of high concentrations of highly digestible protein and amino acids that are used in pet food, poultry, livestock, fish, and crustacean diets [341]. In addition, animal fats such as beef tallow, choice white grease, and poultry fats are also recycled as high-energy feed ingredients in livestock and poultry diets. These animal-derived feed ingredients are susceptible to PFAS contamination because they are derived from livestock and poultry tissues that bioaccumulate these compounds. Unfortunately, little is known about the prevalence of contamination, specific types of compounds, and concentrations of PFAS in rendered animal by-products because there is no feed safety-monitoring system designated to analyze these materials, and very few studies have been conducted to gain insights into the prevalence and potential significance of PFAS contamination in these by-products. The results from one study showed that although PFAS concentrations ranged from undetectable to 37 ng/g dry matter, blood meal contained the greatest PFAS concentrations compared with meat meal and feather meal [300]. Furthermore, the total average PFAS concentrations in these animal-derived by-products was about 10 times greater (10.9 ng/g dry matter) than the average total PFAS concentrations (0.75 ng/g dry matter) in plant-derived high-protein ingredients (soybean meal and dried distillers grains with solubles) [300]. These results indicate that rendered animal protein meals appear to be a substantial potential source of PFAS consumption if included in diets for food-producing animals.
Globally, countries in the European Union have been the most proactive in establishing food and animal-feed safety guidelines for PFAS. In 2018, the European Commission assigned the task of developing analytical methods and measures to quantify low concentrations of PFAS compounds using routine analysis in food laboratories to the Reference Laboratory for Halogenated POPs (Persistent Organic Pollutants) in Feed and Food for the purpose of protecting human health from the detrimental effects of PFAS consumption from food [342]. The resulting guidance document was intended to establish analytical parameters to standardize the PFAS analysis of food and feed that would enable (1) establishing maximum concentrations of PFAS in food and feed, (2) establishing databases to recommend actions levels, (3) assessing exposure of populations based on dietary intake and risk, and (4) enforcing regulations once limits were established.
More recently, the EU Commission adopted Regulation 2023/915 in April 2023 which established the maximum tolerable concentrations of four individual and total PFAS (PFOS, PFOA, perfluorononanoic acid—PFNA, PFHxS) in animal feed ingredients (Table 8) and food of animal origin, except milk (Table 9) [343]. These maximum tolerance levels vary because each PFAS has different toxicity kinetics in different animal species, and some estimates have not been determined because of insufficient data. Limited studies have been conducted to analyze samples of blood and liver from farm animals exposed to PFAS in various countries under various conditions of real-world PFAS exposure. For example, blood and livers from farm animals in various regions of Japan were collected and analyzed to show that PFOS was the most common PFAS contaminant and that serum concentrations were greatest in chickens (5.8 ng/mL) followed by cattle (3.0 ng/mL), goats (2.4 ng/mL), horses (0.71 ng/mL), and pigs (0.37 ng/mL), which had lower concentrations than those reported in other studies for wild animals and fish [324]. Similarly, a survey of tissue samples from pigs and chickens raised on farms near Beijing, China [308] had concentrations (wet weight) of total perfluorinated compounds of 3.4 ng/g in pig liver, 0.51 ng/g in pig kidney, and 0.17 ng/g in pig heart, with lesser amounts found in chicken liver (0.10 ng/g), chicken heart (0.05 ng/g), pork loin (0.02 ng/g), and chicken breast (0.01 ng/g). As a result of the lack of these types of studies, different toxicokinetics among types of PFAS compounds, different PFAS metabolism among animal species, and different rates of bioaccumulation in various organs and tissues, it has been difficult to establish harmonized maximum tolerable standards for PFAS in feed and animal-derived foods. Therefore, although maximum tolerance levels have been established, enacting regulations for PFAS in feed in the European Union is not anticipated in the foreseeable future due to insufficient data to estimate the PFAS concentrations in individual ingredients, and the relative contributions of PFAS-contaminated ingredients to the total diet that would ensure that maximum tolerable levels in animal-derived foods are not exceeded [343]. A PFAS assessment and monitoring system needs to be established to collect and analyze various feed ingredients from different sources and geographic origins to establish a reference database. Until this occurs, the recommended maximum tolerable levels of PFAS in complete feed as shown in Table 8 are the current best estimates to avoid exceeding PFAS in animal-derived foods.

10. PFAS in Animal Manure, Food Waste, Compost, and Anaerobic Digestates

Animal manure and food waste are another poorly understood aspect of the detrimental environmental effects of PFAS contamination, but they play a very important role in perpetuating the recycling of PFAS in circular agri-food systems. As previously described, numerous plant- and animal-derived food sources have been shown to be contaminated with multiple PFAS compounds. This is important because 33 to 40% of the food that is produced globally is lost or wasted annually [344]. Unfortunately, most food loss and waste is disposed in landfills, which is not only a major contributor to the production of methane and carbon dioxide emissions resulting from decomposition, but it also enables PFAS accumulation [345]. Results from a recent study showed that food-contact materials present in food waste were the primary source of 21 different PFAS compounds detected in food waste disposed in landfills, the amount of PFAS in incinerator plant leachate was greater than leachate from landfills, and many PFAS forms had the ability to leach into water [346].
Because of the environmentally damaging effects of disposing of food waste in landfills, attempts are being made to divert food waste from landfills and toward aerobic composting to produce soil amendments, anaerobic digestion to produce biogas, and recycling energy and nutrients into animal feed [345]. Although there are limited data, food-waste streams are a source of PFAS in compost and digestates because these compounds are commonly present in low concentrations in food from non-contaminated areas, and these waste streams contain food-contact materials that have relatively high concentrations of PFAS [275]. Very little is known about the fate of PFAS in food waste during the anaerobic digestion process [347]. Composting food waste is becoming a common practice for recovering nutrients and producing soil amendments while avoiding methane and carbon-dioxide emissions resulting from the decomposition of food waste in landfills [345]. However, land application of compost can result in recycling PFAS back into the environment and food supply. Results from a recent study showed that 15 different PFAS compounds were detected in municipal food-waste compost, PFAS concentrations increased during composting, and food-contact materials (paper, plastic, coated metal) present in food waste were the greatest source of PFAS in food-waste compost [348]. Therefore, the separation of food-contact materials from food waste before composting can substantially reduce PFAS concentrations in compost. Results from another study showed that 68 different PFAS compounds were detected in food-contact materials, but toxicity hazard data are available for only 57% of the compounds found in food packaging [349]. Furthermore, results from another study showed that compostable food serviceware contained up to 13 different PFAS compounds, with some at relatively high concentrations, compared with the detection of only PFOS at a low concentration in fresh dairy manure, and no detectable PFAS in grass clippings and livestock bedding [350]. Comparatively, treated or composted biosolids have greater PFAS concentrations than food-waste compost, which contains greater concentrations than green waste or other organic composts [275]. These results indicate that composting food waste containing substantial amounts of food-contact materials and compostable food serviceware is a major source of PFAS when producing compost, which is a major concern for applications to soil to produce fruits and vegetables for human consumption, and field crops and forages for livestock production.
There are no standards for PFAS in compost or digestates from anaerobic digesters in the U.S., but some cities and states have implemented regulations to prohibit PFAS in food packaging, and some manufacturers are beginning to voluntarily phase out PFAS use in food-contact materials [275]. It is very difficult to test for PFAS in compost because EPA-approved laboratory procedures only apply to drinking water, each lab has its own modified method which makes comparing results across labs difficult, and testing is expensive if it is available. Furthermore, there are no methods for PFAS removal from compost other than to prevent using contaminated materials to produce them. Some states in the U.S. are implementing protective measures such as screening composts made from biosolids and requiring the collection and treatment of contact water from composting sites that accept food waste [275].
Proper management of animal manure is an essential component of a circular agri-food system to ensure that nutrients are recovered and recycled for productive purposes. Beyond manure application as a soil amendment, anaerobic digestion to produce biogas has become an effective alternative recycling process, where residual digestate is then applied to cropland [351]. However, PFAS that may be present in manure from animals consuming PFAS-contaminated drinking water and feed are likely to become concentrated in the digestate. Furthermore, various methods are used to enhance biogas yield during anaerobic digestion, and little is known about the fate of various PFAS during these anaerobic digestion processes. Like composting, there is no technology available to remove PFAS from digestate from anaerobic digestion of manure other than preventing PFAS farther up the biological chain.
Unfortunately, there are limited options for altering agricultural practices to reduce PFAS contamination in plant- and animal-derived foods and waste streams (Table 10). In general, testing soil, water supplies, and animal-feed ingredients for the presence of PFAS contamination may minimize PFAS animal exposure on farms if point sources can be identified and not used. However, standardized analytical methodologies are needed to accurately quantify the large number of varying chemical composition of PFAS compounds in diverse biological matrices.

11. How Do We Fix This Major One Health Problem?

Every person in every local community of every country around the world is entitled to have clean air to breathe, clean water to drink, and safe food to eat as a basic human right. As Brooks [352] eloquently summarized, “despite political pendulum swings, we must all keep our eyes on the horizon. The environmental and health threats facing our shared home persist, the opportunities to develop more sustainable solutions and practices remain timely, and realizing the Sustainable Development Goals for all people is necessary.” Unfortunately, our ability to assess and monitor new environmental threats, such as PFAS, is limited because scientific analyses are incapable of keeping up with the amounts and types of chemicals released into the environment [353]. The widespread global contamination, environmental persistence, irreversible exposure, and toxic effects of even low concentrations of PFAS in soil, plants, food-producing animals, and humans are compelling indicators that PFAS have become a major One Health and sustainability problem.
Unfortunately, there is much less scientific and public awareness of the devastating effects of PFAS on the environment and all living things compared with other novel entities (i.e., microplastics), and the other eight planetary boundaries that cannot be exceeded if humanity is to exist and survive on Earth. Planetary boundaries are defined as scientific thresholds or limits in the Earth’s atmosphere and ecosystems that must not be exceeded by human activities if we are to maintain a stable and resilient Earth ecosystem that will ensure a safe operating space for human existence and survival [354,355]. Novel entities, which includes PFAS and microplastics, are one of the six (i.e., climate change, disrupted global nitrogen and phosphorus flows, functional and genetic biodiversity loss, freshwater use, land system change) of nine planetary boundaries that has been exceeded [353,356]. To make matters worse, studies have shown that microplastics act as carriers for PFAS, and their many complex interactions affect PFAS distribution, accumulation and toxic effects within ecosystems [357]. Although the persistence of these chemicals in the environment is often considered to be a less hazardous problem than toxicity, it is the main reason why these novel entity pollution problems have escalated into bigger problems because they spread over long distances, continually accumulate over time, and cause life-long exposure [356]. Although the combined toxicity of PFAS and microplastics is poorly understood, their coexistence and cumulative impact on the environment require the development of co-removal technologies to effectively mitigate them [357]. As a result, there is an urgent need to develop sustainable and bio-based alternative food packaging materials with similar physicochemical properties as found in current materials, but without the toxic effects.
Promising bio-based materials including plant polysaccharides, proteins, and waxes, along with recycled by-products and waste materials from agri-food industries that can be used to replace PFAS and plastics while also enhancing oxygen scavenging, moisture absorbing, and antimicrobial properties of sustainable food-packaging materials [358]. Until new safe and sustainable alternatives for PFAS and plastics are developed, our ability to control further environmental contamination is limited.
The extremely high environmental resilience and very slow degradation of PFAS results in only two fates, dilution or burial, if no mitigation actions are used [6]. There are a limited number of practices that consumers can adopt to limit PFAS exposure because of the pervasiveness of these “forever chemicals” (Table 4). There are no remediation practices that can be used to remove PFAS from the atmosphere, and limited methods to remove PFAS from water supplies (Table 5) and soil (Table 6). Although some remediation technologies for removing PFAS from contaminated water and soil are effective, most of them require many more years of development to make them technically and economically viable for practical implementation. Currently, the best methods for PFAS removal from contaminated water supplies involve filtration by reverse osmosis, or the use of membranes or activated carbon [20,217], and the most practical method for removing PFAS in soil appears to be ball milling [247,248]. However, these PFAS remediation techniques involve significant long-term resources and financial investment, have limited ability to remove short-chain PFAS compounds, and the effects that their use may have on local ecosystems are unknown [6]. There are also a lack of effective control measures and limited practices to reduce PFAS contamination in plant- and animal-derived foods and waste streams (Table 10). Phasing out one PFAS compound and replacing it with another of similar structure and function has been the most common industry practice [6]. However, this practice does not solve the problem of the continual production, use, and disposal of many types of PFAS in the environment. This global PFAS contamination and One Health problem can only be overcome by phasing out and banning future use of these forever chemicals.
There are numerous challenges in regulating PFAS [359]. First, because of the numerous applications, widespread use, and multiple benefits of PFAS in a long list of consumer products around the world, industries that produce or rely on these chemicals exert tremendous political pressure to prevent or limit regulations because of the economic losses that would be created in transitioning to safer alternatives. Furthermore, the lack of a universally accepted regulatory definition that adequately represents the diversity of the nearly 15,000 types of PFAS compounds, and the lack of uniform international standards and approaches for regulating PFAS among countries and regions has made it difficult for businesses to track and ensure compliance across borders in complex global supply chains. In addition, the complex chemistry of PFAS and their multiple and diverse impacts on health and the environment require significant interdisciplinary research investment, which is expensive and time-consuming, to obtain comprehensive data on the hazards and risks of PFAS for informing effective regulations. Lastly, the current regulations of individual PFAS often result in industries substituting with other less studied PFAS compounds to avoid regulatory compliance, but this does not reduce their hazardous health and environmental effects.
Initial attempts to regulate the environmental contamination of PFAS began in 2009, when the Stockholm Convention of the United Nations Environment Programme listed two specific types of PFAS compounds, PFOA and PFOS, as persistent organic pollutants in Annex A, which involves eliminating production and use, and Annex C which aims to restrict the production and use of PFAS chemicals [9]. Since then, some voluntary and regulatory frameworks have been implemented for PFOS, PFOA, and a few other types of PFAS compounds including PFCAs, PFSAs, perfluorooctane sulfonamides (FOSAs), and perfluorooctane sulfonamidoethanols (FOSEs), at national or regional levels in the European Union and United States [360,361,362], but it is unclear if they have been effective in mitigating the harmful effects on humans, animals, plants, and the environment.
International and U.S. federal and state regulatory policies and guidance are complex and are influenced by numerous political, social, economic, and scientific factors [363]. Specifically, balancing the tradeoffs between the perceived benefits of PFAS on society versus the detrimental effects of PFAS on the environmental and human health has been the main determinant of the extent of development of PFAS regulations, but political will, social awareness, economic and scientific resource availability, and practical challenges have also contributed [364]. Unfortunately, because of various socioeconomic and political factors [228], regulations and standards to restrict or ban the use of PFAS to prevent further environmental contamination vary substantially among countries [359].
The EU and Canada have developed and implemented the most strict regulations aimed at reducing and controlling the production and use of PFAS. In Europe, the production and marketing of PFOA salts and precursors for all industrial uses including space exploration was banned in 2020 [364], and other PFAS compounds including PFOA, PFOS, PFNA, and PFHxS were restricted under a regulatory framework for food contaminants (https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/risk-management-risk-reduction-and-sustainable-chemistry.html, accessed on 17 January 2025). In 2023, the European Chemicals Agency proposed greater restrictions on the manufacture, marketing, and use of a broader group of PFAS rather than individual compounds [359]. The EU Reference Laboratory for halogenated POPs in feed and food developed a guidance document on analytical parameters to determine PFAS in food and feed [342], and the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment [343] published guidelines recognizing that animal feed is key to compliance with maximum PFAS levels in food of animal origin. Some EU countries (i.e., Denmark, France, Germany, Sweden, The Netherlands) are enacting more strict PFAS regulations. For example, Denmark introduced a ban on the use of food contact materials containing PFAS, and The Netherlands has set stricter standards for monitoring and regulating PFAS contamination from industrial sources and maximum concentration limits of PFAS in groundwater and drinking water [359]. In Canada, the Canadian government implemented the final version of the Prohibition of Certain Toxic Substances Regulations in 2024 that further restricted the manufacture, use, sale, offer for sale, and import of three PFAS subgroups (PFOS, PFOA, and long-chain PFCAs) that were already regulated [359]. In addition, comprehensive risk assessments of PFAS by Environment and Climate Change Canada have led to prohibiting some types of PFAS in consumer products, environmental monitoring, and promoting the development and use of safer alternatives [359]. Health Canada has also defined limits of different PFAS compounds in agricultural, industrial, and commercial soils [365].
In contrast, although the federal governments in the U.S. and Australia have provided some education, guidance, and standards regarding PFAS use and contamination, any regulatory action has been deferred to state and territory governments [363]. For example, although the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has provided guidance for sampling methods to measure PFAS in potable and non-potable water, no published protocols are available for determining the presence and concentrations of PFAS in soil and forage crop samples, nor are there regulations or guidelines for hazardous limits in soils for agricultural or industrial industries [9]. Furthermore, there are no policies and government incentives for remediation of contaminated air, water, and soil [9]. However, several states in the U.S. (i.e., California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, New York, Vermont, Washington) have implemented bans or restrictions on PFAS in various industrial and consumer products. For example, California law prohibits the manufacture, distribution. or sale of textiles and plant fiber-based food packaging that contain regulated PFAS, and requires companies to provide product labeling warnings for cookware and other consumer products containing PFAS [359]. Although the apparent disconnect between federal and state PFAS regulations in the U.S. may seem problematic, the current downsizing of regulatory agencies and deregulation at the federal level in the U.S. can be overcome by states maintaining and enacting more stringent PFAS regulations in the future.
Several countries in the Asia-Pacific region (i.e., Australia, China, Japan, New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Vietnam) have integrated PFAS regulations into existing chemical regulation frameworks, and may require permits or licenses before manufacturing, importing, distributing, or using PFAS if they are not explicitly prohibited. Some Asia-Pacific countries are planning to implement more strict regulations comparable to those in the EU and U.S. for maximum PFAS limits in drinking water (Japan, Taiwan) and banning PFAS in cosmetics (New Zealand). In January 2025, Japan implemented regulations that prohibit the manufacture, import, and use of 138 PFAS compounds [359]. South Korea has imposed restrictions or bans on eight PFAS including PFOA, PFOS, PFHxS, PFBA, PFBS, PFHxA, and PFNA [359]. Unfortunately, other countries in Asia, Latin America (except Mexico and Brazil), and Africa have not developed or implemented PFAS regulations. China and Brazil continue to allow the production and use of PFOA and PFOS, even though they were designated to be eliminated from further use [363].
Unknown chemicals pose never-ending challenges for safety risk assessments [366], and there are several practical challenges in developing and implementing effective PFAS regulations [363]. The lack of an authoritative list of all PFAS compounds being used limits our ability to evaluate the health effects of all types of PFAS. It is infeasible to conduct complete toxicity assessments for each one of the nearly 15,000 PFAS compounds that have been produced and released into the global environment. Furthermore, some of the toxic effects of PFAS observed in animals may not be applicable to humans. Lastly, regulations are difficult to establish for a compound that provides numerous societal benefits unless there is clear and convincing scientific evidence that these compounds cause harm to humans and the environment. Regardless of these challenges, PFAS are a major One Health problem that urgently must be addressed through collaboration among governments, industry stakeholders, and the public to limit the production and use of these compounds and reduce their presence in our global ecosystem [357]. Because of the widespread global production, use, and environmental impact of PFAS, a coordinated global effort of cooperation, robust scientific research, and data sharing is needed to develop harmonized regulatory frameworks and develop safer alternatives to PFAS to mitigate the detrimental effects on health and the environment.

