This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 13 months

This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Environment High‑importance This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Chemistry Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Science Policy High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Policy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science policy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science PolicyWikipedia:WikiProject Science PolicyTemplate:WikiProject Science PolicyScience Policy High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do list for Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2023-05-10 Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Update : Describe the occurrence of PFAS in pesticides

On 24 May 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to PFAS. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Archives

Index Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 400 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present.

In my view, this addition would need to be condensed considerably. The text includes general information on bioaccumulation and biomagnification. --Leyo 22:54, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20231115225400","author":"Leyo","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Leyo-20231115225400-Bioaccumulation_and_biomagnification","replies":["c-JimRenge-20231116084900-Leyo-20231115225400"]}}-->

Yes, we prefer wikilinks to concepts like bioaccumulation and biomagnification. I don´t understand why the review (Houde M, Martin JW, Letcher RJ, Solomon KR, Muir DC (June 2006). "Biological monitoring of polyfluoroalkyl substances: A review". Environmental Science & Technology. 40 (11): 3463–3473) was removed; secondary sources are generally preferred in wp. Feel free to condense the text. JimRenge (talk) 08:49, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20231116084900","author":"JimRenge","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-JimRenge-20231116084900-Leyo-20231115225400","replies":[]}}-->

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 January 2024 and 11 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): GregRR1 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Lindseybean28 (talk) 21:26, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240509212600","author":"Lindseybean28","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Lindseybean28-20240509212600-Wiki_Education_assignment:_College_Composition_II","replies":[]}}-->

The sections "Economic role" and "Estimated contemporary costs" partly cover the same topic. What about merging the contents in a section called "Socio-economic role"? 195.176.112.14 (talk) 20:14, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240423201400","author":"195.176.112.14","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-195.176.112.14-20240423201400-Merge_\"Economic_role\"_and_\"Estimated_contemporary_costs\"?","replies":["c-Leyo-20240624184900-195.176.112.14-20240423201400"]}}-->

Both sections (as such) do not exist anymore. --Leyo 18:49, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240624184900","author":"Leyo","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Leyo-20240624184900-195.176.112.14-20240423201400","replies":[]}}-->

Which section does this go under? ‘This is Chernobyl’: Texas ranchers say ‘forever chemicals’ in waste-based fertilizers ruined their land Hcobb (talk) 18:49, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240430184900","author":"Hcobb","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Hcobb-20240430184900-Presence_in_Fertilizer","replies":[]}}-->

Other than Teflon, that list isn't particularly meaningful to a non-chemist. Maybe list common products that contain these chemicals? 57.135.233.22 (talk) 13:38, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240529133800","author":"57.135.233.22","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-57.135.233.22-20240529133800-Examples","replies":[]}}-->

Under the subheading of United States in the section titled "Concerns, litigation, and regulations in specific countries and regions" this statement is made: "but the Republican Party, supported by the U.S. chemical industry filibustered the bill.[24]"

I read the article linked as support for this statement. It mentions filibuster once and does not state who did the filibuster. Txantimedia (talk) 07:54, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240822075400","author":"Txantimedia","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Txantimedia-20240822075400-Unsupported_statement_in_the_article","replies":["c-Nowa-20240901215100-Txantimedia-20240822075400"]}}-->

The quote from the article is "All legislation aimed at regulating toxic PFAS “forever chemicals” died in the Democratic-controlled US Congress last session as companies flexed their lobbying muscle and bills did not gain enough Republican support to overcome a Senate filibuster." It doesn't say that there was an actual filibuster. I take it to mean if there was a filibuster, there was not enough Republican support to overcome it. So I agree that the wording in the article should be clarified. Nowa (talk) 21:51, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240901215100","author":"Nowa","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Nowa-20240901215100-Txantimedia-20240822075400","replies":[]}}-->

Even if well-sourced, the factoid may not merit inclusion in this article. It's not really about PFAS themselves. I don't know if this type of political information is appropriate for this article. (It doesn't sound like it belongs in an encyclopedia.) Drsruli (talk) 03:36, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240902033600","author":"Drsruli","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Drsruli-20240902033600-Unsupported_statement_in_the_article","replies":["c-Nowa-20240902123200-Drsruli-20240902033600"]}}-->

