“Forever Chemicals” under fire: Global push to protect firefighters and communities
Thank you for choosing Automatic Translation. Currently we are offering translations from English into French and German, with more translation languages to be added in the near future. Please be aware that these translations are generated by a third party AI software service. While we have found that the translations are mostly correct, they may not be perfect in every case. To ensure the information you read is correct, please refer to the original article in English. If you find an error in a translation which you would like to bring to our attention, it would help us greatly if you let us know. We can correct any text or section, once we are aware of it. Please do not hesitate to contact our webmaster to let us know of any translation errors.
As the dangers of toxic “forever chemicals” come into sharper focus, countries around the world are taking dramatically different approaches to regulation.
In the United States, a growing number of firefighters are speaking out about the health risks linked to PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances), a class of chemicals used in firefighting foam and protective gear.
A recent AP investigation revealed that dozens of Rhode Island firefighters have been diagnosed with cancer, raising alarm over long-term exposure to PFAS-laced equipment. Despite mounting evidence, many departments still rely on gear that contains these chemicals, citing cost and lack of alternatives.
“I wore that gear every day for 30 years,” said one retired firefighter. “Now I’m battling cancer, and no one warned us.”
PFAS are known for their durability—they don’t break down easily in the environment or the human body. The World Health Organization has classified PFOA, one of the most common PFAS compounds, as a human carcinogen. PFOS, another variant, is considered a possible carcinogen.
Australia and Europe: Diverging Paths
Meanwhile, Australia has taken a cautious step forward, banning the import, manufacture, and use of three PFAS compounds: PFOA, PFOS, and PFHxS. But critics say the move is too slow and narrow. As The Conversation reports, there are over 14,000 known PFAS variants, and most remain unregulated.
Europe is pushing for a far more aggressive approach. The European Union has proposed a sweeping ban on all PFAS chemicals by 2030, invoking the precautionary principle: act now to prevent irreversible harm, even if full scientific certainty is lacking.
The EU’s chemical agency has found that nearly all PFAS on the market lack sufficient safety data, and many manufacturers have withheld toxicity information.
The Cost of Inaction
Cleanup costs for PFAS-contaminated sites are staggering. In the U.S., military bases, airports, and industrial zones have become hotspots for PFAS pollution. In Australia, the Fiskville firefighting training college was shut down in 2015 after PFAS contamination was discovered in soil and water.
Experts warn that delaying regulation will only increase the financial burden on taxpayers. “We’re paying to clean up chemicals that should never have been allowed in the first place,” said one environmental health researcher.
What´s next?
With mounting pressure from health advocates, firefighters, and environmental groups, governments worldwide face a critical choice: regulate PFAS individually, or ban the entire class. The stakes are high—not just for those in uniform, but for every community exposed to these persistent pollutants.
Further reading:
https://www.iaff.org/news/government-of-canada-announces-new-actions-on-pfas/