12. Conclusions

There is no safe level of PFAS. The widespread global contamination, environmental persistence, irreversible exposure, and toxic effects of even low concentrations of PFAS in soil, plants, food-producing animals, and humans are compelling indicators that PFAS have become a major One Health and sustainability problem. Human exposure to PFAS causes detrimental health effects associated with nearly every organ (liver, kidneys, lungs, heart, brain, bones, and reproductive organs) and physiological system (circulatory, neural, endocrine, reproductive, and immune systems) in the human body. Novel entities, which includes PFAS and microplastics, are one of the nine planetary boundaries that has been exceeded, and the many complex interactions between these two categories of compounds affect PFAS distribution, accumulation, and toxic effects within ecosystems.
There are a limited number of practices that consumers can adopt to limit PFAS exposure because of the widespread presence of these “forever chemicals” in numerous consumer products. There are no remediation practices that can be used to remove PFAS from the atmosphere, limited methods to remove PFAS from water supplies and soil, and few practices that can minimize PFAS exposure of plants and animals. Therefore, PFAS production and use must be drastically curtailed except for critical uses. Research should be focused on developing bio-based materials including plant polysaccharides, proteins, and waxes, along with recycled by-products and waste materials from agri-food industries that can be used to replace PFAS and plastics while also enhancing the oxygen-scavenging, moisture-absorbing, and antimicrobial properties of sustainable food-packaging materials.
At the same time, industries must be required to pretreat water before discharging it into wastewater treatment plants to filter PFAS at the source and make the polluter responsible for cleaning up their own mess. Farmers must not spread sewage sludge on cropland and pastures, but should test soil for possible levels of PFAS contamination and should stop producing feed and food on contaminated soil. Consumers should ask marketers and manufacturers if their packaging and equipment are PFAS-free, and they should source food products only from farms that have not used biosolids as a soil amendment. Lastly, governments, industry stakeholders, and the public must collaborate to control the production and use of these compounds and reduce their presence and adverse health effects in our global ecosystem.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

All data and information supporting reported results are provided in the Reference section, with citations providing links to each article cited in this review.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
EFSAEuropean Food Safety Authority
EUEuropean Union
FOSAsPerfluorooctane sulfonamides
FOSEsPerfluorooctane sulfonamidoethanols
PFAAsPerfluoroalkyl acids
PFASPerfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances
PFBSPerfluorobutanesulfonate
PFCAsPerfluoroalkyl carboxylates
PFHxAPerfluorohexanoate
PFHxSPerfluorohexane sulfonate
PFNAPerfluorononanoic acid
PFOAPerfluorooctanoate
PFOSPerfluorooctane sulfonate
PFSAsPerfluoroalkane sulfonates
POPsPersistent organic pollutants
U.S. EPAUnited States Environmental Protection Agency