You raise some interesting points. I agree that the article doesn't need a note about US legislation that didn't pass back in 2021. If we can get someone to second this point, then I'm in favor of removing the paragraph. Nowa (talk) 12:32, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240902123200","author":"Nowa","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Nowa-20240902123200-Drsruli-20240902033600","replies":["c-Gahundle-20240921201800-Nowa-20240902123200"]}}-->

I agree, not necessary for this article. Should also be removed from intro section. Gahundle (talk) 20:18, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240921201800","author":"Gahundle","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Gahundle-20240921201800-Nowa-20240902123200","replies":[]}}-->

Article alternates between using PFAS as plural and PFASs. Should be standardized throughout. I see there was previously a RfC on this topic that did not lead to any changes. I am partial to "PFAS" without plural s, as that seems to be more common in literature (and it's what the group I work with uses, so that helps). Whichever way it goes, a decision should be made and article updated to reflect that. Gahundle (talk) 00:11, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240917001100","author":"Gahundle","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Gahundle-20240917001100-Inconsistent_-_PFAS_vs._PFASs","replies":["c-Tenryuu-20240917015800-Gahundle-20240917001100","c-Leyo-20240917213200-Gahundle-20240917001100"]}}-->

Leaning towards using PFAS. There are more instances of that being used over the other version, and I haven't seen any instances where PFAS was used to refer to something in the singular. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:58, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240917015800","author":"Tenryuu","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Tenryuu-20240917015800-Gahundle-20240917001100","replies":[],"displayName":"Tenryuu\u00a0\ud83d\udc32"}}-->

Even the OECD in its revised definition (doi:10.1787/e458e796-en) uses "PFAS" as a singular: […] any chemical with at least a perfluorinated methyl group (−CF₃) or a perfluorinated methylene group (−CF₂−) is a PFAS.
"PFAS" is even sometimes used in singular, when actually the plural is meant, e.g. Where PFAS is found at levels that exceed these standards or If PFAS is detected in your water. When using "PFASs", nobody would use "is" instead of "are". Furthermore, I've seen it several times, that people mistake "PFAS" to be a single chemical, similar to similar-looking acronyms such as PFOS, PFOA etc. This wouldn't happen if "PFASs" was used.
Initially, "PFASs" was used. A few years ago, there was a shift towards "PFAS". Recently, there has been a shift back to "PFASs" by Organisations such as the UN[1] (incl. Stockholm Convention), OECD[2], but also in the scientific literature.
For the reasons stated, I do strongly prefer "PFASs" (with plural-s). --Leyo 21:32, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240917213200","author":"Leyo","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Leyo-20240917213200-Gahundle-20240917001100","replies":[]}}-->

These three sections are pretty bloated. Health outcomes I think can be reduced to a single paragraph, rather than 7 subheadings. Same idea for litigation and regulation: there are quite a lot of details about litigation from individual US states that I think the breadth of this article does not warrant. Much of this can be condensed, removed, or moved to an article specific to PFAS litigation/regulation. The section on remediation needs a rewrite; it's not organized, it's unclear which technologies are in use and which are under research, or how well developed any of them are. I'm planning to start tackling these when I get a chance, but wanted to give people a chance to weigh in (or beat me to it!) in case there are any strong feelings about any of this. Gahundle (talk) 03:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240927033800","author":"Gahundle","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Gahundle-20240927033800-Condensing_sections:_adverse_health_outcomes,_regulatory_concerns,_remediation","replies":[]}}-->

The following paper could be useful to improve and update the section on analytical methods: Closing PFAS analytical gaps: Inter-method evaluation of total organofluorine techniques for AFFF-impacted water, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hazl.2024.100122 194.230.145.139 (talk) 23:59, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240928235900","author":"194.230.145.139","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-194.230.145.139-20240928235900-analytical_methods","replies":[]}}-->

I've nominated this article as a level 5 vital article here. -1ctinus📝🗨 20:28, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20241104202800","author":"1ctinus","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-1ctinus-20241104202800-Nomination_as_a_vital_article","replies":[],"displayName":"-1ctinus\ud83d\udcdd"}}-->