Perfluorinated food contaminants-origin and spread
Understanding the nature and origin of food contamination is of paramount importance in putting a stop to it. Although the toxicological impact of PFAS in humans is conflicting, they are persistent in the environment and are believed to enter the food chain. It is unclear whether industrial food processing and packaging causes additional contamination of food and beverages. The objective of the EU-funded ' PERFluorinated Organics in Our Diet ' (PERFOOD) was to assess the origin of PFAS in our diet and the role of diet in the total human exposure to PFAS. For this purpose, PERFOOD developed new analytical methods that facilitated the reliable and sensitive measurement of PFAS. This considerably improved the detection limits of existing techniques. Advanced mass spectrometry methods were used by project partners to quantify PFAS in our diet and understand PFAS transfer from the environment into food. Also, the contribution of food packaging and processing to contaminant spread was assessed. The consortium found that in cattle, perfluorinated alkyl acids (PFAA) could be transferred from feed and water to meat and milk. Vegetables take up PFAS from (pore) water. Meat and dairy along with leafy vegetables constituted the main source of contaminant exposure for humans. In contrast to feral fish, farmed fish had low PFAS levels as their feed had low concentrations of PFAS. Scientists warned against using baking paper and materials with a fluorine-based coating as these constitute a potential route for migration of PFAS to food. Overall, the transfer of PFAS from various sources to dietary elements depends largely on the levels of PFAS in source materials. Surveys were conducted of various European regions regarding different dietary habits. Dietary intake patterns of PFAS differ from region to region. All exposure estimates calculated from the project’s survey results for both adults and children show margins of safety well above 1, i.e. exposure is at a level much below existing guidelines, except the estimates made for some ‘hot spots’. The survey results provided pertinent information about food processing that should be used to formulate recommendations for minimising PFAS spread into the food chain. With regard to drinking water, project findings showed that the levels of PFAS depended on the type of filtration treatment used in each case. Importantly, the PERFOOD initiative went a step further to identify potential specific measures and materials that could reduce or remove PFAS from the drinking water production cycle.