References

  1. OECD Environment Directorate. Toward a New Comprehensive Global Database of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs): Summary Report on Updating the OECD 2007 List of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs); Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD): Paris, France, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  2. Glüge, J.; Scheringer, M.; Cousins, I.T.; DeWitt, J.C.; Goldenman, G.; Herzke, D.; Lohmann, R.; Ng, C.A.; Trier, X.; Wang, Z. An overview of the uses of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Environ. Sci. Process. Impacts 2021, 22, 2345–2373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Panieri, E.; Baralic, K.; Djukic-Cosic, D.; Djordjevic, A.B.; Saso, L. PFAS Molecules: A major concern for the human health and the environment. Toxics 2022, 10, 44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Li, F.; Duan, J.; Tian, S.T.; Ji, H.D.; Zhu, Y.M.; Wei, Z.S. Short-chain per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in aquatic systems: Occurrence, impacts and treatment. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 380, 122506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Cousins, I.T.; DeWitt, J.C.; Gluge, J.; Goldenman, G.; Herzke, D.; Lohmann, R.; Miller, M.; Ng, C.A.; Scheringr, M.; Vierke, L.; et al. Strategies for grouping per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) to protect human and environmental health. Environ. Sci. Process. Impacts 2020, 22, 1444–1460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Wang, Z.; DeWitt, J.C.; Higgins, C.P.; Cousins, I.T. A never-ending story of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs). Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 51, 2508–2518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Sunderland, E.M.; Hu, X.C.; Dassuncao, C.; Tokranov, A.K.; Wagner, C.C.; Allen, J.G. A review of the pathways to poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) and present understanding of health effects. J. Expo. Sci. Environ. Epidemiol. 2019, 29, 131–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Meegoda, J.N.; Kewalramani, J.A.; Li, B.; March, R.W. Review of the applications, environmental release, and remediation technologies of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 8117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Jha, G.; Kankarla, V.; McLennon, E.; Pal, S.; Sihi, D.; Dari, B.; Diaz, D.; Nocco, M. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in integrated crop-livestock systems: Environmental exposure and human health risks. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 12550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Zareitalabad, P.; Siemens, J.; Harmer, M.; Amelung, W. Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) in surface waters, sediments, soils and wastewater—A review on concentrations and distribution. Chemosphere 2013, 91, 725–732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Hamid, H.; Li, L.Y.; Grace, J.R. Review of the fate and transformation of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) in landfills. Environ. Pollut. 2018, 235, 74–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Sepulvado, J.G.; Blaine, A.C.; Hundal, L.S.; Higgins, C.P. Occurrence and fate of perfluorochemicals in soil following the land application of municipal biosolids. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 8106–8112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Ghisi, R.; Vamerali, T.; Manzetti, S. Accumulation of perfluorinated alkyl substances (PFAS) in agricultural plants: A review. Environ. Res. 2019, 169, 326–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Death, C.; Bell, C.; Champness, D.; Milne, C.; Reichman, S.; Hagen, T. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in livestock and game species: A review. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 774, 144795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Brake, H.D.; Langfeldt, A.; Kaneene, J.B.; Wilkins, M.J. Current per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS) research points to a growing threat in animals. JAVMA 2023, 261, 952–958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Bolan, N.; Sarkar, B.; Vithanage, M.; Singh, G.; Tsang, D.C.W.; Mukhopadhyay, R.; Ramadass, K.; Vinu, A.; Sun, Y.; Ramanayaka, S.; et al. Distribution, behavior, bioavailability and remediation of poly- and per-fluoroalkyl substance (PFAS) in solid biowastes and biowaste-treated soil. Environ. Int. 2021, 155, 106600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Peritore, A.F.; Gugliandolo, E.; Cuzzocrea, S.; Crupi, R.; Britti, D. Current review of increasing animal health threat of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS): Harms, limitations, and alternatives to manage their toxicity. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 11707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Nakayama, S.F.; Yoshikane, M.; Onoda, Y.; Nishihama, Y.; Iwai-Shimada, M.; Takagi, M.; Kobayashi, Y.; Isobe, T. Worldwide trends in tracing poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in the environment. TrAC Trends Anal. Chem. 2019, 121, 115410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Brambilla, G.; D’Hollander, W.; Oliaei, F.; Stahl, T.; Weber, R. Pathways and factors for food safety and food security at PFOS contaminated sites within a problem based learning approach. Chemosphere 2015, 129, 192–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. DeWitt, J.C. (Ed.) Toxicological Effects of Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances; Humana Press: Totowa, NJ, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Podder, A.; Sadmani, A.H.M.A.; Reinhart, D.; Chang, N.-B.; Goel, R. Per and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) as a contaminant of emerging concern in surface water: A transboundary review of their occurrences and toxicity effects. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 419, 126361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Espartero, L.J.L.; Yamada, M.; Ford, J.; Owens, G.; Prow, T.; Juhasz, A. Health-related toxicity of emerging per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances: Comparison to legacy PFOS and PFOA. Environ. Res. 2022, 212, 113431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Nian, M.; Luo, K.; Luo, F.; Aimuzi, R.; Huo, X.N.; Chen, Q.; Tian, Y.; Zhang, J. Association between prenatal exposure to PFAS and fetal sex hormones: Are the short-chain PFAS safer? Environ. Sci. Technol. 2020, 54, 8291–8299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Woodlief, T.; Vance, S.; Hu, Q.; DeWitt, J. Immunotoxicity of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances: Insights into short-chain PFAS exposure. Toxics 2021, 9, 100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Rosato, I.; Zare Jeddi, M.; Ledda, C.; Gallo, E.; Fletcher, T.; Pitter, G.; Batzella, E.; Canova, C. How to investigate human health effects related to exposure to mixtures of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances: A systematic review of statistical methods. Environ. Res. 2022, 205, 112565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Sun, M.; Arevalo, E.; Strynar, M.; Lindstrom, A.; Richardson, M.; Kearns, B.; Pickett, A.; Smith, C.; Knappe, D.R.U. Legacy and emerging perfluoroalkyl substances are important drinking water contaminants in the Cape Fear River Watershed of North Carolina. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 2016, 3, 415–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Gebbink, W.A.; Van Asseldonk, L.; Van Leeuwen, S.P.J. Presence of emerging per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) in river and drinking water near a fluorochemical production plant in the Netherlands. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 51, 11057–11065. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Kotlarz, N.; McCord, J.; Collier, D.; Lea, C.S.; Strynar, M.; Lindstrom, A.B.; Wilkie, A.A.; Islam, J.Y.; Matney, K.; Tarte, P.; et al. Measurement of novel, drinking water-associated PFAS in blood from adults and children in Wilmington, North Carolina. Environ. Health Perspect. 2020, 128, 77005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Wang, Y.; Chang, W.; Wang, L.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, M.; Wang, Y.; Li, P. A review of sources, multimedia distribution and health risks of novel fluorinated alternatives. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2019, 182, 109402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Salihovic, S.; Stubleski, J.; Kärrman, A.; Larrson, A.; Fall, T.; Lind, L.; Lind, P.M. Changes in markers of liver function in relations to changes in perfluoroalkyl substances—A longitudinal study. Environ. Int. 2018, 117, 196–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Bassler, J.; Ducatman, A.; Elliott, M.; Wen, S.; Wahlang, B.; Barnett, J.; Cave, M.C. Environmental perfluoroalkyl acid exposures are associated with liver disease characterized by apoptosis and altered serum adipocytokines. Environ. Pollut. 2019, 247, 1055–1063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Jin, R.; McConnell, R.; Catherine, C.; Xu, S.; Walker, D.I.; Stratakis, N.; Jones, D.P.; Miller, G.W.; Peng, C.; Conti, D.V.; et al. Perfluoroalkyl substances and severity of nonalcoholic fatty liver in children: An untargeted metabolomics approach. Environ. Int. 2020, 134, 105220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Stratakis, N.; Conti, D.V.; Jin, R.; Margetaki, K.; Valvi, D.; Siskos, A.P.; Maitre, L.; Garcia, E.; Varo, N.; Zhao, Y.; et al. Prenatal exposure to perfluoroalkyl substances associated with increased susceptibility to liver injury in children. Hepatology 2020, 72, 1758–1770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Costello, E.; Rock, S.; Statakis, N.; Eckel, S.P.; Walker, D.I.; Valvi, D.; Cserbik, D.; Jenkins, T.; Xanthakos, S.A.; Kohli, R.; et al. Exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances and makers of liver injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Environ. Health Perspect. 2022, 130, 46001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Shankar, A.; Xiao, J.; Ducatman, A. Perfluoroalkyl chemicals and chronic kidney disease in US adults. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2011, 174, 893–900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Kataria, A.; Trachtman, H.; Malaga-Dieguez, L.; Trasande, L. Association between perfluoroalkyl acids and kidney function in a cross-sectional study of adolescents. Environ. Health. 2015, 14, 89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Stanifer, J.W.; Stapleton, H.M.; Souma, T.; Wittmer, A.; Zhao, X.; Boulware, L.E. Perfluorinated chemicals as emerging environmental threats to kidney health: A scoping review. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2018, 13, 1479–1492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Wang, J.; Zeng, X.W.; Bloom, M.S.; Qian, Z.; Hinyard, L.J.; Belue, R.; Lin, S.; Wang, S.Q.; Tian, Y.P.; Yang, M.; et al. Renal function and isomers of perfluorooctanoate (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonate (PFOS): Isomers of C8 health project in China. Chemosphere 2019, 218, 1042–1049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Wang, P.; Liu, D.; Yan, S.; Liang, Y.; Cui, J.; Guo, L.; Ren, S.; Chen, P. The role of ferroptosis in the damage of human proximal tubule epithelial cells caused by perfluorooctane sulfonate. Toxics 2022, 10, 436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Dong, G.H.; Tung, K.Y.; Tsai, C.H.; Liu, M.M.; Wang, D.; Liu, W.; Jin, Y.H.; Hsieh, W.S.; Lee, Y.L.; Chen, P.C. Serum polyfluoroalkyl concentrations, asthma outcomes, and immunological markers in a case-control study of Taiwanese children. Environ. Health Perspect. 2013, 121, 507–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Bao, W.W.; Qian, Z.; Geiger, S.D.; Liu, E.; Liu, Y.; Wang, S.Q.; Lawrence, W.R.; Yang, B.Y.; Hu, L.W.; Zeng, X.W.; et al. Gender-specific associations between serum isomers of perfluoroalkyl substances and blood pressure among Chinese: Isomers of C8 health project in China. Sci. Tot. Environ. 2017, 607–608, 1304–1312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Khalil, N.; Ebert, J.R.; Honda, M.; Lee, M.; Ramzi, W.; Nahhas, R.W.; Koskela, A.; Hangartner, T.; Kannan, K. Perfluoroalkyl substances, bone density, and cardio-metabolic risk factors in obese 8–12 year old children: A pilot study. Environ. Res. 2018, 160, 314–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Huang, M.; Jiao, J.; Zhuang, P.; Chen, X.; Wang, J.; Zhang, Y. Serum polyfluoroalkyl chemicals are associated with risk of cardiovascular diseases in national US population. Environ. Int. 2018, 119, 37–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. De Toni, L.; Radu, C.M.; Sabovic, I.; Di Nisio, A.; Dall’Acqua, S.; Guidolin, D.; Spampinato, S.; Campello, E.; Simioni, P.; Foresta, C. Increased cardiovascular risk associated with chemical sensitivity to perfluoro-octanoic acid: Role of platelet aggregation. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Li, N.; Liu, Y.; Papandonatos, G.D.; Calafat, A.M.; Eaton, C.B.; Kelsey, K.T.; Cecil, K.M.; Kalkwarf, H.J.; Yolton, K.; Lanphear, B.P.; et al. Gestational and childhood exposure to per- and polyfluoro-alkyl substances and cardiometabolic risk at age 12 years. Environ. Int. 2021, 147, 106344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Ding, N.; Karvonen-Gutierrez, C.A.; Mukherjee, B.; Calafat, A.M.; Harlow, S.D.; Park, S.K. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances and incident hypertension in multi-racial/ethnic women: The study of women’s health across the nation. Hypertension 2022, 79, 1876–1886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Preston, E.V.; Hivert, M.F.; Fleisch, A.F.; Calafat, A.M.; Sagiv, S.K.; Perng, W.; Rifas-Shiman, S.L.; Chavarro, J.E.; Oken, E.; Zota, A.R.; et al. Early-pregnancy plasma per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS) concentrations and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in the project viva cohort. Environ. Int. 2022, 165, 107335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Schillemans, T.; Donat-Vargas, C.; Lindh, C.H.; de Faire, U.; Wolk, A.; Leander, K.; Åkesson, A. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances and risk of myocardial infarction and stroke: A nested case-control study in Sweden. Environ. Health Perspect. 2022, 130, 37007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Hoffman, K.; Webster, T.F.; Weisskopf, M.G.; Weinberg, J.; Vieira, V.M. Exposure to perfluoroalkyl chemicals and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder in U.S. children 12–15 years of age. Environ. Health Perspect. 2010, 118, 1762–1767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Gump, B.B.; Wu, Q.; Dumas, A.K.; Kannan, K. Perfluorochemical (PFC) exposure in children: Association with impaired response inhibition. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 8151–8159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Stein, C.R.; Savitz, D.A. Serum perfluorinated compound concentration and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children 5–18 years of age. Environ. Health Perspect. 2011, 119, 1466–1471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Gallo, V.; Leonardi, G.; Brayne, C.; Armstrong, B.; Fletcher, T. Serum perfluoroalkyl substance neuro toxicity: Mechanisms and potential implications for adverse neurological outcomes. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 2013, 35, 1312–1333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Stein, C.R.; Savitz, D.A.; Bellinger, D.C. Perfluorooctanoate and neuropsychological outcomes in children. Epidemiology 2013, 24, 590–599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Liew, Z.; Ritz, B.; Bonefeld-Jørgensen, E.C.; Henriksen, T.B.; Aagaard Nohr, E.; Hammer Bech, B.; Fei, C.; Bossi, R.; von Ehrenstein, O.S.; Streja, E.; et al. Prenatal exposure to perfluoroalkyl substances and the risk of congenital cerebral palsy in children. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2014, 180, 574–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Stein, C.R.; Savitz, D.A.; Bellinger, D.C. Perfluorooctanoate exposure in a highly exposed community and parent and teacher reports of behaviour in 6–12-year-old children. Paediatr. Perinat. Epidemiol. 2014, 28, 146–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Høyer, B.B.; Ramlau-Hansen, C.H.; Obel, C.; Pedersen, H.S.; Hernik, A.; Ogniev, V.; Jönsson, B.A.G.; Lindh, C.H.; Rylander, L.; Rignell-Hydbom, A.; et al. Pregnancy serum concentrations of perfluorinated alkyl substances and offspring behavior and motor development at age 5–9 years—A prospective study. Environ. Health 2015, 14, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Wang, Y.; Rogan, W.J.; Chen, H.Y.; Chende, P.C.; Su, P.H.; Chen, H.Y.; Wang, S.L. Prenatal exposure to perfluoroalkyl substances and children’s IQ: The Taiwan maternal and infant cohort study. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 2015, 218, 639–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Lien, G.W.; Huang, C.C.; Shiu, J.S.; Chen, M.H.; Hsieh, W.S.; Guo, Y.L.; Chen, P.H. Perfluoroalkyl substances in cord blood and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms in seven-year-old children. Chemosphere 2016, 156, 118–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Oulhote, Y.; Steuerwald, U.; Debes, F.; Wwihe, P.; Grandjean, P. Behavioral difficulties in 7-year old children in relation to developmental exposure to perfluorinated alkyl substances. Environ. Int. 2016, 97, 237–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Lyall, K.; Yau, V.M.; Hansen, R.; Kharrazi, M.; Yoshida, C.K.; Calafat, A.M.; Windham, G.; Croen, L.A. Prenatal maternal serum concentrations of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in association with autism spectrum disorder and intellectual disability. Environ. Health Perspect. 2018, 126, 017001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Lenters, V.; Iszatt, N.; Forns, J.; Čechová, E.; Kočan, A.; Legler, J.; Leonards, P.; Stigum, H.; Eggesbø, M. Early-life exposure to persistent organic pollutants (PCPs, PBDEs, PCBs, PFASs) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A multi-pollutant analysis of a Norwegian birth cohort. Environ. Int. 2019, 125, 33–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Wang, Y.; Wang, L.; Chang, W.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, W. Neurotoxic effects of perfluoroalkyl acids: Neurobehavioral deficit and its molecular mechanism. Toxicol. Lett. 2019, 305, 65–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Luo, J.; Xiao, J.; Gao, Y.; Ramlau-Hansen, C.H.; Toft, G.; Li, J.; Obel, C.; Linding Anderson, S.; Deziel, N.C.; Tseng, W.L.; et al. Prenatal exposure to perfluoroalkyl substances and behavioral difficulties in childhood at 7 and 11 years. Environ. Res. 2020, 191, 110111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Forns, J.; Verner, M.A.; Iszatt, N.; Nowack, N.; Balch, C.C.; Vrijheid, M.; Costa, O.; Andiarena, A.; Sovcikova, E.; Høyer, B.B.; et al. Early life exposure to perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and ADHD: A meta-analysis of nine European population-based studies. Environ. Health Perspect. 2020, 28, 57002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Spratlen, M.J.; Perera, F.P.; Lederman, S.A.; Rauh, V.A.; Robinson, M.; Kannan, K.; Trasande, L.; Herbstman, J. The association between prenatal exposure to perfluoroalkyl substances and childhood neurodevelopment. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 263, 114444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Shin, H.-M.; Bennett, D.H.; Calafat, A.M.; Tancredi, D.; Hertz-Picciotto, I. Modeled prenatal exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in association with child autism spectrum disorder: A case-control study. Environ. Res. 2020, 186, 109514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Hutcheson, R.; Innes, K.; Conway, B. Perfluoroalkyl substances and likelihood of stroke in persons with and without diabetes. Diab. Vasc. Dis. Res. 2020, 17, 1479164119892223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Piekarski, D.J.; Diaz, K.R.; McNerney, M.W. Perfluoroalkyl chemicals in neurological health and disease: Human concerns and animal models. NeuroToxicology 2020, 77, 155–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Tukker, A.M.; Bouwman, L.M.S.; van Kleef, R.G.D.M.; Hendriks, H.S.; Legler, J.; Westerin, R.H.S. Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoate (PFOA) acutely affect human α1β2γ2L GABAA receptor and spontaneous neuronal network function in vitro. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 5311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Ding, N.; Park, S.K. Perfluoroalkyl substances exposure and hearing impairment in US adults. Environ. Res. 2020, 187, 109686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Skogheim, T.S.; Weyde, K.V.F.; Aase, H.; Engel, S.M.; Surén, P.; Øle, M.G.; Biele, G.; Reichborn-Kjennerud, T.; Brantsæter, A.L.; Haug, L.S.; et al. Prenatal exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and associations with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder in children. Environ. Res. 2021, 202, 111692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Park, S.K.; Ding, N.; Han, D. Perfluoroalkyl substances and cognitive function in older adults: Should we consider non-monotonic dose-responses and chronic kidney disease? Environ. Res. 2021, 192, 10346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Shen, C.-Y.; Weng, J.C.; Tsai, J.D.; Su, P.H.; Chou, M.C.; Wang, S.L. Prenatal exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals and subsequent brain structure changes revealed by voxel-based morphometry and generalized Q-sampling MRI. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 4798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Oh, J.; Bennett, D.H.; Calafat, A.M.; Tancredi, D.; Roa, D.L.; Schmidt, R.J.; Hertz-Picciotto, I.; Shin, H.M. Prenatal exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in association with autism spectrum disorder in the MARBLES study. Environ. Int. 2021, 147, 106328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Oh, J.; Schmidt, R.J.; Tancredi, D.; Calafat, A.M.; Roa, D.L.; Hertz-Picciotto, I.; Shin, H.M. Prenatal exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances and cognitive development in infancy and toddlerhood. Environ. Res. 2021, 196, 110939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Di Nisio, A.; Pannella, M.; Vogiatzis, S.; Sut, S.; Dall’Acqua, S.; Santa Rocca, M.; Antonini, A.; Porzionato, A.; De Caro, R.; Bortolozzi, M.; et al. Impairment of human dopaminergic neurons at different developmental stages by perfluoro-octanoic acid (PFOA) and differential human brain areas accumulation of perfluoroalkyl chemicals. Environ. Int. 2022, 158, 106982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Brown-Leung, J.M.; Cannon, J.R. Neurotransmission targets of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance neurotoxicity: Mechanisms and potential implication for adverse neurological outcomes. