There is a lot of news about the dangers of “eternal” chemical compounds. But what seems like a lot is, after all, very little: A recent scientific article revealed that only a small slice of studies linking perfluoroalkylated substances (PFAS) with risks to human health is gaining space in the media.
says PÚBLICO Rebecca Fuoco, first author of the study published this Tuesday in the Scientific Journal environmental health. The researcher laments that only a small fraction of the knowledge produced about PFAS actually reaches the public.
Rebecca Foucault, along with three other investigators, analyzed 273 epidemiological studies on PFAS and its impact on human health published between 2018 and 2020 in peer-reviewed scientific journals. The authors found that less than 8% of articles with statistically significant results were released via press release.
“I did not expect to find so many interesting and fascinating studies that neither I nor my fellow PFAS experts had heard of. This shows that media coverage expands the scope of studies even within the scientific community itself,” notes Rebecca Foucault.
PFAS are very persistent compounds that do not degrade in the environment – hence their name as chemicals. “everlasting“. They are used in various industrial products, equipment and processes. Some of these applications are difficult to replace — as is the case with some medical devices — which brings challenges to efforts in both the United States and Europe to reduce PFAS use.
These materials have physicochemical properties of industrial and commercial value, such as durability and the ability to repel oil and water, in addition to their high thermal and chemical stability. Therefore, they are widely used in non-stick cookware, waterproof textiles, medical devices, cosmetics or personal care products, fire fighting foams, paints, and food containers.
The versatility and distinctive features of PFAS have made it nearly ubiquitous. It is very difficult to have a home without products containing these substances. They are even present in the human bloodstream. To reverse this position, an editorial in the scientific journal Sciences, Published this Thursday, it advocates the urgency of “innovating beyond PFAS,” and making every effort to develop materials or processes capable of replacing all “eternals.”
“We can feel trapped when it comes to using PFAS in many applications, as a result of the good performance and versatility of this material. This has made PFAS a suitable choice in the development of materials and components in industrial processes. However, it is clear that alternatives to PFAS can be found and this dependency can actually be an obstacle to innovation.“, Reads an editorial signed by Martin Scheringer, Professor of Environmental Chemistry at the University of Brno, in the Czech Republic
Matt C/Dr
From osteoporosis to breast cancer
Among the studies that were almost “hidden” from the general public were publications establishing significant associations between human exposure to PFAS and health problems such as osteoporosis, premature birth, gestational diabetes, and breast and ovarian cancer.
This concealment of scientific findings “reduces the likelihood that important articles will reach the public and policy makers,” who are best placed to transform knowledge into public measures or policies, the study’s conclusion states. Article from environmental health.
“It is true that there are articles that are too technical to be of interest to journalists, but it is also true that many scientists keep valuable data in inaccessible journals and jump straight to the next study,” notes the author, in a response sent to PÚBLICO by e-mail.
Is the press release that important? According to the authors, yes. very. In the world of articles describing a statistically relevant association between PFAS and health harms, those who benefited from a press release deserve twenty times more attention than the media and social networks.
“New studies that find strong associations between persistent chemicals and serious health harm go unnoticed. The research hidden in scientific journals is limited in scope, and therefore has less impact,” says Rebecca Foucault, who is also director of science communication at the Green Science Policy Institute.
The institute, which was established in 2008 in the US state of California, has a mission to “promote the safer use of chemical products, with the goal of protecting human health and the environment,” it says. page From the Green Science Policy Institute.
Media interest was assessed for each scientific study based on an Altmetrics score. This is an alternative measure that privileges references in news portals, social networks and collaborative encyclopedias (instead of traditional indicators such as the number of citations and the influence factor of a scientific journal).
Fear of speaking to journalists
Why don’t many labs, institutions or scientists promote the work they do through press releases? Rebecca Foucault suspects that the main influencing factors are the “lack of professional resources, training, and incentives for scientists to engage in communication outside of academia.”
“My experience is that many PFAS scientists are wary about the idea of speaking to journalists, because they fear their discoveries will be described in a sensational way and leave the public in a panic,” says Rebecca Fuoco for PÚBLICO.
However, the study reveals that exaggerations in the news are generally due, says the author, to press releases issued by scientific institutions. In addition, a recent review of government memos issued by PFAS shows that risks communicated to the general public are “underestimated”.
“I urge scientists and institutions to embrace science communication as an important part of the research process,” said co-author Linda Birnbaum, scientist emeritus at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and research resident at Duke University in the US. press release.
The authors strongly recommend that scholars take an active role in preparing press releases, working collaboratively with public relations departments and ensuring the accuracy of information subsequently released. The study also makes available to the scientific community Five recommendations So that business reaches more people in a clear and accessible way.
“Writer. Analyst. Avid travel maven. Devoted twitter guru. Unapologetic pop culture expert. General zombie enthusiast.”
