Testing Testing Testing
"We often see that the targeted analysis for individual PFAS chemicals significantly underreport the actual PFAS content of products in which PFAS is used. In addition to the two methods that measure total fluorine, other techniques can measure total organic fluorine, thus ensuring results are not skewed by the possible presence of inorganic fluorine (which is distinct from PFAS)."
The Science of Artificial Turf, Jeff Gearhart, Research Director, the Ecology Center, Detroit MI, Healthy Stuff Lab. Gearhart's presentation is about how to have a healthy engagement with sports that doesn’t increase health risks from injuries or chemical hazards.
Gearhart shows his personal biomonitoring lab results. He has many of the PFAS analytes and notes they are additive and cumulative. He explains that there is not a lot of research on artificial turf but there is plenty of evidence of the hazards in artificial turf and the increasing global warming pollutant load of plastic and additives.
He cautions that most studies look at a limited set of chemicals. The tests don’t look at multiple components of the entire assembly of materials. He cautions to be wary of anyone who makes claims of safety, especially after doing "testing" without acknowledging the limits of the test.
He explains there are concerns at every phase of the PFAS Fluoropolymer life cycle. PFAS is used in artificial turf for a variety of reasons, besides plastic extrusion. I think the most compelling point is that the history of the water advisory / guideline levels has dropped precipitously as the science has evolved to increase the level of concern. -- Ellie Goldberg
The problems with claims about testing turf for "PFAS". CHE-Alaska Presents: Making the Invisible Visible, The PFAS Project Lab with Alissa Cordner. (www.pfasproject.com) Transcription, selected excerpts.
There are many ways that the tests are used to mislead and deceive. Let me know what you find out about who is doing the testing and what tests they are doing.
Cordner: I've been working on an issue of measurable PFAS in artificial turf. Even if PFAS aren't intentionally added to the turf it appears that contamination is ubiquitous because PFAS are used to help extrude those little tiny plastic blades of fake grass…
...I'm not aware of any turf that doesn't have measurable PFAS. it depends though on how you define PFAS and how you define measurable. I've seen some turf company testing data where the levels of detection are in the double-digit parts per billion. That's not a level that is sufficiently low for me to feel comfortable saying there's no PFAS.
We want to be down to the same level of detection that you would find with the EPA’s methods which is going to be around one part per trillion. So if you are told that there's no PFAS and if you are given documentation that there's no PFAS I would suggest you make sure that it says what the level of detection is, and if that level of detection is much higher than one part per trillion. … That's the smallest amount that can be detected, so make sure that the level detection is sufficiently low and then see how many PFAS they're testing for.
If they're only testing for PFOA or PFOS I guess it's possible that there could be a turf sample that doesn't have PFOA or PFOS in it although I've seen multiple testing results that do have both of those compounds actually. So again it's sort of how do you define PFAS? Is it just a couple or is it the 29 used in EPA’s method or is it the chemical class like a total organic fluorine measure? And then what's the level of detection?
And I'll just say one final takeaway point you know we're talking about PFAS and turf and PFAS contaminating our food system… All of this to me speaks to the need for a more precautionary approach to this class of chemicals which says that in virtually every one of their uses today perhaps with a few small exceptions but in almost all uses the use of PFAS is not necessary for the health and survival of our society.