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 2022, 35, 1312–1333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Starnes, H.M.; Rock, K.D.; Jackson, T.W.; Belcher, S.M. A critical review and meta-analysis of impacts of per- and polyfluorinated substances on the brain and behavior. Front. Toxicol. 2022, 4, 881584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Xie, Z.; Tan, J.; Fang, G.; Ji, H.; Miao, M.; Tian, Y.; Hu, H.; Cao, W.; Liang, H.; Yuan, W. Associations between prenatal exposure to perfluoroalkyl substances and neurobehavioral development in early childhood: A prospective cohort study. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2022, 241, 113818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Larebeke, N.; Koppen, G.; Decraemer, S.; Colles, A.; Bruckers, L.; Den Hond, E.; Govarts, E.; Morrens, B.; Schettgen, T.; Remy, S.; et al. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and neurobehavioral function and cognition in adolescents (2010–2011) and elderly people 92014): Results from the Flanders Environment and Health Studies (FLEHS). Environ. Sci. Eur. 2022, 34, 98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Koskela, A.; Koponen, J.; Lehenkari, P.; Viluksela, M.; Korkalainen, M.; Tuukkanen, J. Perfluoroalkyl substances in human bone: Concentrations in bones and effects on bone cell differentiation. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 6841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Khalil, N.; Chen, A.; Lee, M.; Czerwinski, S.A.; Ebert, J.R.; DeWitt, J.C.; Kannan, K. Association of perfluoroalkyl substances, bone mineral density, and osteoporosis in the U.S. population in NHANES 2009–2010. Environ. Health Perspect. 2016, 124, 81–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Cluett, R.; Seshasayee, S.M.; Rokoff, L.B.; Rifas-Shiman, S.L.; Ye, X.; Calafat, A.M.; Gold, D.R.; Coull, B.; Gordon, C.M.; Rosen, C.J.; et al. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance plasma concentrations and bone mineral density in midchildhood: A cross-sectional study (project viva, United States). Environ. Health Pespect. 2019, 127, 87006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Banjabi, A.A.; Li, A.J.; Kumosani, T.A.; Yousef, J.M.; Kannan, K. Serum concentrations of perfluoroalkyl substances and their association with osteoporosis in a population in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Environ. Res. 2020, 187, 109676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Di Nisio, A.; De Rocco, P.M.; Giadone, A.; Rocca, M.S.; Guidolin, D.; Foresta, C. Perfluoroalkyl substances and bone health in young men: A pilot study. Endocrine 2020, 67, 678–684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Buckley, J.P.; Kuiper, J.R.; Lanphear, B.P.; Calafat, A.M.; Cecil, K.M.; Chen, A.; Xu, Y.; Yolton, K.; Kalkwarf, H.J.; Braun, J.M. Associations of maternal serum perfluoroalkyl substances concentrations with early adolescent bone mineral content and density: The health outcomes and measures of the environment (HOME) study. Environ. Health Perspect. 2021, 129, 97011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Schmidt, C.W. A measure of strength: Developmental PFAS exposures and bone mineral content in adolescence. Environ. Health Perspect. 2021, 129, 124002–124011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Xiong, X.; Chen, B.; Wang, Z.; Ma, L.; Li, S.; Gao, Y. Association between perfluoroalkyl substances concentration and bone mineral density in the US adolescents aged 12–19 years in NHANES 2005–2010. Front. Endocrinol. 2022, 13, 980608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Apelberg, B.J.; Witter, F.R.; Herbstman, J.B.; Calafat, A.M.; Halden, R.U.; Larry, L.; Needham, L.I.; Goldman, L.R. Cord serum concentrations of perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoate (PFOA) in relation to weight and size at birth. Environ. Health Perspect. 2007, 115, 1670–1676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Fei, C.; McLaughlin, J.K.; Tarone, R.E.; Olsen, J. 2008. Fetal growth indicators and perfluorinated chemicals: A study in the Danish national birth cohort. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2008, 168, 66–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Olsen, G.W.; Butenhoff, J.L.; Zobel, L.R. Perfluoroalkyl chemicals and human fetal development: An epidemiologic review with clinical and toxicological perspectives. Reprod. Toxicol. 2009, 27, 212–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Washino, N.; Saijo, K.; Nakazawa, H.; Kishi, R. Correlations between prenatal exposure to perfluorinated chemicals and reduced fetal growth. Environ. Health Perspect. 2009, 117, 660–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Darrow, L.A.; Stein, C.R.; Steenland, K. Serum perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonate concentrations in relation to birth outcomes in the Mid-Ohio Valley, 2005–2010. Environ. Health Perspect. 2013, 121, 1207–1213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Johnson, P.I.; Sutton, P.; Atchley, D.S.; Koustas, E.; Lam, J.; Sen, S.; Robinson, K.A.; Axelrad, D.A.; Woodruff, T.J. The navigation guide—Evidence-based medicine meets environmental health: Systemic review of human evidence for PFOA effects on fetal growth. Environ. Health Perspect. 2014, 122, 1028–1039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Jensen, T.K.; Andersen, L.B.; Kyhl, H.B.; Nielsen, F.; Christesen, H.T.; Grandjean, P. Association between perfluorinated compound exposure and miscarriage in Danish pregnant women. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0123496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Ashley-Martin, J.; Dodds, L.; Arbuckle, T.E.; Bouchard, M.F.; Fisher, M.; Morriset, A.S.; Monnier, P.; Shapiro, G.D.; Ettinger, A.S.; Dallaire, R.; et al. Maternal concentrations of perfluoroalkyl substances and fetal markers of metabolic function and birth weight. The maternal-infant research on environmental chemicals (MIREC) Study. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2017, 185, 185–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Lauritzen, H.B.; Larose, T.L.; Øien, T.; Sandanger, T.M.; Odland, J.Ø.; van de Bor, M.; Jacobsen, G.W. Maternal serum levels of perfluoroalkyl substances and organochlorines and indices of fetal growth: A Scandinavian case-cohort study. Pediatr. Res. 2017, 81, 33–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Manzano-Salgado, C.B.; Casas, M.; Lopez-Espinosa, M.J.; Ballester, F.; Iñiguez, C.; Martinez, D.; Costa, O.; Santa-Marina, L.; Pereda-Pereda, E.; Schettgen, T.; et al. Prenatal exposure to perfluoroalkyl substances and birth outcomes in a Spanish birth cohort. Environ. Int. 2017, 108, 278–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Rappazzo, K.M.; Coffman, E.; Hines, E.P. Exposure to perfluorinated alkyl substances and health outcomes in children: A systematic review of the epidemiologic literature. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Shi, Y.; Yang, L.; Li, J.; Lai, J.; Wang, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Wu, Y. Occurrence of perfluoroalkyl substances in cord serum and association with growth indicators in newborns from Beijing. Chemosphere 2017, 169, 396–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Ghassabian, A.; Bell, E.M.; Ma, W.L.; Sundaram, R.; Kannan, K.; Louis, G.M.B.; Yeung, E. Concentrations of perfluoroalkyl substances and bisphenol A in newborn dried blood spots and the association with child behavior. Environ. Pollut. 2018, 243 Pt B, 1629–1636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Huang, R.; Chen, Q.; Zhang, L.; Luo, K.; Chen, L.; Zhao, S.; Feng, L.; Zhang, J. Prenatal exposure to perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances and the risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Environ. Health 2019, 18, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Reardon, A.J.F.; Khodayari Moez, E.; Dinu, I.; Goruk, S.; Field, C.J.; Kinniburgh, D.W.; MacDonald, A.M.; Martin, J.W. Longitudinal analysis reveals early-pregnancy associations between perfluoroalkyl sulfonates and thyroid hormone status in a Canadian prospective birth cohort. Environ. Int. 2019, 129, 389–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Di Nisio, A.; Rocca, M.S.; Sabovic, I.; De Rocco Ponce, M.; Corsini, C.; Guidolin, D.; Zanon, C.; Acquasaliente, L.; Carosso, A.R.; De Toni, L.; et al. Perfluorooctanoic acid alters progesterone activity in human endometrial cells and induces reproductive alterations in young women. Chemosphere 2020, 242, 125208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Liew, Z.; Luo, J.; Nohr, E.A.; Hammer Bech, B.; Bossi, R.; Arah, O.A.; Olsen, J. Maternal plasma perfluoroalkyl substances and miscarriage: A nested case-control study in the Danish national birth cohort. Environ. Health Perspect. 2020, 128, 47007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Mitro, S.D.; Sagiv, S.K.; Fleisch, A.F.; Jaacks, L.M.; Williams, P.L.; Rifas-Shiman, S.L.; Calafat, A.M.; Hivert, M.F.; Oken, E.; James-Todd, T.M. Pregnancy per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance concentrations and postpartum health in project viva: A prospective cohort. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2020, 105, e3415–e3426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Petersen, K.U.; Larsen, J.R.; Deen, L.; Flachs, E.M.; Hærvig, K.K.; Hull, S.D.; Bonde, J.P.E.; Tøttenborg, S.S. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances and male reproductive health: A systematic review of the epidemiological evidence. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health B Crit. Rev. 2020, 23, 276–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Street, M.E.; Bernasconi, S. Endocrine-disrupting chemicals in human fetal growth. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 1430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  109. Xiao, C.; Gandjean, P.; Valvi, D.; Nielsen, F.; Jensen, T.K.; Weihe, P.; Oulhote, Y. Associations of exposure to perfluoroalkyl substances with thyroid hormone concentrations and birth size. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2020, 105, 735–745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Birru, R.L.; Liang, H.-W.; Farooq, F.; Bedi, M.; Feghali, M.; Haggerty, C.L.; Mendez, D.D.; Catov, J.M.; Ng, C.A.; Adibi, J.J. A pathway level analysis of PFAS exposure and risk of gestational diabetes mellitus. Environ. Health 2021, 20, 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. Chambers, W.S.; Hopkins, J.G.; Richards, S.M. A review of per- and polyfluorinated alkyl substance impairment of reproduction. Front. Toxicol. 2021, 3, 732436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Gardener, H.; Sun, Q.; Grandjean, P. PFAS concentration during pregnancy in relation to cardiometabolic health and birth outcomes. Environ. Res. 2021, 192, 110287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Kishi, R.; Ikeda-Araki, A.; Miyashita, C.; Itoh, S.; Kobayashi, S.; Bamai, Y.A.; Yamazaki, K.; Tamura, N.; Minatoya, M.; Mesfin Ketema, R.; et al. Members of the Hokkaido Study on Environment and Children’s Health. Hokkaido birth cohort study on environment and children’s health: Cohort profile 2021. Environ. Health Prev. Med. 2021, 26, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Wikström, S.; Hussein, G.; Karlsson, A.L.; Lindh, C.H.; Bornehag, C.-G. Exposure to perfluoroalkyl substances in early pregnancy and risk of sporadic first trimester miscarriage. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 3568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Hall, S.M.; Zhang, S.; Hoffman, K.; Miranda, M.L.; Stapleton, H.M. Concentrations of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in human placental tissues and associations with birth outcomes. Chemosphere 2022, 295, 133873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Goudarzi, H.; Araki, A.; Itoh, S.; Sasaki, S.; Miyashita, C.; Mitsui, T.; Nakazawa, H.; Nonomura, K.; Kishi, R. The association of prenatal exposure to perfluorinated chemicals with glucocorticoid and androgenic hormones in cord blood samples: The Hokkaido study. Environ. Health Perspect. 2017, 125, 111–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  117. Harris, M.H.; Oken, E.; Rifas-Shiman, S.L.; Calafat, A.M.; Ye, X.; Bellinger, D.C.; Webster, T.F.; White, R.F.; Sagiv, S.K. Prenatal and childhood exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) and child cognition. Environ. Int. 2018, 115, 358–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Di Nisio, A.; Sabovic, I.; Valente, U.; Tescari, S.; Santa Rocca, M.; Guidolin, D.; Dall’Acqua, S.; Acquasaliente, L.; Pozzi, N.; Plebani, M.; et al. Endocrine disruption of androgenic activity by perfluoroalkyl substances: Clinical and experimental evidence. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2019, 104, 1259–1271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Aimuzi, R.; Luo, K.; Huang, R.; Huo, X.; Nian, M.; Ouyang, F.; Du, Y.; Feng, L.; Wang, W.; Zhang, J.; et al. Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances and maternal thyroid hormones in early pregnancy. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 264, 114557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  120. Preston, E.V.; Webster, T.F.; Claus Henn, B.; McClean, M.D.; Gennings, C.; Oken, E.; Rifas-Shiman, S.L.; Pearce, E.N.; Calafat, A.M.; Fleisch, A.F.; et al. Prenatal exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances and maternal and neonatal thyroid function in the project viva cohort: A mixtures approach. Environ. Int. 2020, 139, 105728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Eick, S.M.; Goin, D.E.; Cushing, L.; DeMicco, E.; Smith, S.; Park, J.S.; Padula, A.M.; Woodruff, T.J.; Morello-Frosch, R. Joint effects of prenatal exposure to per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances and psychosocial stressors on corticotropin-releasing hormone during pregnancy. J. Expo. Sci. Environ. Epidemiol. 2021, 32, 27–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Caporale, N.; Leemans, M.; Birgersson, L.; Germain, P.-L.; Cheroni, C.; Borbély, G.; Engdahl, E.; Lindh, C.; Bressan, R.B.; Cavallo, F.; et al. From cohorts to molecules: Adverse impacts of endocrine disrupting mixtures. Science 2022, 375, eabe8244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Sun, M.; Cao, X.; Wu, Y.; Shen, L.; Wei, G. Prenatal exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals and thyroid function in neonates: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2022, 231, 113215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Tachachartvanich, P.; Singam, E.R.A.; Durkin, K.A.; Furlow, J.D.; Smith, M.T.; La Merrill, M.A. In vitro characterization of the endocrine disrupting effects of per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) on the human androgen receptor. J. Hazard. Mat. 2022, 429, 128243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  125. Sinisalu, L.; Yeung, L.W.Y.; Wang, J.; Pan, Y.; Dai, J.; Hyötyläinen, T. Prenatal exposure to poly-/per-fluoroalkyl substances is associated with alteration of lipid profiles in cord-blood. Metabolomics 2021, 17, 103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  126. Alderete, T.L.; Jin, R.; Walker, D.I.; Valvi, D.; Chen, Z.; Jones, D.P.; Peng, C.; Gilliland, F.D.; Berhane, K.; Conti, D.V.; et al. Perfluoroalkyl substances, metabolomic profiling, and alterations in glucose homeostasis among overweight and obese Hispanic children: A proof-of-concept analysis. Environ. Int. 2019, 126, 445–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  127. Donat-Vargas, C.; Bergdahl, I.A.; Tornevi, A.; Wennberg, M.; Sommar, J.; Kiviranta, H.; Koponen, J.; Rolandsson, O.; Åkesson, A. Perfluoroalkyl substances and risk of type II diabetes: A prospective nested case-control study. Environ. Int. 2019, 123, 390–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  128. Li, Y.; Barregard, L.; Xu, Y.; Scott, K.; Pineda, D.; Lindh, C.H.; Jakobsson, K.; Fletcher, T. Associations between perfluoroalkyl substances and serum lipids in a Swedish adult population with contaminated drinking water. Environ. Health 2020, 19, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Rosen, E.M.; Kotlarz, N.; Knappe, D.R.U.; Lea, S.; Collier, D.N.; Richardson, D.B.; Hoppin, J.A. Drinking water-associated PFAS and fluoroethers and lipid outcomes in the GenX exposure study. Environ. Health Perspect. 2021, 130, 97002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Schillemans, T.; Shi, L.; Donat-Vargas, C.; Hanhineva, K.; Tornevi, A.; Johansson, I.; Koponen, J.; Kiviranta, H.; Rolandsson, O.; Bergdahl, I.A.; et al. Plasma metabolites associated with exposure to perfluoroalkyl substances and risk of type 2 diabetes—A nested case-control study. Environ. Int. 2021, 146, 106180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Guo, P.; Furnary, T.; Vasiliou, V.; Yan, Q.; Nyhan, K.; Jones, D.P.; Johnson, C.H.; Liew, Z. Non-targeted metabolomics and associations with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) exposure in humans: A scoping review. Environ. Int. 2022, 162, 107159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Park, S.K.; Wang, X.; Ding, N.; Karvonen-Gutierrez, C.A.; Calafat, A.M.; Herman, W.H.; Mukherjee, B.; Harlow, S.D. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances and incident diabetes in midlife women: The study of women’s health across the nation (SWAN). Diabetologia 2022, 65, 1157–1168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority). Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and their salts. Scientific opinion of the panel on contaminants in the food chain. EFSA J. 2008, 653, 1–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Grandjean, P.; Andersen, E.W.; Budtz-Jørgensen, E.; Nielsen, F.; Mølbak, K.; Weihe, P.; Heilmann, C. Serum vaccine antibody concentrations in children exposed to perfluorinated compounds. JAMA 2012, 307, 391–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  135. Granum, B.; Haug, L.S.; Namork, E.; Stølevik, S.B.; Thomsen, C.; Aaberge, I.S.; van Loveren, H.; Løvik, M.; Nygaard, U.C. Prenatal exposure to perfluoroalkyl substances may be associated with altered vaccine antibody levels and immune-related health outcomes in early childhood. J. Immunotoxicol. 2013, 10, 373–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Steenland, K.; Zhao, L.; Winquist, A.; Parks, C. Ulcerative colitis and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) in a highly exposed population of community residents and workers in the mid-Ohio valley. Environ. Health Perspect. 2013, 121, 900–905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  137. Dalsager, L.; Christensen, N.; Husby, S.; Kyhl, H.; Nielsen, F.; Høst, A.; Grandjean, P.; Kold Jensen, T. Association between prenatal exposure to perfluorinated compounds and symptoms of infections at age 1–4 years among 359 children in the Odense child cohort. Environ. Int. 2016, 96, 48–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Abraham, K.; Mielke, H.; Fromme, H.; Völkel, W.; Menze, J.; Peiser, M.; Zepp, F.; Willich, S.N.; Weikert, C. Internal exposure to perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) and biological markers in 101 healthy 1-year-old children: Associations between levels of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and vaccine response. Arch. Toxicol. 2020, 94, 2131–2147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM). Risk to human health related to the presence of perfluorooctane sulfonic acid and perfluorooctanoic acid in food. EFSA J. 2020, 16, 5194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Barry, V.; Winquist, A.; Steenland, K. Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) exposures and incident cancers among adults living near a chemical plant. Environ. Health Perspect. 2013, 121, 1313–1318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Consonni, D.; Straif, K.; Symons, J.M.; Tomenson, J.A.; van Amelsvoort, L.G.P.M.; Sleeuwenhoek, A.; Cherrie, J.W.; Bonetti, P.; Colombo, I.; Farrar, D.G.; et al. Cancer risk among tetrafluoroethylene synthesis and polymerization workers. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2013, 178, 350–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Bartell, S.M.; Vieira, V.M. Critical review on PFOA, kidney cancer, and testicular cancer. J. Air Waste Manag. Assoc. 2021, 71, 663–679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Itoh, H.; Harada, K.H.; Kasuga, Y.; Yokoyama, S.; Onuma, H.; Nishimura, H.; Kusama, R.; Yokoyama, K.; Zhu, J.; Sassa, M.H.; et al. Serum perfluoroalkyl substances and breast cancer risk in Japanese women: A case-control study. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 800, 149316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Steenland, K.; Winquist, A. PFAS and cancer, a scoping review of the epidemiological evidence. Environ. Res. 2021, 194, 110690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  145. USEPA. Our Current Understanding of the Human Health and Environmental Risks of PFAS. Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) are a Group of Manufactured Chemicals. United States Environmental Protection Agency; 2021. Available online: https://www.epa.gov/pfas/our-current-understanding-human-health-and-environmental-risks-pfas (accessed on 10 February 2025).
  146. USDHHS. Toxicological Profile for Perfluoroalkyls; Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry: Atlanta, GA, USA, 2021; p. 993. Available online: https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp200.pdf (accessed on 10 February 2025).
