A new study reveals that supposedly “safe” polymers can break down into toxic chemicals, challenging long-held regulatory assumptions. Action Alert!
THE TOPLINE
- Research shows that polymeric brominated flame retardants degrade into harmful substances linked to developmental and cardiovascular issues.
- The EPA’s 1995 “polymer exemption” allowed the chemical industry to self-regulate, overlooking the dangers of polymer breakdown products.
- The findings raise alarms about PFAS polymers, which have largely escaped regulation despite their major contribution to environmental contamination.
For years, the chemical industry has promoted polymers—large molecular compounds—as safe, inert substances that pose little to no health risk. However, a new study out of southern China published in Nature Sustainability challenges this assumption, revealing that certain polymers, such as those in used in the electronics industry and as model flame-retardant chemicals, often touted as ‘safe’, can degrade over time, releasing toxic chemicals into the environment and endangering human health.
The Hidden Dangers of Polymeric Flame Retardants
Researchers investigating polymeric brominated flame retardants discovered that these supposedly stable compounds break down into dozens of smaller, harmful molecules. The study found that these breakdown products can lead to mitochondrial dysfunction, developmental disorders, and cardiovascular harm. Alarmingly, these toxic byproducts were detected in soil, air, and dust, with the highest concentrations near electronic waste recycling facilities.
Despite their potential for harm, polymers are exempted from many of the rules designed to ensure chemicals are safe. The EPA’s justification is that certain polymers are “low-risk” and the agency’s attention is better spent elsewhere. This was all implemented in a rule change in 1995; the EPA even allowed the chemical industry to determine if a chemical met the requirements for the polymer exemption.
The science is increasingly showing this intentionally lax oversight that appears set to benefit chemical companies is a grave mistake—at least for the rest of us. The assumption behind the polymer exemption is that high-molecular-weight polymers are not bioavailable, do not cross the blood-brain barrier, and therefore are not toxic—but this does not account for their breakdown products, which include microplastics, that do become absorbed by humans and the environment. More and more evidence (such as here and here) is showing the disturbing accumulation of microplastics in human brains.
Implications for PFAS
The findings also raise concerns about ‘forever chemicals’, known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (or PFAS), another class of chemicals that have become ubiquitous in the bodies of Americans. This is down to the incredible persistence of these organo-fluorine compounds, their tendency to bioaccumulate, and their widespread use linked to their ability to partition oil and water. Among the adverse health effects that have been associated with PFAS are: immune system suppression, decreased fertility, pregnancy-induced hypertension, preeclampsia, kidney prostate and testicular cancers, elevated cholesterol, hormonal disruption, liver toxicity, thyroid disease, and an array of developmental defects including low birth weight, accelerated puberty, bone variations, and behavioral changes.
PFAS can be found in a wide range of consumer and industrial products. These include non-stick cookware, stain-resistant fabrics and carpets, food packaging, personal care products, cleaning products, water resistant products (e.g. jackets, tents), firefighting foams, a wide range of industrial processes, aerospace and automotive industries, construction materials, and more.
One way the EPA has evaded responsibility for tackling the issue of PFAS contamination is by playing games with the very definition of “PFAS.”
The new information that is coming to light about the dangers of polymers adds an additional element of concern. PFAS as a class consist of polymers and non-polymers. Most regulatory attention has been focused on non-polymers on the assumption that fluorinated polymers are safer. As a result, PFAS polymers have been exempted from some PFAS regulations and definitions—even though 80% of historical PFAS environmental contamination is estimated to have originated from polymer production.
ANH-USA has long called for a complete ban on PFAS chemicals, recognizing their extreme persistence and tendency to bioaccumulate, as well as the growing evidence that they pose a major danger to public health. The token phasing out or establishment of exposure limits for legacy PFAS like PFOA and PFOS is just not enough as the newer PFAS have just not been studied sufficiently, and it is almost certainly total chemical load that is ultimately going to be the most critical factor linked to exposure. Despite mounting scientific evidence that exposure to PFAS is linked to cancer, immune disorders, reproductive issues, and other serious health problems, regulatory agencies have largely failed to take meaningful action.
A Call for Stronger Protections
This study underscores the urgent need for stricter oversight of polymers, particularly those used as flame retardants and in PFAS applications. Without regulatory intervention, these chemicals will continue to accumulate in the environment, threatening both human and wildlife health.
As ANH-USA has warned, the time for incremental change has passed. The only effective solution is to ban PFAS as a class, preventing further contamination and safeguarding public health. Until regulators step up, consumers must stay informed, advocate for stronger protections, and demand transparency from manufacturers. The fight to eliminate PFAS is far from over—but with increased public awareness and action, real change is possible.
Action Alert! Write to Congress and the EPA today, urging them to implement a comprehensive ban on PFAS chemicals to protect public health. Please send your message immediately.