  147. Goodrich, J.A.; Walker, D.; Lin, X.; Wang, H.; Lim, T.; McConnell, R.; Conti, D.V.; Chatzi, L.; Setiawan, V.W. Exposure to perfluoroalkyl substances and risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in a multiethnic cohort. JHEP Rep. 2022, 4, 100550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  148. Li, H.; Hammarstrand, S.; Midberg, B.; Xu, Y.; Li, Y.; Olsson, D.S.; Fletcher, T.; Jakobsson, K.; Andersson, E.M. Cancer incidence in a Swedish cohort with high exposure to perfluoroalkyl substances in drinking water. Environ. Res. 2022, 204, 112217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Guerrero-Preston, R.; Ili-Gangas, C.; LeBron, C.; Witter, E.R.; Apelberg, B.J.; Hernández-Roystacher, M.; Jaffe, A.; Halden, R.U.; Sidransky, D. Global DNA hypomethylation is associated with In Utero exposure to cotinine and perfluorinated alkyl compounds. Epigenetics 2010, 5, 539–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  150. Liu, C.Y.; Chen, P.C.; Lien, P.C.; Liao, Y.P. Prenatal perfluorooctyl sulfonate exposure and Alu DNA hypomethylation in cord blood. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 1066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Starling, A.P.; Liu, C.; Shen, G.; Yang, I.V.; Kechris, K.; Borengasser, S.J.; Boyle, K.E.; Zhang, W.; Smith, H.A.; Calafat, A.M.; et al. Prenatal exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, umbilical cord blood DNA methylation, and cardio-metabolic indicators in newborns: The healthy start study. Environ. Health Perspect. 2020, 128, 127014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Xu, Y.; Jurkovic-Mlakar, S.; Li, Y.; Wahlberg, K.; Scott, K.; Pineda, D.; Lindh, C.H.; Jakobsson, K.; Engström, K. Association between serum concentrations of perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and expression of serum microRNAs in a cohort highly exposed to PFAS from drinking water. Environ. Int. 2020, 136, 105446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Goodrich, J.M.; Calkins, M.M.; Caban-Martinez, A.J.; Stueckle, T.; Grant, C.; Calafat, A.M.; Nematollahi, A.; Jung, A.M.; Graber, J.M.; Jenkins, T.; et al. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, epigenetic age and DNA methylation: A cross-sectional study of firefighters. Epigenomics 2021, 13, 1619–1636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Kim, S.; Thapar, I.; Brooks, B.W. Epigenetic changes by per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Environ. Pollut. 2021, 279, 116929. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Abdallah, M.-A.-E.; Wemken, N.; Drage, D.S.; Tlustos, C.; Cellarius, C.; Cleere, K.; Morrison, J.J.; Daly, S.; Coggins, M.A.; Harrad, S. Concentrations of perfluoroalkyl substances in human milk from Ireland: Implications for adult and nursing infant exposure. Chemosphere 2020, 246, 125724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Li, N.; Ying, G.-G.; Hong, H.; Deng, W.-J. Perfluoroalkyl substances in the urine and hair of preschool children, airborne particles in kindergartens, and drinking water in Hong Kong. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 270, 116219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Trudel, D.; Horowitz, L.; Wormuth, M.; Scheringer, M.; Cousins, I.T.; Hungerbühler, K. Estimating consumer exposure to PFOS and PFOA. Risk Anal. 2008, 28, 251–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Zhou, W.; Zhao, S.; Tong, C.; Chen, L.; Yu, X.; Yuan, T.; Aimuzi, R.; Luo, F.; Tian, Y.; Zhang, J. Dietary intake, drinking water ingestion and plasma perfluoroalkyl substances concentration in reproductive aged Chinese women. Environ. Int. 2019, 127, 487–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  159. Ao, J.; Yuan, T.; Xia, H.; Ma, Y.; Shen, Z.; Shi, R.; Tian, Y.; Zhang, J.; Ding, W.; Gao, L.; et al. Characteristic and human exposure risk assessment of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances: A study based on indoor dust and drinking water in China. Environ. Pollut. 2019, 254, 112873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  160. McMahon, P.B.; Tokranov, A.K.; Bexfield, L.M.; Lindsey, B.D.; Johnson, T.D.; Lombard, M.A.; Watson, E. Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances in groundwater used as a source of drinking water in the Eastern United States. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2022, 56, 2279–2288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Smalling, K.L.; Romanok, K.M.; Bradley, P.M.; Morriss, M.C.; Gray, J.L.; Kanagy, L.K.; Gordon, S.E.; Williams, B.M.; Breitmeyer, S.E.; Jones, D.K.; et al. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in United States tapwater: Comparison of underserved private-well and public-supply exposures and associated health implications. Environ. Int. 2023, 178, 108033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  162. Xing, Y.; Zhou, Y.; Zhang, X.; Lin, X.; Li, J.; Liu, P.; Lee, H.K.; Huang, Z. The sources and bioaccumulation of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in animal-derived foods and the potential risk of dietary intake. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 905, 167313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Carnero, A.R.; Lestido-Cardama, A.; Loureiro, P.V.; Barbosa-Pereira, L.; de Quiros, A.R.B.; Sendon, R. Presence of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in food contact materials (FCM) and its migration to food. Foods 2021, 10, 1443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Hampson, H.E.; Costello, E.; Walker, D.L.; Wang, H.; Baumert, B.O.; Valvi, D.; Rock, S.; Jones, D.P.; Goran, M.I.; Gilliland, F.D.; et al. Associations of dietary intake and longitudinal measures of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in predominantly Hispanic young adults: A multicohort study. Environ. Int. 2024, 185, 108454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Di Giorgi, A.; La Maida, N.; Taoussi, O.; Pichini, S.; Busardò, F.P.; Tini, A.; Di Trana, A. Analysis of perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in conventional and unconventional matrices: Clinical outcomes. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. Open 2023, 1, 100002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Kee, H.H.; Deo, J.I.; Kim, S.M.; Shiea, J.; Yoo, H.H. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS): Trends in mass spectrometric analysis for human biomonitoring and exposure patterns from recent global cohort studies. Environ. Int. 2024, 194, 109117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Zhou, Y.; Zhou, Z.; Lian, Y.; Sun, X.; Wu, Y.; Qiao, L.; Wang, M. Source, transportation, bioaccumulation, distribution and risk assessment of perfluorinated alkyl substances in vegetables: A review. Food Chem. 2021, 349, 129137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  168. Paragot, N.; Bečanová, J.; Karásková, P.; Prokeš, R.; Klánová, J.; Lammel, G.; Degrendele, C. Multi-year atmospheric concentrations of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) at a background site in central Europe. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 265 Pt B, 114851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  169. Lee, Y.-M.; Lee, J.-Y.; Kim, M.-K.; Yang, H.; Lee, J.-E.; Son, Y.; Kho, Y.; Choi, K.; Zoh, K.-D. Concentration and distribution of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in the Asan Lake area of South Korea. J. Hazard. Mater. 2020, 381, 120909. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Yamazaki, E.; Taniyasu, S.; Wang, X.; Yamashita, N. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in surface water, gas and particles in open ocean and coastal environment. Chemosphere 2021, 272, 129869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Benskin, J.P.; Ahrens, L.; Muir, D.C.G.; Scott, B.F.; Spencer, C.; Rosenberg, B.; Yomy, G.; Kylin, H.; Lohmann, R.; Martin, J.W. Manufacturing origin of perfluorooctanoate (PFOA) in Atlantic and Canadian Arctic seawater. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46, 677–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Karásková, P.; Codling, G.; Melymuk, L.; Klánová, J. A critical assessment of passive air samplers for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. Atmos. Environ. 2018, 185, 186–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Xie, Z.; Zhao, Z.; Möller, A.; Wolschke, H.; Ahrens, L.; Sturm, R.; Ebinghaus, R. Neutral poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances in air and seawater of the North Sea. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2013, 20, 7988–8000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Ahrens, L.; Schoeib, M.; Harner, T.; Lee, S.C.; Guo, R.; Reiner, E.J. Wastewater treatment plant and landfills as sources of polyfluoroalkyl compounds to the atmosphere. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 8098–8105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  175. Heydebreck, F.; Tang, J.; Xie, Z.; Ebinghaus, R. Emissions of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in a textile manufacturing plant in China and their relevance for workers’ exposure. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 50, 10386–10396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  176. Bastow, T.P.; Douglas, G.B.; Davis, G.B. Volatilization potential of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances from airfield pavements and during recycling asphalt. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2022, 41, 2202–2208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Roth, J.; Abusallout, I.; Hill, T.; Holton, C.; Thapa, U.; Hanigan, D. Release of volatile per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances from aqueous film-forming foam. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 2020, 7, 164–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Schellenberger, S.; Liagkouridis, I.; Awad, R.; Khan, S.; Plassmann, M.; Peters, G. An outdoor aging study to investigate the release of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) from functional textiles. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2022, 56, 3471–3479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  179. Yao, Y.; Chang, S.; Sun, H.; Gan, Z.; Hu, H.; Zhao, Y.; Zhang, Y. Neutral and ionic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in atmospheric and dry deposition samples over a source region (Tianjin, China). Environ. Pollut. 2016, 212, 449–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Shimizu, M.S.; Mott, R.; Potter, A.; Zhou, J.; Baumann, K.; Surratt, J.D.; Turpin, B.; Avery, G.B.; Harfmann, J.; Kieber, R.J.; et al. Atmospheric deposition and annual flux of legacy Perfluoroalkyl substances and replacement perfluoroalkyl ether carboxylic acids in Wilmington, NC, USA. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 2021, 8, 366–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Tian, Y.; Yao, Y.; Chang, S.; Zhao, Z.; Zhao, Y.; Yuan, X.; Wu, F.; Sun, H. Occurrence and phase distribution of neutral and ionizable per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) in the atmosphere and plant leaves around landfills: A case study in Tianjin, China. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2018, 52, 1301–1310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Cui, Q.; Pan, Y.; Zhang, H.; Sheng, N.; Wang, J.; Guo, Y.; Dai, J. Occurrence and tissue distribution of novel perfluoroether carboxylic and sulfonic acids and legacy per/polyfluoroalkyl substances in black-spotted frog (Pelophylax nigromaculatus). Environ. Sci. Technol. 2018, 52, 982–990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Gómez-Ramírez, P.; Bustnes, J.O.; Eulaers, I.; Herzke, D.; Johnsen, T.V.; Lepoint, G.; Pérez-Garcia, J.M.; García-Fernández, A.J.; Jaspers, V.L.B. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in plasma and feathers of nestling birds of prey from northern Norway. Environ. Res. 2017, 158, 277–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  184. Loseth, M.E.; Briels, N.; Flo, J.; Malarvannan, G.; Poma, G.; Covaci, A.; Herzke, D.; Nygård, T.; Bustnes, J.O.; Jenssen, B.M.; et al. White-tailed eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla) feathers from Norway are suitable for monitoring legacy, but not emerging contaminants. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 647, 525–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  185. Mousavi, S.E.; Delgado-Saborit, J.M.; Godderis, L. Exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances and premature skin aging. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 405, 124256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  186. Kauck, E.A.; Diesslin, A.R. Some properties of perfluorocarboxylic acids. Indust. Eng. Chem. 1951, 43, 2332–2334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  187. Inoue, Y.; Hashizume, N.; Yakata, N.; Murakami, H.; Suzuki, Y.; Kikushima, E.; Otsuka, M. Unique physicochemical properties of perfluorinated compounds and their bioconcentration in common carp Cyprinus carpio L. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2011, 62, 672–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  188. Liu, W.; Jin, Y.; Quan, X.; Sasaki, K.; Saito, N.; Nakayama, S.F.; Sato, I.; Tsuda, S. Perfluorosulfonates and perfluorocarboxylates in snow and rain in Dalian, China. Environ. Int. 2009, 35, 737–742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Xing, Y.; Li, Q.; Chen, X.; Huang, B.; Ji, L.; Zhang, Q.; Fu, X.; Li, T.; Wang, J. PFASs in soil: How they threaten human health through multiple pathways and whether they are receiving adequate concern. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2023, 71, 1259–1275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  190. Chen, H.; Reinhard, M.; Yin, T.; Nguyen, T.V.; Tran, N.H.; Gin, K.Y.-H. Multi-compartment distribution of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) in an urban catchment system. Water Res. 2019, 154, 227–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  191. Brusseau, M.L.; Yan, N.; Van Glubt, S.; Wang, Y.; Chen, W.; Lyu, Y.; Dungan, B.; Carroll, K.C.; Holguin, F.O. Comprehensive retention model for PFAS transport in subsurface systems. Water Res. 2019, 148, 41–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  192. Scott, J.W.; Gunderson, K.G.; Green, L.A.; Rediske, R.R.; Steinman, A.D. Perfluoroalkylated substances (PFAS) associated with microplastics in a lake environment. Toxics 2021, 9, 106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  193. Hong, S.; Khim, J.S.; Wang, T.; Naile, J.E.; Park, J.; Kwon, B.-O.; Song, S.J.; Ryu, J.; Codling, G.; Jones, P.D.; et al. Bioaccumulation characteristics of perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) in coastal organisms from the west coast of South Korea. Chemosphere 2015, 129, 157–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  194. Kang, H.; Lee, H.-K.; Moon, H.-B.; Kim, S.; Lee, J.; Ha, M.; Hong, S.; Kim, S.; Choi, K. Perfluoroalkyl acids in serum of Korean children: Occurrences, related sources, and associated health outcomes. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 645, 958–965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  195. Kim, D.-H.; Lee, J.-H.; Oh, J.-E. Perfluoroalkyl acids in paired serum, urine, and hair samples: Correlations with demographic factors and dietary habits. Environ. Pollut. 2019, 248, 175–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  196. Zhang, M.; Wang, P.; Lu, Y.; Shi, Y.; Wang, C.; Sun, B.; Li, X.; Song, S.; Yu, M.; Zhao, J.; et al. Transport and environmental risks of perfluoroalkyl acids in a large irrigation and drainage system for agricultural production. Environ. Intern. 2021, 157, 106856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  197. Blaine, A.C.; Rich, C.D.; Sedlacko, E.M.; Hyland, K.C.; Stushnoff, C.; Dickenson, E.R.V.; Higgins, C.P. Perfluoroalkyl acid uptake in lettuce (Lactuca sativa) and strawberry (Fragaria ananassa) irrigated with reclaimed water. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 48, 14361–14368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  198. Toze, S. Reuse of effluent water—Benefits and risks. Agric. Water Manag. 2006, 80, 147–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  199. Kolpin, D.W.; Hubbard, L.E.; Cwiertny, D.M.; Meppelink, S.M.; Thompson, D.A.; Gray, J.L. A comprehensive statewide spatiotemporal stream assessment of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in an agricultural region of the United States. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 2021, 8, 981–988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  200. Andrews, D.Q.; Naidenko, O.V. Population-wide exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances from drinking water in the United States. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 2020, 7, 931–936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  201. Borrull, J.; Colom, A.; Fabregas, J.; Borrull, F.; Pocurull, E. Presence, behaviour and removal of selected organic micropollutants through drinking water treatment. Chemosphere 2021, 276, 130023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  202. Boone, J.S.; Vigo, C.; Boone, T.; Byrne, C.; Ferrario, J.; Benson, R.; Donohue, J.; Simmons, J.E.; Kolpin, D.W.; Furlong, E.T.; et al. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in source and treated drinking waters of the United States. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 653, 359–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  203. Domingo, J.L.; Nadal, M. Human exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) through drinking water: A review of the recent scientific literature. Environ. Res. 2019, 177, 108648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  204. Eschauzier, C.; Hoppe, M.; Schlummer, M.; de Voogt, P. Presence and sources of anthropogenic perfluoroalkyl acids in high-consumption tap-water based beverages. Chemosphere 2013, 90, 36–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  205. Gagliano, E.; Sgroi, M.; Falciglia, P.P.; Vagliasindi, F.G.A.; Roccaro, P. Removal of poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) from water by adsorption: Role of PFAS chain length, effect of organic matter and challenges in adsorbent regeneration. Water Res. 2020, 171, 115381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  206. Deng, S.; Yu, Q.; Huang, J.; Yu, G. Removal of perfluorooctane sulfonate from wastewater by anion exchange resins: Effects of resin properties and solution chemistry. Water Res. 2010, 44, 5188–5195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  207. Appleman, T.D.; Dickenson, E.R.; Bellona, C.; Higgins, C.P. Nanofiltration and granular activated carbon treatment of perfluoroalkyl acids. J. Hazard. Mater. 2013, 260, 740–746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  208. Appleman, T.D.; Higgins, C.P.; Quinones, O.; Vanderford, B.J.; Kolstad, C.; Zeigler-Holady, J.C.; Dickenson, E.R. Treatment of poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances in U.S. full-scale water treatment systems. Water Res. 2014, 51, 246–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  209. McCleaf, P.; Englund, S.; Ostlund, A.; Lindegren, K.; Wiberg, K.; Ahrens, L. Removal efficiency of multiple poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) in drinking water using granular activated carbon (GAC) and anion exchange (AE) column tests. Water Res. 2017, 120, 77–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  210. Ochoa-Herrera, V.; Sierra-Alvarez, R. Removal of perfluorinated surfactants by sorption onto granular activated carbon, zeolite and sludge. Chemosphere 2008, 72, 1588–1593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  211. Liu, C.J.; Werner, D.; Bellona, C. Removal of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) from contaminated groundwater using granular activated carbon: A pilot-scale study with breakthrough modeling. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 51, 6342–6351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  212. Woodard, S.; Berry, J.; Newman, B. Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC. Remediat. J. 2017, 27, 19–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  213. Xiao, X.; Ulrich, B.A.; Chen, B.; Higgins, C.P. Sorption of poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) relevant to aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF)-impacted groundwater by biochars and activated carbon. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 51, 6342–6351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  214. Soriano, A.; Gorri, D.; Urtiaga, A. Efficient treatment of perfluorohexanoic acid by nanofiltration flowed by electrochemical degradation of the NF concentrate. Water Res. 2017, 112, 147–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  215. Tang, C.Y.; Fu, Q.S.; Robertson, A.P.; Criddle, C.S.; Leckie, J.O. Use of reverse osmosis membranes to remove perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) from semiconductor wastewater. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2006, 40, 7343–7349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  216. Tang, C.Y.; Fu, Q.S.; Criddle, C.S.; Leckie, J.O. Effect of flux (transmembrane pressure) and membrane properties on fouling and rejection of reverse osmosis and nanofiltration membranes treating perfluorooctane sulfonate containing wastewater. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2007, 41, 2008–2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  217. Mastropietro, T.F.; Bruno, R.; Pardo, E.; Armentano, D. Reverse osmosis and nanofiltration membranes for highly efficient PFASs removal: Overview, challenges, and future perspectives. Dalton. Trans. 2021, 50, 5398–5410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  218. Wu, D.; Li, X.; Tang, Y.; Lu, P.; Chen, W.; Xu, X.; Li, L. Mechanism insight of PFOA degradation by ZnO assisted-photocatalytic ozonation: Efficiency and intermediates. Chemosphere 2017, 180, 247–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  219. Park, S.; Lee, L.S.; Medina, V.F.; Zull, A.; Waisner, S. Heat-activated persulfate oxidation of PFOA, 6:2 fluorotelomer sulfonate, and PFOS under conditions suitable for in-situ groundwater remediation. Chemosphere 2016, 145, 376–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  220. Mitchell, S.M.; Ahmad, M.; Teel, A.L.; Watts, R.J. Degradation of perfluorooctanoic acid by reactive species generated through catalyzed H2O2 propagation reactions. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 2013, 1, 117–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  221. Singh, R.K.; Fernando, S.; Baygi, S.F.; Multari, N.; Thagard, S.M.; Holsen, T.M. Breakdown products from perfluorinated alkyl substances (PFAS) degradation in a plasma-based water treatment process. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 53, 2731–2738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  222. Lin, J.-C.; Hu, C.-Y.; Lo, S.-L. Effect of surfactants on the degradation of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) by ultrasonic (US) treatment. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2016, 28, 130–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  223. Taseidifar, M. Environmental applications of a biodegradable cysteine-based surfactant. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2020, 206, 111389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  224. Brusseau, M.L.; Anderson, R.H.; Guo, B. PFAS concentrations in soils: Background levels versus contaminated sites. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 740, 140017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  225. Shahsavari, E.; Rouch, D.; Khudur, L.S.; Thomas, D.; Aburto-Medina, A.; Ball, A.S. Challenges and current status of the biological treatment of PFAS-contaminated soils. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2021, 8, 602040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  226. Shen, L.; Zhou, J.; Liang, X.; Qin, L.; Wang, T.; Zhu, L. Different sources, fractionation, and migrationof legacy and novel per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances between greenhouse and open-field soils. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2023, 57, 1670–1679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  227. Wei, C.; Song, X.; Wang, Q.; Hu, Z. Sorption kinetics, isotherms and mechanisms of PFOS on soils with different physicochemical properties. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2017, 142, 40–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  228. Abunada, Z.; Alazaiza, M.Y.D.; Bashir, M.J.K. An overview of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in the environment: Source, fate, risk and regulations. Water 2020, 12, 3590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  229. Mahinroosta, R.; Senevirathna, L. A review of the emerging treatment technologies for PFAS contaminated soils. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 255, 109896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  230. Sörengård, M.; Kleja, D.B.; Ahrens, L. Stabilization and solidification remediation of soil contaminated with poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs). J. Hazard. Mater. 2019, 367, 639–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  231. Sörengård, M.; Kleja, D.B.; Ahrens, L. Stabilization of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) with colloidal activated carbon (PlumeStop®) as a function of soil clay and organic matter content. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 249, 109345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  232. Trellu, C.; Pechaud, Y.; Oturan, N.; Mousset, E.; van Hullebusch, E.D.; Huguenot, D.; Oturan, M.A. Remediation of soils contaminated by hydrophobic organic compounds: How to recover extracting agents from soil washing solutions? J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 404, 124137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  233. Senevirathna, S.; Mahinroosta, R.; Li, M.; KrishnaPillai, K. In situ soil flushing to remediate confined soil contaminated with PFOS—And innovative solution for emerging environmental issue. Chemoshpere 2021, 262, 127606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  234. Uriakhil, M.A.; Sidnell, T.; De Castro Fernández, A.; Lee, J.; Ross, I.; Bussemaker, M. Per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substance remediation from soil and sorbents: A review of adsorption behavior and ultrasonic treatment. Chemosphere 2021, 282, 131025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  235. Kim, S.O.; Kim, W.S.; Kim, K.W. Evaluation of electrokinetic remediation of arsenic-contaminated soils. Environ. Geochem. Health 2005, 27, 443–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  236. Mejia-Avendaño, S.; Munoz, G.; Sauvé, S.; Liu, J. Assessment of the influence of soil characteristics and hydrocarbon fuel cocontamination of the solvent extraction of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances. Anal. Chem. 2017, 89, 2539–2546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  237. Gusiatin, Z.M.; Kulikowska, D.; Klik, B. New-generation washing agents in remediation of metal-polluted soils and methods for washing effluent treatment: A review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 6220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  238. Crownover, E.; Oberle, D.; Kluger, M.; Heron, G. Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances thermal desorption evaluation. Remediat. J. 2019, 29, 77–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  239. Sörengård, M.; Lindh, A.S.; Ahrens, L. Thermal desorption as a high removal remediation technique for soils contaminated with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs). PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0234476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  240. Lee, Y.-C.; Lo, S.-L.; Kuo, J.; Lin, Y.-L. Persulfate oxidation of perfluorooctanoic acid under the temperatures of 20–40 °C. Chem. Eng. J. 2012, 198–199, 27–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  241. Tran, T.; Abrell, L.; Brusseau, M.L.; Chorover, J. Iron-activated persulfate oxidation degrades perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) at ambient temperature. Chemosphere 2021, 281, 130824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  242. Bruton, T.A.; Sedlak, D.L. Treatment of aqueous film-forming foam by heat-activated persulfate under conditions representative of in situ chemical oxidation. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 51, 13878–13885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  243. Bruton, T.A.; Sedlak, D.L. Treatment of perfluoroalkyl acids by heat-activated persulfate under conditions representative of in situ chemical oxidation. Chemosphere 2018, 206, 457–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  244. Yang, S.; Cheng, J.; Sun, J.; Hu, Y.; Liang, X. Defluorination of aqueous perfluorooctanesulfonate by activated persulfate oxidation. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e74877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  245. Su, Y.; Rao, U.; Khor, C.M.; Jensen, M.G.; Teesch, L.M.; Wong, B.M.; Cwiertny, D.M.; Jassby, D. Potential-driven electron transfer lowers the dissociation energy of the F-F bond and facilitates reductive defluorination of perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS). ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2019, 11, 33913–33922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  246. Tenorio, R.; Liu, J.; Xiao, X.; Maizel, A.; Higgins, C.P.; Schaefer, C.E.; Strathmann, T.J. Destruction of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) in aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) with UV-sulfate photoreductive treatment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2020, 54, 6957–6967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  247. Montinaro, S.; Concas, A.; Pisu, M.; Cao, G. Remediation of heavy metals contaminated soils by ball milling. Chemosphere 2007, 67, 631–639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  248. Turner, L.P.; Kueper, B.H.; Jaansalu, K.M.; Patch, D.J.; Battye, N.; El-Sharnouby, O.; Mumford, K.G.; Weber, K.P. Mechanochemical remediation of perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) amended sand and aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) impacted soil by planetary ball milling. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 765, 142722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  249. Kwon, B.G.; Lim, H.J.; Na, S.H.; Choi, B.I.; Shin, D.S.; Chung, S.Y. Biodegradation of perfluorooctanesulfonate (PFOS) as an emerging contaminant. Chemosphere 2014, 109, 221–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  250. Yi, L.B.; Chai, L.Y.; Xie, Y.; Peng, Q.J.; Peng, Q.Z. Isolation, identification, and degradation performance of a PFOA-degrading strain. Genet. Mol. Res. 2016, 15, gmr.15028043. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  251. Chetverikov, S.P.; Sharipov, D.A.; Korshunova, T.Y.; Loginov, O.N. Degradation of perfluorooctanyl sulfonate by strain pseudomonas plecoglossicida 2.4-D. Appl. Biochem. Microbiol. 2017, 53, 533–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  252. Gobelius, L.; Lewis, J.; Ahrens, L. Plant uptake of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances at a contaminated fire training facility to evaluate the phytoremediation potential of various plant species. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 51, 12602–12610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  253. Yin, T.; Chen, H.; Reinhard, M.; Yi, X.; He, Y.; Gin, K.Y.H. Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances removal in a full-scale tropical constructed wetland system treating landfill leachate. Water. Res. 2017, 125, 418–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  254. Huff, D.K.; Morris, L.A.; Sutter, L.; Costanza, J.; Pennell, K.D. Accumulation of six PFAS compounds by woody and herbaceous plants: Potential for phytoextraction. Int. J. Phytoremediat. 2020, 22, 1538–1550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  255. Presentato, A.; Lampis, S.; Vantini, A.; Manea, F.; Daprá, F.; Zuccoli, S.; Vallini, G. On the ability of perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS) bioaccumulation by two pseudomonas sp. Strains isolated from PFAS-contaminated environmental matrices. Microorganism 2020, 8, 92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  256. Zhou, H.; Chen, C.; Zhang, X.; Chen, J.; Quan, X. Phytotoxicity of PFOS and PFOA to Brassica chinensis in different Chinese soils. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2011, 74, 1343–1347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  257. Zhou, H.; Guan, Y.; Zhang, G.; Zhang, Z.; Tan, F.; Quan, X.; Chen, J. Uptake of perfluorooctance sulfonate (PFOS) by wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) plant. Chemosphere 2013, 91, 139–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  258. Zhou, S.; Fang, S.; Zhu, L.; Liu, L.; Liu, Z.; Zhang, Y. Mutual impacts of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and earthworms (Eisenia fetida) on the bioavailability of perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) in soil. Environ. Pollut. 2014, 184, 495–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  259. Zhou, H.; Qu, B.; Guan, Y.; Jiang, J.; Chen, X. Influence of salinity and temperature on uptake of perfluorinated carboxylic acids (PFCAs) by hydroponically grown wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). SpringerPlus 2016, 5, 541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  260. Zhou, L.; Zhu, L.; Zhao, S.; Ma, X. Sequestration and bioavailability of perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) in soils: Implications for their underestimated risk. Sci. Total Environ. 2016, 72, 169–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  261. Stahl, T.; Heyn, J.; Thiele, H.; Hüther, J.; Failing, K.; Georgii, S.; Brunn, H. Carryover of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) from soil to plants. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2009, 57, 289–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  262. Lechner, M.; Knapp, H. Carryover of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) from soil to plant and distribution to the different plant compartments studied in cultures of carrots (Daucus carota ssp. sativus), potatoes (Solanum tuberosum), and cucumbers (Cucumis sativus). J. Agric. Food Chem. 2011, 59, 11011–11018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  263. Cornelius, C.; D’Hollander, W.; Roosens, L.; Covaci, A.; Smolders, R.; Van Den Heuvel, R.; Goarts, E.; Van Campenhout, K.; Reynders, H.; Bervoets, L. First assessment of population exposure to perfluorinated compounds in Flanders, Belgium. Chemosphere 2012, 86, 308–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  264. Felizeter, S.; McLachlan, M.S.; de Voogt, P. Uptake of perfluorinated alkyl acids by hydroponically grown lettuce (Lactuca sativa). Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46, 11735–11743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  265. Herzke, D.; Huber, S.; Bervoets, L.; D’Hollander, W.; Hajslova, J.; Pulkrabova, J.; Brambilla, G.; De Filippis, S.P.; Klenow, S.; Heinemeyer, G. Perfluorinated alkylated substances in vegetables collected in four European countries; occurrence and human exposure estimations. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2013, 20, 7930–7939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  266. Blaine, A.C.; Rich, C.D.; Hundal, L.S.; Lau, C.; Mills, M.A.; Harris, K.M.; Higgins, C.P. Uptake of perfluoroalkyl acids into edible crops via land applied biosolids: Field and greenhouse studies. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2013, 47, 14062–14069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  267. Klenow, S.; Heinemeyer, G.; Brambilla, G.; Dellatte, E.; Herzke, D.; de Voogt, P. Dietary exposure to selected perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) in four European regions. Food Addit. Contam. Part A 2013, 30, 2141–2151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  268. Blaine, A.C.; Rich, C.D.; Sedlacko, E.M.; Hundal, L.S.; Kumar, K.; Lau, C.; Mills, M.A.; Harris, K.M.; Higgins, C.P. Perfluoroalkyl acid disributions in various plant compartments of edible crops grown in biosolids-amended soils. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 48, 7858–7865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  269. Felizeter, S.; McLachlan, M.S.; de Voogt, P. Root uptake and translocation of perfluoroinated alkyl acids by three hydroponically grown crops. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2014, 62, 3334–3342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  270. D’Hollander, W.; Herzke, D.; Huber, S.; Hajslova, J.; Pulkrabova, J.; Brambilla, G.; De Filippis, S.P.; Bervoets, L.; de Voogt, P. Occurrence of perfluorinated alkylated substances in cereals, salt, sweets and fruit items collected in four European countries. Chemosphere 2015, 129, 179–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  271. Bizkarguenaga, E.; Zabaleta, I.; Prieto, A.; Fernández, L.; Zuloaga, O. Uptake of 8:2 perfluoroalkyl phosphate diester and its degradation products by carrot and lettuce from copost-amended soil. Chemosphere 2016, 152, 309–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  272. Navarro, I.; de la Torre, A.; Sanz, P.; Porcel, M.Á.; Pro, J.; Carbonell, G.; de los Ángeles Martinez, M. Uptake of perfluoroalkyl substances and halogenated flame retardants by crop plants grown in biosolids-amended soils. Environ. Res. 2017, 152, 199–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  273. Haug, L.S.; Salihovic, S.; Jogsten, I.E.; Thomsen, C.; van Bavel, B.; Lindström, G.; Becher, G. Levels in food and beverages and daily intake of perfluorinated compounds in Norway. Chemosphere 2010, 80, 1137–1143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  274. Pérez, F.; Llorca, M.; Köck-Schulmeyer, M.; Škrbić, B.; Oliveira, L.S.; da Boit Martinello, K.; Al-Dhabi, N.A.; Antić, I.; Farré, M.; Barceló, D. Assessment of perfluoroalkyl substances in food items at global scale. Environ. Res. 2014, 135, 181–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  275. U.S. EPA. Emerging Issues in Food Waste Management—Persistent Chemical Contaminants; EPA/600/R-21/115; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development: Washington, DC, USA, 2021. Available online: https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2021-08/emerging-issues-in-food-waste-management-persistent-chemical-contaminants.pdf (accessed on 10 February 2025).
  276. Bao, J.; Yu, W.-J.; Liu, Y.; Wang, X.; Jin, Y.-H.; Dong, G.-H. Perfluoroalkyl substances in groundwater and home-produced vegetables and eggs around a fluorochemical industrial park in China. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2019, 171, 199–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  277. Brown, J.B.; Conder, J.M.; Arblaster, J.A.; Higgins, C.P. Assessing human health risks from per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS)-impacted vegetable consumption: A tiered modeling approach. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2020, 54, 15202–15214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  278. Stahl, T.; Riebe, R.A.; Falk, S.; Failing, K.; Brunn, H. Long-term lysimeter experiment to investigate the leaching of perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) and the carryover from soil to plants: Results of a pilot study. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2013, 61, 1784–1793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  279. Wen, B.; Li, L.; Zhang, H.; Ma, Y.; Shan, X.-Q.; Zhang, S. Field study on the uptake and translocation of perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) by wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) grown in biosolids-amended soils. Environ. Pollut. 2014, 184, 547–554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  280. Krippner, J.; Brunn, H.; Falk, S.; Georgii, S.; Schubert, S.; Stahl, T. Effects of chain length and pH on the uptake and distribution of perfluoroalkyl substances in maize (Zea mays). Chemosphere 2014, 94, 85–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  281. Krippner, J.; Falk, S.; Brunn, H.; Georgii, S.; Schubert, S.; Stahl, T. Accumulation potentials of perfluoroalkyl carboxylic acids (PFCAs) and perfluoroalkyl sulfonic acids (PFSAs) in maize (Zea mays). J. Agric. Food Chem. 2015, 63, 3646–3653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  282. Müller, C.E.; LeFevre, G.H.; Timofte, A.E.; Hussain, F.A.; Sattely, E.S.; Luthy, R.G. Competing mechanisms for perfluoroalkyl acid accumulation in plants revealed using an Arabidopsis model system. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2016, 35, 1138–1147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  283. Wen, B.; Wu, Y.; Zhang, H.; Liu, Y.; Hu, X.; Huang, H.; Zhang, S. The roles of protein and lipid in the accumulation and distribution of perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoate (PFOA) in plants grown in biosolids-amended soils. Environ. Pollut. 2016, 216, 682–688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  284. Liu, Z.; Lu, Y.; Shi, Y.; Wang, P.; Jones, K.; Sweetman, A.J.; Su, C. Crop bioaccumulation and human exposure of perfluoroalkyl acids through multi-media transport from a mega fluorochemical industrial park, China. Environ. Int. 2017, 106, 37–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  285. Grassini, P.; La Menza, N.C.; Edreira, J.I.R.; Monzón, J.P.; Tenorio, F.A.; Specht, J.E. Chapter 9—Soybean. In Crop Physiology Case Histories for Major Crops; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2021; pp. 282–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  286. Zhou, S.; Liang, T.; Zhou, T.; Li, D.; Wang, B.; Zhan, J.; Liu, L. Biotransformation and responses of antioxidant enzymes in hydroponically cultured soybean and pumpkin exposed to perfluorooctane sulfonamide (FOSA). Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2018, 161, 669–675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  287. Jiang, T.; Zhang, W.; Liang, Y. Uptake of individual and mixed per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) by soybean and their effects on functional genes related to nitrification, denitrification, and nitrogen fixation. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 838 Pt 4, 156640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  288. Jian, J.-M.; Guo, Y.; Zeng, L.; Liu, L.-Y.; Lu, X.; Wang, F.; Zeng, E.Y. Global distribution of perfluorochemicals (PFCs) in potential human exposure source—A review. Environ. Int. 2017, 108, 51–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  289. Poothong, S.; Papadopoulou, E.; Padilla-Sánchez, J.A.; Thomsen, C.; Haug, L.S. Multiple pathways of human exposure to poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs): From external exposure to human blood. Environ. Int. 2020, 134, 105244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  290. Tittlemier, S.A.; Pepper, K.; Seymour, C.; Moisey, J.; Bronson, R.; Cao, X.-L.; Dabeka, R.W. Dietary exposure of Canadians to perfluorinated carboxylates and perfluorooctane sulfonate via consumption of meat, fish, fast foods, and food items prepared in their packaging. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2007, 55, 3203–3210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  291. Noorlander, C.W.; van Leeuwen, S.P.J.; te Biesebeek, J.D.; Mengelers, M.J.B.; Zeilmaker, M.J. Levels of perfluorinated compounds in food and dietary intake of PFOS and PFOA in the Netherlands. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2011, 59, 7496–7505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  292. Heo, J.-J.; Lee, J.-W.; Kim, S.-K.; Oh, J.-E. Foodstuff analyese show that seafood and water are major perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) sources to humans in Korea. J. Hazard. Mat. 2014, 279, 402–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  293. Eriksson, U.; Kärrman, A.; Rotander, A.; Mikkelsen, B.; Dam, M. Perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) in food and water from Faroe Islands. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2013, 20, 7940–7948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  294. van Leeuwen, S.P.J.; Karrman, A.; van Bavel, B.; de Boer, J.; Lindstrom, G. Struggle for quality in determination of perfluorinated contaminants in environmental and human samples. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2006, 40, 7854–7860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  295. van Zanten, H.H.E.; van Ittersum, M.K.; De Boer, I.J.M. The role of farm animals in a circular food system. Glob. Food Secur. 2019, 21, 18–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  296. van Selm, B.; Hijbeek, R.; van Ittersum, M.K.; van Hal, O.; van Middelaar, C.E.; de Boer, I.J.M. Recoupling livestock and feed production in the Netherlands to reduce environmental impacts. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 899, 165540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  297. Kowalczyk, J.; Ehlers, S.; Oberhausen, A.; Tischer, M.; Fürst, P.; Schafft, H.; Lahrssen-Wiederholt, M. Absorption, distribution, and milk secretion of the perfluoroalkyl acids PFBS, PFHxS, PFOS, and PFOA by dairy cows fed naturally contaminated feed. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2013, 61, 2903–2912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  298. van Asselt, E.D.; Kowalczyk, J.; van Eijkeren, J.C.; Zeilmaker, M.J.; Ehlers, S.; Fürst, P.; Lahrssen-Wiederholt, M.; van der Fels-Klerx, H.J. Transfer of perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) from contaminated feed to dairy milk. Food Chem. 2013, 141, 1489–1495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  299. Vestergren, R.; Orata, F.; Berger, U.; Cousins, I.T. Bioaccumulation of perfluoroalkyl acids in dairy cows in a naturally contaminated environment. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 2013, 20, 7959–7969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  300. Li, X.; Gao, K.; Dong, S.; Liu, X.; Fu, K.; Wang, P.; Zhang, A.; Su, X.; Fu, J. Length-specific occurrence and profile of perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) in animal protein feeds. J. Hazard. Mat. 2019, 373, 224–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  301. Lupton, S.J.; Smith, D.J.; Scholljegerdes, E.; Ivey, S.; Young, W.; Genualdi, S. Plasma and skin per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS) levels in dairy cattle with lifetime exposures to PFAS-contaminated drinking water and feed. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2022, 70, 15945–15954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  302. Drew, R.; Hagen, T.G.; Champness, D. Accumulation of PFAS by livestock—Determination of transfer factors from water to serum for cattle and sheep in Australia. Food Addit. Contam. Part A Chem. Anal. Control Expo. Risk Assess. 2021, 38, 1897–1913. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  303. Li, X.; Liu, Y.; Yin, Y.; Wang, P.; Su, X. Occurrence of some legacy and emerging contaminants in feed and food and their ranking priorities for human exposure. Chemosphere 2023, 321, 138117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  304. Fernandes, A.R.; Lake, I.R.; Dowding, A.; Rose, M.; Jones, N.R.; Petch, R.; Smith, F.; Panton, S. The potential of recycled materials used in agriculture to contaminate food through uptake by livestock. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 667, 359–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  305. Ferandes, A.R.; Lake, I.R.; Dowding, A.; Rose, M.; Jones, N.R.; Smith, F.; Panton, S. The transfer of environmental contaminants (Brominated and Chlorinated dioxins and biphenyls, PBDEs, HBCDDs, PCNs and PFAS) from recycled materials used for bedding to the eggs and tissues of chickens. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 892, 164441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  306. Wilson, T.B.; Stevenson, G.; Crough, R.; de Araujo, J.; Fernando, N.; Anwar, A.; Scott, T.; Quinteros, J.A.; Scott, P.C.; Archer, M.J.G. Evaluation of residues in hen eggs after exposure of laying hens to water containing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2021, 40, 735–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  307. Wang, G.; Lu, J.; Xing, Z.; Li, S.; Liu, Z.; Tong, Y. Occurrence, distribution, and risk assessment of perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) in muscle and liver of cattle in Xinjiang, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  308. Wang, J.M.; Shi, Y.L.; Pan, Y.Y.; Cai, Y.Q. Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and other fluorochemicals in viscera and muscle of farmed pigs and chickens in Beijing, China. Chin. Sci. Bull. 2010, 55, 3550–3555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  309. Mikołajczyk, S.; Warenik-Bany, M.; Pajurek, M.; Marchand, P. Perfluoroalkyl substances in the meat of Polish farm animals and game—Occurrence, profiles and dietary intake. Sci. Total Environ. 2024, 945, 174071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  310. Liu, Y.; Zhang, Q.; Li, Y.; Hao, Y.; Li, J.; Zhang, L.; Wang, P.; Yin, Y.; Zhang, S.; Li, T.; et al. Occurrence of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) in raw milk and feed from nine Chinese provinces and human exposure risk assessment. Chemosphere 2022, 300, 134521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  311. Xiao, K.; Li, X.; Xu, N.; Wang, X.; Hao, L.; Bao, H.; Zhang, L.; Shi, Y.; Cai, Y. Carry-over rate of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances to raw milk and human exposure risks in different regions of China. Sci. Total Environ. 2024, 944, 173902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  312. Zafeiraki, E.; Costopoulou, D.; Vassiliadou, I.; Leondiadis, L.; Dassenakis, E.; Hoogenboom, R.L.A.P. Perfluoroalkylated substances (PFAS) in home and commercially produced chicken eggs from the Netherlands and Greece. Chemosphere 2016, 144, 2106–2112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  313. Gazzotti, T.; Sirri, F.; Ghelli, E.; Zironi, E.; Zampiga, M.; Pagliuca, G. Perfluoroalkyl contaminants in eggs from backyard chickens reared in Italy. Food Chem. 2021, 362, 130178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  314. Lasters, R.; Groffen, T.; Eens, M.; Coertjens, D.; Gebbink, W.A.; Hofman, J.; Bervoets, L. Home-produced eggs: An important human exposure pathway of perfluoroalkylated substances (PFAS). Chemosphere 2022, 308 Pt 1, 136283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  315. Mikołajczyk, S.; Pajurek, M.; Warenik-Bany, M. Perfluoroalkyl substances in hen eggs from different types of husbandry. Chemosphere 2022, 103 Pt 1, 134950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  316. Mikkonen, A.T.; Martin, J.; Upton, R.N.; Barker, A.O.; Brumley, C.N.; Taylor, M.P.; Mackenzie, L.; Roberts, M.S. Spatio-temporal trends in livestock exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) inform risk assessment and management measures. Environ. Res. 2023, 225, 115518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  317. Mikkonen, A.T.; Martin, J.; Upton, R.N.; Moenning, J.-L.; Numata, J.; Taylor, M.P.; Roberts, M.S.; Mackenzie, L. Dynamic exposure and body burden models for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) enable management of food safety risks in cattle. Environ. Int. 2023, 180, 108218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  318. Chou, W.-C.; Tell, L.A.; Baynes, R.E.; Davis, J.L.; Cheng, Y.-H.; Maunsell, F.P.; Riviere, J.E.; Lin, Z. Development and application of an interactive generic physiologically based pharmacokinetic (igPBPK) model for adult beef cattle and lactating dairy cows to estimate tissue distribution and edible tissue and milk withdrawal intervals for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Food Chem. Toxicol. 2023, 181, 114062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  319. Johnston, J.J.; Ebel, E.D.; Williams, M.S.; Esteban, E.; Lupton, S.J.; Scholljegerdes, E.J.; Ivey, S.L.; Powell, M.R.; Smith, D.J. Blood-based ante-mortem method for estimating PFOS in beef from contaminated dairy cattle. ACS Agric. Sci. Technol. 2023, 3, 835–844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  320. Hill, N.I.; Becanova, J.; Lohmann, R. A sensitive method for the detection of legacy and emerging per- and polyfluoroinated alkyl substances (PFAS) in dairy milk. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2022, 414, 1235–1243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  321. Lupton, S.J.; Huwe, J.K.; Smith, D.J.; Dearfield, K.L.; Johnston, J.J. Absorption and excretion of 14C-perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) in Angus cattle (Bos taurus). J. Agric. Food Chem. 2012, 60, 1128–1134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  322. Lupton, S.J.; Huwe, J.K.; Smith, D.J.; Dearfield, K.L.; Johnston, J.J. Distribution and excretion of perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) in beef cattle (Bos taurus). J. Agric. Food Chem. 2014, 62, 1167–1173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  323. Lupton, S.J.; Dearfield, K.L.; Johnston, J.J.; Wagner, S.; Huwe, J.K. Perfluorooctane sulfonate plasma half-life determination and long-term tissue distribution in beef cattle (Bos taurus). J. Agric. Food Chem. 2015, 63, 10988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  324. Guruge, K.S.; Manage, P.M.; Yamanaka, N.; Miyazaki, S.; Taniyasu, S.; Yamashita, N. Species-specific concentrations of perfluoroalkyl contaminants in farm and pet animals in Japan. Chemosphere 2008, 73, S210–S215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  325. Draghi, S.; Pavlovic, R.; Pellegrini, A.; Fidani, M.; Riva, F.; Brecchia, G.; Agradi, S.; Arioli, F.; Vigo, D.; Di Cesare, F.; et al. First investigation of the physiological distribution of legacy and emerging perfluoroalkyl substances in raw bovine milk according to the component fraction. Foods 2023, 12, 2449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  326. Kowalczyk, J.; Ehlers, S.; Furst, P.; Schafft, H.; Lahrssen-Wiederholt, M. Transfer of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) from contaminated feed into milk and meat of sheep: Pilot study. Arch. Environ. 2012, 63, 288–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  327. Zafeiraki, E.; Vassiliadou, I.; Costopoulou, D.; Leondiadis, L.; Schafft, H.A.; Hoogenboom, R.; van Leeuwen, S.P.J. Perfluoroalkylated substances in edible livers of farm animals, including depuration behaviour in young sheep fed with contaminated grass. Chemosphere 2016, 156, 280–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  328. Numata, J.; Kowalczyk, J.; Adolphs, J.; Ehlers, S.; Schafft, H.; Fuerst, P.; Müller-Graf, C.; Lahrssen-Wiederholt, M. Toxicokinetics of seven perfluoroalkyl sulfonic and carboxylic acids in pigs fed a contaminated diet. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2014, 62, 6861–6870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  329. Guruge, K.S.; Noguchi, M.; Yoshioka, K.; Yamazaki, E.; Taniyasu, S.; Yoshioka, M.; Yamanaka, N.; Ikezawa, M.; Tanimura, N.; Sato, M.; et al. Microminipigs as a new experimental animal model for toxicological studies: Comparative pharmacokinetics of perfluoroalkyl acids. J. Appl. Toxicol. 2016, 36, 68–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  330. Xie, S.; Cui, Y.; Yang, Y.; Meng, K.; Pan, Y.; Liu, Z.; Chen, D. Tissue distribution and bioaccumulation of 8:2 fluorotelomer alcohol and its metabolites in pigs after oral exposure. Chemosphere 2020, 249, 126016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  331. Basini, G.; Bussolati, S.; Torcianti, V.; Grasselli, F. Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) induces redox status disruption in swine granulosa cells. Vet. Sci. 2022, 9, 254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  332. Basini, G.; Bussolati, S.; Torcianti, V.; Grasselli, F. Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) affects steroidogenesis and antioxidant defence in granlosa cells from swine ovary. Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2023, 101, 104169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  333. Good, S.L.; Antwi-Boasiako, C.; González-Alvarez, M.E.; Buol, B.M.; Baumgard, L.H.; Keating, A.F.; Charbonnet, J.A. Distribution of perfluorooctanoic acid in exposed female postpubertal pigs in thermal neutral or heat-stressed conditions. Toxicol. Sci. 2025, 205, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  334. O’Brien, J.M.; Carew, A.C.; Chu, S.; Letcher, R.J.; Kennedy, S.W. Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) toxicity in domestic chicken (Gallus gallus domesticus) embryos in the absence of effects on peroxisome proliferator activated receptor alpha (PPARalpha)—Regulated genes. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. C Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2009, 149, 524–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  335. Yeung, L.W.Y.; Loi, E.I.H.; Wong, V.Y.Y.; Guruge, K.S.; Yamanaka, N.; Tanimura, N.; Hasegawa, J.; Yamashita, N.; Miyazaki, S.; Lam, P.K.S. Biochemical responses and accumulation properties of long-chain perfluorinated compounds (PFOS/PFDA/PFOA) in juvenile chickens (Gallus gallus). Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2009, 57, 377–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  336. Yoo, H.; Guruge, K.S.; Yamanaka, N.; Sato, C.; Mikami, O.; Miyazaki, S.; Yamashita, N.; Giesy, J.P. Depuration kinetics and tissue deposition of PFOA and PFOS in white leghorn chickens (Gallus gallus) administered by subcutaneous implantation. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2009, 72, 26–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  337. Briels, N.; Ciesielski, T.M.; Herzke, D.; Jaspers, V.L.B. Developmental toxicity of perfluorooctanesulfonate (PFOS) and its chlorinated polyfluoroalkyl ether sulfonate alternative F-53B in the domestic chicken. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2018, 52, 12859–12867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  338. Kowalczyk, J.; Göckener, B.; Eichhorn, M.; Kotthoff, M.; Bücking, M.; Schafft, H.; Lahrssen-Wiederholt, M.; Numata, J. Transfer of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) from feed into the eggs of laying hens. Part 2: Toxicokinetic results including the role of precursors. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2020, 68, 12539–12548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  339. Feng, Q.-J.; Luo, X.-J.; Ye, M.-X.; Hu, K.-Q.; Zeng, Y.-H.; Mai, B.-X. Bioaccumulation, tissue distributions, and maternal transfer of perfluoroalkyl carboxylates (PFCAs)in laying hens. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 905, 167008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  340. Choi, Y.J.; Lee, L.S.; Hoskins, T.D.; Gharehveran, M.M.; Sepúlveda, M.S. Occurrence and implications of per and polyfluoroalkyl substances in animal feeds used in laboratory toxicity testing. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 867, 161583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  341. Wilkinson, A.D.; Meeker, D.L. How agricultural rendering supports sustainability and assists livestock’s ability to contribute more than just food. Anim. Front. 2021, 11, 24–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  342. European Union Reference Laboratory for Halogenated POPs in Feed and Food. Guidance Document on Analytical Parameters for the Determination of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in Food and Feed, Version 1.2. 11 May 2022. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Christina-Riemenschneider/publication/360790596_Guidance_Document_on_Analytical_Parameters_for_the_Determination_of_Per-and_Polyfluoroalkyl_Substances_PFAS_in_Food_and_Feed_Version_12/links/628b8e6e3303d263c471de69/Guidance-Document-on-Analytical-Parameters-for-the-Determination-of-Per-and-Polyfluoroalkyl-Substances-PFAS-in-Food-and-Feed-Version-12.pdf (accessed on 26 February 2025).
  343. GFIRA. Feed is Key to Compliance with Maximum PFAS Levels in Food of Animal Origin; German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment: Berlin, Germany, 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  344. Wang, X.; Dou, Z.; Feng, S.; Zhang, Y.; Ma, L.; Zou, C.; Bai, Z.; Lakshmanan, P.; Shi, X.; Liu, D.; et al. Global food nutrients analysis reveals alarming gaps and daunting challenges. Nat. Food 2023, 4, 1007–1017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  345. Wang, Y.; Ying, H.; Stefanovski, D.; Shurson, G.C.; Chen, T.; Wang, Z.; Yin, Y.; Zheng, H.; Nakaishi, T.; Li, J.; et al. Food waste used as a resource can reduce climate and resource burdens in agrifood systems. Nat. Food 2025, 6, 478–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  346. Wang, X.; Huang, X.; Zhi, Y.; Liu, X.; Wang, Q.; Yue, D.; Wang, X. Leaching of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) from food contact materials with implications for waste disposal. J. Hazard. Mat. 2024, 479, 135658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  347. O’Connor, J.; Mickan, B.S.; Rinklebe, J.; Song, H.; Siddique, K.H.M.; Wang, H.; Kirkham, M.B.; Bolan, N.S. Environmental implications, potential value, and future of food-waste anaerobic digestate management: A review. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 318, 115519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  348. Timshina, A.S.; Robey, N.M.; Oldnettle, A.; Barron, S.; Mehdi, Q.; Cerlanek, A.; Townsend, T.G.; Bowden, J.A. Investigating the sources and fate of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in food waste compost. Waste Manag. 2024, 180, 125–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  349. Phelps, D.W.; Parkinson, L.V.; Boucher, J.M.; Muncke, J.; Geueke, B. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in food packaging: Migration, toxicity, and management strategies. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2024, 58, 5670–5684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  350. Goossen, C.P.; Schattman, R.E.; MacRae, J.D. Evidence of compost contamination with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) from “compostable” food serviceware. Biointerphases 2023, 18, 030501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  351. Samoraj, M.; Mironiuk, M.; Izydorczyk, G.; Witek-Krowiak, A.; Szopa, D.; Moustakas, K.; Chojnacka, K. The challenges and perspectives for anaeobic digestion of animal waste and fertilizer application of the digestate. Chemosphere 2022, 295, 133799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  352. Brooks, B.W. Ignoring environment and health threats does not make sense. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 2025, 12, 356–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  353. Persson, L.; Carney Almroth, B.M.; Collins, C.D.; Cornell, S.; de Wit, C.A.; Diamond, M.L.; Fantke, P.; Hassellöv, M.; MacLeod, M.; Ryberg, M.W.; et al. Outside the safe operating space of the planetary boundary for novel entities. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2022, 56, 1510–1521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  354. Rockström, J.; Steffen, W.; Noone, K.; Persson, Å.; Chapin, F.S.; Lambin, E.F.; Lenton, T.M.; Scheffer, M.; Folke, C.; Schellnhuber, H.J.; et al. Planetary boundaries: Exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecol. Soc. 2009, 14, 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  355. Steffen, W.; Richardson, K.; Rockström, J.; Cornell, S.E.; Fetzer, I.; Bennett, E.M.; Biggs, R.; Carpenter, S.R.; de Vries, W.; de Wit, C.A.; et al. Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science 2015, 347, 1259855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  356. Cousins, I.T.; Johansson, J.H.; Salter, M.E.; Sha, B.; Scheringer, M. Outside the safe operating space of a new planetary boundary for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Environ. Sci. Technol. 2022, 56, 11172–11179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  357. Islam, M.S.; Kekre, K.M.; Shah, A.; Tsai, P.-C.; Ponnusamy, V.K.; Andaluri, G. Unraveling the complexities of microplastics and PFAS synergy to foster sustainable environmental remediation and ecosystem protection: A critical review with novesights. J. Hazard. Mat. Adv. 2025, 17, 100621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  358. Yashwanth, A.; Huang, R.; Iepure, M.; Mu, M.; Zhou, W.; Kunadu, A.; Carignan, C.; Yegin, Y.; Cho, D.; Oh, J.K.; et al. Food packaging solutions in the post-per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and microplastics era: A review of functions, materials, and bio-based alternatives. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2024, 24, e70079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  359. Yu, R.-S.; Yu, H.-C.; Yang, Y.-F.; Singh, S. A global overview of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance regulatory strategies and their environmental impact. Toxics 2025, 13, 251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  360. ECHA. Support Document for Identification of 2,3,3,3-Tetrafluoro-2-(Heptafluoropropoxy)Propionic Acid, Its Salts and Its Acyl Halides (Covering any of Their Individual Isomers and Combinations Thereof) as Substances of Very High Concern Because of Their Hazardous Properties Which Cause Probable Serious Effects to Human Health and the Environment Which Give Rise to an Equivalent Level of Concern to Those of CMR1 and PBT/vPvB2 Substances (Article 57f); European Chemicals Agency: Helsinki, Finland, 2019; p. 138. Available online: https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/13638/svhc_msc_supdoc_hfpo-da_20190626_final_12819_en.pdf/53fa6a5b-e95f-3128-ea9d-fa27f43b18bc (accessed on 5 March 2025).
  361. EPA. 2010/15 PFOA Stewardship Program Guidance on Reporting Emissions and Product Content; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC, USA, 2006. Available online: https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-10/documents/pfoaguidance.pdf (accessed on 5 March 2025).
  362. OECD. Risk Reduction Approaches for PFASs—A Cross-Country Analysis; OECD Environmental, Health, Safety, and Public Service Risk Management. No. 29; Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD): Paris, France, 2015; p. 82. Available online: https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2015/09/risk-reduction-approaches-for-per-and-polyfluoroalkyl-substances-pfass-a-cross-country-analysis_51521362/ed861d08-en.pdf (accessed on 5 March 2025).
  363. Brennan, N.M.; Evans, A.T.; Fritz, M.K.; Peak, S.A.; von Holst, H.E. Trends in the regulation of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS): A scoping review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 10900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  364. Bundesinstitut für Risikobewertung. New Health-Based Guidance Values for the Industrial Chemicals PFOS and PFOA: BfR Opinion No 032/2019 of 21 August 2019; BfR-Stellungnahmen. Bundesinst. für Risikobewertung: Berlin, Germany, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  365. Health Canada. HC (Health Canada) Updates to Health Canada Soil Screening Values for Perfluoroalkylated Substances (PFAS); Health Canada: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 2019; pp. 1–2. Available online: https://buyandsell.gc.ca/cds/public/2020/06/19/1e18568783a9ee9bddc91262c6d7679a/attachment_007.pdf (accessed on 5 March 2025).
  366. Coffin, S.; Wyer, H.; Leapman, J.C. Addressing the environmental and health impacts of microplastics requires open collaboration between diverse sectors. PLoS Biol. 2021, 19, e3000932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Table 1. Industrial and consumer products containing various types of PFAS (adapted from [2,3]).
Table 1. Industrial and consumer products containing various types of PFAS (adapted from [2,3]).
Product CategoryApplication
AutomotiveTreatment for external surfaces and internal leather coatings, textiles, and carpets; used in mechanical components, seals and lubricants
Aviation and aerospaceAdditives for hydraulic fluids; insulators and sleeves
BiocidesActive compounds in plant growth regulators; active or inert emulsifiers, solvents, carriers, wetting agents; aerosol propellants in pesticides
Building and constructionCoatings of architectural materials; additives in coatings, paints, dyes, stains, and sealants; weathering, flame, and soil resistant coatings for cables and wiring; plastic foams including polystyrene and polyurethane; floor coverings, coated woods; solar panels and glass
ElectronicsFlame retardants; insulators and welding materials; semiconductor chips; electroplating; liquids and greases used as lubricants in electronics; ionic liquids used in lithium batteries
EnergyFilm for solar panels
Fire preventionFire-extinguishing foams; materials for fire-fighting equipment, protective clothes, and fuel repellents
Food processing and packagingNon-stick cooking pans and food storage containers; water and oil repellent paper, bags, and food packaging materials
Household productsPropellant gases, refrigerants, and extinguishing agents; surfactants in floor-cleaning products; non-stick coatings and treatments for textiles, leather, carpets; car waxes
Medical productsStain-resistant and water repellent materials; X-ray film; surgical patches, biocompatible human implants, and medical prosthesis; pharmaceuticals
Metal platingWetting agent and anti-mist agents
Oil wells and miningSurfactants in oil wells and mining floatation; lining of gas pipes; drilling fluids
Personal care productsCosmetics, makeup, nail polish, shampoo, dental floss, and skin lotions; sun protection
Sports equipmentSki waxes; waterproofing sprays for outdoor water repellent clothing; climbing ropes; artificial turf
Textiles, leather, and clothing productsCoatings to create oil, water, and stain-repellent properties
Table 2. Partial list of poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) by chemical group classification, compound names, and abbreviations.
Table 2. Partial list of poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) by chemical group classification, compound names, and abbreviations.
PFAS Group/AbbreviationCompound NameAbbreviation
Perfluoroalkyl sulphonic acids (PFSAs)Perfluorobutane sulfonic acid (n = 4)PFBS
Perfluoropentane sulfonic acid (n = 5)PFPeS
Perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (n = 6)PFHxS
Perfluoroheptane sulfonic acid (n = 7)PFHpS
Perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (n = 8)PFOS
Perfluorononane sulfonic acid (n = 9)PFNS
Perfluorodecane sulfonic acid (n = 10)PFDS
Perfluorododecane sulfonic acid (n = 12)PFDoDS
Perfluoroalkyl carboxylic acids (PFCAs)Trifluoroacetic acidTFA
Perfluoropropanoic acid (n = 2)PFPrA
Perfluorobutanoic acid (n = 3)PFBA
Perfluoropentanoic acid (n = 5)PFPeA
Perfluorohexanoic acid (n = 6)PFHxA
Perfluoroheptanoic acid (n = 7)PFHpA
Perfluorooctanoic acid (n = 8)PFOA
Perfluorononanoic acid (n = 9)PFNA
Perfluorodecanoic acid (n = 10)PFDA
Perfluoroundecanoic acid (n = 11)PFUnDA
Perfluorododecanoic acid (n = 12)PFDoDA
Perfluorotridecanoic acid (n = 13) PFTrDA
Perfluorotetradecanoic acid (n = 14)PFTeDA
Perfluorohexadecanoic acid (n = 16)PFHxDA
Perfluorooctadecanoic acid (n = 18)PFODA
Perfluoroalkyl phosphonic acids (PFPAs)Perfluorohexane phosphonic acid (n = 6)
Perfluorooctane phosphonic acid (n = 8)
Perfluorodecane phosphonic acid (n = 10)
Perfluoroalkyl phosphinic acids (PFPiAs)6:6 Perfluoroalkyl phosphinic acid
(m = 6, n = 6)		6:6 PFPiA
6:8 Perfluoroalkyl phosphinic acid
(m = 6, n = 8)		6:8 PFPiA
8:8 Perfluoroalkyl phosphinic acid
(m = 8, n = 8)		8:8 PFPiA
Perfluoroalkane sulphonamides (FASAs)Perfluorooctane sulphonamide (n = 8)FOSA
N-Methyl fluorobutane sulphonamide (n = 4)MeFBSA
N-Methyl fluorooctane sulphonamide
(n = 8)		MeFOSA
N-Ethyl fluorooctane sulphonamide
(n = 8)		EtFOSA
N-Alkyl perfluoroalkane sulphonamido acetic acids (FASAAs)Perfluorooctane sulphonamidoacetic acidFOSAA
N-Methyl fluorooctane sulphonamido acetic acidMeFOSAA
N-Eethyl fluorooctane sulphonamido acetic acidEtFOSAA
N-Alkyl perfluoroalkane sulphonamido ethanols (FASEs)2-N-Methyl fluorooctane sulphonamido ethanolMeFOSE
2-N-Ethyl fluorooctane sulphonamido ethanolEtFOSE
Perfluoroalkyl iodides (PFAIs)Perfluorohexyl iodide (n = 6)PFHxI
Perfluorooctyl iodide (n = 8)PFOI
Perfluorodecyl iodide (n = 10)PFDI
Perfluoroether sulphonic acids (PFESAs)6:2 Chlorinated polyfluorinated ether sulphonic acid (n = 6)6:2 CI-PFESA
8:2 Chlorinated polyfluorinated ether sulphonic acid (n = 8)8:2 CI-PFESA
10:2 Chlorinated polyfluorinated ether sulphonic acid (n = 10)10:2 CI-PFESA
Perfluoroether carboxylic acids (PFECAs)Hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acidHFPO-DA
Hexafluoropropylene oxide trimer acidHFPO-TA
4,8-Dioxa-3H-perfluorononanoic acidADONA
Perfluorooctane sulphonamido ethanol-based phosphate esters (SAmPAPs)Phosphate diester of
N-ethylperfluorooctane
sulphonamido ethanol		SAmPAP diester
Phosphate triester of
N-ethylperfluorooctane
sulphonamido ethanol		SAmPAP
triester
Cyclic perfluoroalkyl sulphonic acids (cyclic PFSAs)Perfluoromethylcyclohexane sulphonic acidsPFMeCHS
Perfluoroethylcyclohexane sulphonic
acids		PFECHS
Fluorotelomer sulphonic acids (FTSAs)n:2 Fluorotelomer sulphonic acids
(n = 4, 6, 8, 10)		N:2 FTSA
Fluorotelomer carboxylic acids (FTCAs)n:2 Fluorotelomer carboxylic acids
(n = 6, 8, 10)		n:2 FTCA
n:3 Fluorotelomer carboxylic acids
(n = 5, 7)		n:3 FTCA
Fluorotelomer unsaturated
carboxylic acids (FTUCAs)		n:2 Fluorotelomer unsaturated
carboxylic acids (n = 6, 8, 10)		n:2 FTUCA
Fluorotelomer olefins (FTOs)n:2 Fluorotelomer olefins
(n = 6, 8, 10)		n:2 FTO
Fluorotelomer alcohols (FTOHs)n:2 Fluorotelomer alcohols
(n = 4, 6, 8, 10, 12)		n:2 FTOH
Fluorotelomer iodides (FTIs)n:2 Fluorotelomer iodides
(n = 4, 6, 8)		n:2 FTI
Fluorotelomer acrylates (FTACs)n:2 Fluorotelomer acrylates
(n = 4, 6, 8, 10, 12)		n:2 FTAC
Fluorotelomer methylacrylates (FTMACs)n:2 Fluorotelomer methyacrylates
(n = 6, 8)		n:2 FTMAC
Polyfluoroalkyl
phosphate
monoesters
(monoPAPs)		n:2 Polyfluoroalkyl phosphate
monoesters (n = 4, 6, 8, 10)		n:2 monoPAP
Polyfluoroalkyl
phosphate
diesters
(diPAPs)		n:2 Polyfluoroalkyl phosphate
diesters (m = n = 4, 6, 8, 10)		n:2 diPAP
4:2/n:2 Polyfluoroalkyl phosphate
diesters (m = 4, n = 4, 6)		4:2/n:2 diPAP
6:2/n:2 Polyfluoroalkyl phosphate
diesters (m = 6, n = 6, 8, 10, 12, 14)		6:2/n:2 diPAP
8:2/n:2 Polyfluoroalkyl phosphate
diesters (m = 8, n = 8, 10, 12)		8:2/n:2 diPAP
10:2/10:2 Polyfluoroalkyl phosphate
diesters (m = 10, n = 10)		10:2/10:2 diPAP
Table 3. Summary of toxic effects of PFAS exposure on human health.
Table 3. Summary of toxic effects of PFAS exposure on human health.
Organ or SystemToxic EffectsReferences
LiverNonalcoholic fatty liver disease; liver fibrosis; reduced liver-function data[30,31,32,33,34]
KidneyReduced toxin excretion; chronic kidney disease[35,36,37,38,39]
LungsPromotes asthma in children[40]
Heart/circulatory systemCardiovascular problems; hypertension; myocardio infarction and stroke[41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48]
Brain/nervous
system		Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder; Alzheimer’s dementia; autism spectrum disorder; brain structure and volume; hearing impairment; reduced IQ; short-term memory loss; Parkinson disease; developmental delay in linguistics, hand–eye coordination, behavior; cerebral palsy; stroke; reduced neurobehavior function, cognition, and neuronal network function[49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80]
Bones/skeletal systemOsteoporosis; reduced bone health, bone mineral content, and bone density[42,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88]
Fertility/reproductive systemInfertility; delayed occurrence of desired pregnancy; miscarriage; lifetime effects on reproductive organs and health; maternal hypertension; preeclampsia; reduced fetal birth weight, fetal growth, fetal head growth; tendency for premature birth; increased mortality; intrauterine disorder of thyroid hormones[45,47,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115]
Endocrine systemThyroid, steroid, and sex-hormone disruption[116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124]
MetabolismDisrupted glucose, fat, bile acid, and cholesterol metabolism; type 2-diabetes; gestational diabetes[110,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132]
Immune systemReduced antibody response to vaccines; autoimmune diseases; ulcerative colitis[133,134,135,136,137,138,139]
CancerKidney, testicular, and post-menopause breast cancer; secondary effects of fatty liver, liver cirrhosis leading to liver cancer[140,141,142,143,144,145,146,147,148]
EpigeneticsGenetic transfer of PFAS effects to subsequent generations[149,150,151,152,153,154]
Table 4. Consumer practices that can reduce PFAS exposure.
Table 4. Consumer practices that can reduce PFAS exposure.
Consumer ProductAction
Drinking waterTest drinking water supplies to monitor presence and concentrations of PFAS
Request water provider to install effective treatments to remove PFAS
Install in-home reverse osmosis or granulated active carbon filters to effectively
remove PFAS
Boiling is ineffective and actually increases PFAS concentrations if contaminated
FoodReplace non-stick cookware with stainless steel, glass, or ceramic alternatives
Avoid heating food packaged in grease-resistant packaging and containers from fast-food restaurants and pizza boxes
Do not consume microwave popcorn in PFAS-treated microwave bags
HouseholdDo not use furniture, upholstery, rugs, carpets, and bedding that are water- or stain-resistant
Personal careConsider eliminating or minimizing use of cosmetics, makeup, nail polish, shampoo, dental floss, and lotions
Table 5. Summary of technologies for removing PFAS from contaminated water.
Table 5. Summary of technologies for removing PFAS from contaminated water.
TechnologyBrief DescriptionReferences
Adsorption
processes		Adsorption using single-use and renewable ion-exchange resins that transfers a wide variety of PFAS compounds and concentrations from the aqueous phase to a solid matrix with high selectivity and efficiency; adsorption using granular activated carbon is the most commonly used method, but active carbon must be regenerated frequently[8,205,206,207,208,209,210,211,212,213]
Filtration
processes		Advanced filtration using reverse osmosis and nanofiltration are energy-efficient processes that force pressurized water streams through a semi-permeable polymer membrane to separate and concentrate PFAS for subsequent disposal or treatment, but cost of some techniques may limit practical application[8,208,214,215,216,217]
Electrochemical oxidationPractical application under development and involves using ozone, ammonium persulfate, or hydrogen peroxide/Fenton reagent[218,219,220]
Plasma
treatment		Practical application under development and involves using high-voltage electrical discharges to generate free radical species[221]
SonolysisPractical application under development and involves using high-frequency ultrasound to cause mineralization[222]
Foam
fractionation		Practical application under development and involves sequestering PFAS into air or ozone bubbles in the air–water interface[223]
Table 6. Summary of technologies for removing or destroying PFAS in contaminated soil.
Table 6. Summary of technologies for removing or destroying PFAS in contaminated soil.
TechnologyBrief DescriptionReferences
PFAS removal
ImmobilizationAddition of modified clay or activated carbon or stabilization agents such as Portland cement to soil to absorb PFAS or create an impermeable layer to limit movement to groundwater supplies[229,230,231]
Soil washingRequires excavation of soil, removal of largest particles, and treatment of remaining fine particles with an extracting agent[232]
Soil flushingInvolves injection and recovery of extraction fluid without removal of soil from the site[233]
Water solubilization, organic solvents, chelating agents, acids, and surfactantsWater-soluble PFAS can be removed by water solubilization while other higher hydrophobicity PFAS require organic solvents, chelating agents, acids or surfactants[229,234,235,236,237]
PFAS
destruction
Thermal
destruction		Energy-intensive and expensive process involving heating at 350 to 900 °C to cause PFAS desorption from soil and forming a gas stream which is further heated at >1200 °C to break down PFAS and retain fluoride ions in a molecular scrubber[229,238,239]
Chemical
reduction/oxidation		Involves the addition of highly reactive chemicals, such as heat- or iron-activated persulfate, by vertical injection wells in upstream contaminated soil and extraction wells downstream to protect groundwater; reductive processes involving ultraviolet-light-generated solvated electrons that cause defluorination without the use of chemicals[219,240,241,242,243,244,245,246]
Ball millingAn energy- and cost-effective method for removing PFAS from contaminated soil by processing through specific reactors and being forced to collide with solid balls that cause chemical transformations and physical grinding[247,248]
BioremediationUtilizes specific bacteria and fungi or plant species that transform, degrade, acquire, and stabilize PFAS[225,249,250,251,252,253,254,255]
Table 7. Summary of the effects of PFAS exposure in livestock and poultry on body tissue and organ bioaccumulation, metabolism, excretion, and deposition in meat, milk, and eggs.
Table 7. Summary of the effects of PFAS exposure in livestock and poultry on body tissue and organ bioaccumulation, metabolism, excretion, and deposition in meat, milk, and eggs.
SpeciesPFAS EffectsReferences
Beef cattleSingle oral dose of PFOA is completely absorbed and excreted in feces and urine within 9 days of dosing but oral doses of PFOS persist in blood, adipose tissue, muscle, liver, bone, and kidney with half-lives of 36 to 385 days depending on tissue; total PFAA concentration in beef liver samples collected in various regions in China were 60-fold greater than in muscle samples but were deemed far below threshold for human-health risks; complex dynamics of PFOS plasma depletion rate indicates withdrawal times depends on initial concentrations and threshold level of concern; PFOS and PFHxS concentrations in drinking water are positively correlated with serum concentrations, and meat from cattle grazing on PFAS-contaminated sites may exceed human health consumption guidelines in some countries; models using serum and tissue estimates from daily cattle exposure to PFAS-contaminated water, pasture, soil and accounting for animal growth, seasonal variability, and differences in concentrations across paddocks have been developed to evaluate exposure-management scenarios [307,316,317,319,321,322,323]
Dairy cattleExposure to naturally contaminated feed and water resulted in detection of PFOS and PFAAs in liver, blood, and muscle of dairy cows and these compounds have high potential for transfer to milk and meat; various PFAS have different uptake and depuration kinetics which also vary among tissues and extent of secretion in milk; physiologically based pharmacokinetic model shows that although nearly all PFOS consumed is secreted in cow’s milk, the half-life was 56 days, indicating a slow elimination rate before producing milk without PFOS; high concentrations of PFOS in calf fetal livers suggest placental-barrier transfer from dam; skin samples could be used for monitoring PFAS in cattle when on-farm blood collection is not possible; multiparous cows with no known exposure to PFAS had higher prevalence of contamination in all milk fractions.[297,298,299,301,316,317,324,325]
Sheep and goatsPlasma concentrations, excretion via urine and feces, and secretion in milk were less for PFOA than PFOS-fed contaminated corn silage for 21 days; bioaccumulation of PFAS is positively correlated with intake of contaminated water which varies by season and climate; feeding contaminated grass for up to 112 days increased liver PFOS concentrations, which decreased during depuration, resulting in livers not exceeding EFSA food safety standards[302,316,326,327]
SwineBioaccumulation in plasma (up to 51%), adipose tissue and muscle (40 to 49%), liver, kidney, ovary, and follicular fluid; longer chain lengths increase accumulation; PFAS disrupts redox status, steroidogenesis, and antioxidant defense in granulosa cells in ovary; heat stress alters PFAS distribution that is detrimental to reproduction; pigs have longer PFAS elimination half-lives than most species except humans[308,328,329,330,331,332,333]
Broiler chickensEnvironmentally relevant concentrations of some forms of PFAS may adversely affect embryonic development (lower heart rate and enlarged liver) due to different toxicity thresholds; injection of increasing doses of PFOS in egg air cells prior to incubation reduced hatchability and increased liver concentrations; three-week oral gavage of 1 mg/kg body weight of PFAS mixture three times weekly had no adverse effects on body or organ weights; liver and kidney are major PFAS accumulation organs and rates of elimination vary between PFOA and PFOS; subcutaneous implantation for 4 wks followed by depuration for 4 wks resulted in no effects on body index, clinical biochemistry, or histology[308,334,335,336,337]
Laying hensTransfer rates, bioaccumulation, and half-lives of PFAS from feed to eggs varied among PFAS types; drinking water containing increasing concentrations of 4 types of PFAS compounds increased PFAS concentrations in eggs but were below Australia and New Zealand food-safety thresholds; yolks from home-produced eggs contained greater concentrations of long-chain PFASs (i.e., PFOS) than organic, battery, and free-range eggs collected from supermarkets in Netherland and Greece but would not exceed EFSA food safety standards; eggs from backyard chickens in Italy contained PFAS concentrations that would contribute up to 29% of the tolerable weekly intake limit for children; eight types of PFAS were detected in home-grown eggs from free-range hens within a 10 km radius of a fluorochemical plant in Belgium where concentrations of PFOS and PFOA were affected by diet and age of hens, and consumption of two eggs per week would exceed European health guidelines in more than 67% of locations; eggs from organic production had greatest concentrations of PFAS followed by eggs from free-range and cage hens in Poland, but corresponded to 0 to 15% of tolerable weekly intake of adults and 0 to 5% for children; toxicokinetic factors have been identified that influence the different bioaccumulation rates, tissue distribution, and maternal transfer of PFCAs to eggs[306,312,313,314,315,338,339]
Table 8. Estimated maximum possible PFAS concentrations in complete feeds for feeding laying hens, finishing cattle, sheep, and finishing pigs to avoid exceeding maximum concentrations in foods of animal origin based on EU Regulation 2023/915 (adapted from [343]).
Table 8. Estimated maximum possible PFAS concentrations in complete feeds for feeding laying hens, finishing cattle, sheep, and finishing pigs to avoid exceeding maximum concentrations in foods of animal origin based on EU Regulation 2023/915 (adapted from [343]).
Complete FeedPFOSPFOAPFNAPFHxS
μg/kg dry matter
Laying hens0.420.250.290.17
Finishing cattle0.14NA *NA1.0
Sheep0.21NANANA
Finishing pigs0.070.05NA0.06
Dairy cows0.076.5NA3.7
* NA = not available due to insufficient data.
Table 9. Maximum recommended PFAS concentrations in foods of animal origin based on EU Regulation 2023/915 (adapted from [343]).
Table 9. Maximum recommended PFAS concentrations in foods of animal origin based on EU Regulation 2023/915 (adapted from [343]).
FoodPFOSPFOAPFNAPFHxS
μg/kg fresh weight
Eggs1.00.300.700.30
Meat from cattle, pigs, and poultry0.300.800.200.20
Meat from sheep1.00.200.200.20
Offal from cattle, sheep, pigs, and poultry6.00.700.400.50
Milk from cattle *0.020.010.050.06
* Indicative concentrations based on EU Recommendation 2022/1431.
Table 10. Agricultural practices that reduce PFAS contamination in plant- and animal-derived foods and waste streams.
Table 10. Agricultural practices that reduce PFAS contamination in plant- and animal-derived foods and waste streams.
Practice
Test groundwater, surface water, and irrigation water supplies to determine the presence and concentrations of PFAS, and implement water treatment systems to remove PFAS in drinking water for livestock and poultry if needed
Avoid fruit, vegetable, pasture, and crop production from soil and water high-risk locations near airports, fire-training locations, industrial sites, and landfills
Avoid applying biosolids from human sewage treatment facilities on agricultural lands due to potentially high concentrations of PFAS
Properly apply non-PFAS animal manure to agricultural land to increase soil organic matter and decrease PFAS accumulation in plants
Avoid using hydroponics to grow vegetables in PFAS-contaminated areas which can increase plant accumulation in the absence of soil; avoid using hydroponics to grow vegetables in PFAS-contaminated areas which can increase plant accumulation in the absence of soil
Avoid feeding and using plant residues such as corn stover and wheat straw as bedding to livestock due to potentially high PFAS concentrations
Plant trees or construct wetlands in locations with PFAS-contaminated soil and water for bioremediation
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Shurson, G.C. The Alarming Effects of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) on One Health and Interconnections with Food-Producing Animals in Circular and Sustainable Agri-Food Systems. Sustainability 2025, 17, 6957. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17156957

AMA Style

Shurson GC. The Alarming Effects of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) on One Health and Interconnections with Food-Producing Animals in Circular and Sustainable Agri-Food Systems. Sustainability. 2025; 17(15):6957. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17156957

Chicago/Turabian Style

Shurson, Gerald C. 2025. "The Alarming Effects of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) on One Health and Interconnections with Food-Producing Animals in Circular and Sustainable Agri-Food Systems" Sustainability 17, no. 15: 6957. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17156957

APA Style

Shurson, G. C. (2025). The Alarming Effects of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) on One Health and Interconnections with Food-Producing Animals in Circular and Sustainable Agri-Food Systems. Sustainability, 17(15), 6957. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17156957

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop