Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) comprise over 10,000 substances – such as PFOS (perfluorooctane sulfonic acid), PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid), perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA) and perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (PFHxS). These are industrial chemicals that have been used for decades in the manufacture of a wide range of products, such as textiles, household goods, firefighting equipment, the automotive industry, food processing, construction and electronics.

There is evidence of adverse health effects from some PFAS. Consequently, the use and manufacture of frequently detected PFAS have been banned or restricted in Europe: PFOS in 2010, followed by PFOA in 2020 and PFHxS, its salts and related compounds in 2023. The use of undecafluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA), its salts and PFHxA-related substances has been restricted in clothing textiles, fire-fighting foams, paper and cardboard used as food contact materials, and in cosmetic products.

On 7 February 2023, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) published a proposal to ban the manufacture, use and placing on the market (including import) of at least 10,000 PFAS. ECHA published two risk assessments on this in March 2026. In March 2026, ECHA published two risk assessments on this matter, which will serve as the basis for the European Commission to draft a legislative proposal for a comprehensive ban on PFAS.

PFASs are found in coatings for textiles such as outdoor clothing, as impregnation, in baking paper, in ski waxes or fire extinguishers. In cosmetics, they are used in mascara, makeup and lipsticks. PFASs are difficult to degrade and are now widespread throughout the environment. They are therefore also detectable in the food chain and in humans.

Humans are primarily exposed to PFAS through food and drinking water.

Once ingested, PFAS are found in the blood and are excreted from the body at varying rates, mainly via the kidneys. This can lead to accumulation in the body. The half-life in the body can range from a few hours to weeks (e.g. PFHxA, PFBA) up to several years (e.g. PFOS, PFOA, PFHxS), depending on the chain length of the PFAS. Globally, it is evident that levels of PFOS, PFOA and PFHxS in humans have been decreasing since 2000, whereas levels of PFNA are rising.

PFAS pass into breast milk and enter the infant’s body during the breastfeeding period. However, measurement results and modelling show that the blood levels of these compounds in children who have been breastfed for a long time and those who have not breastfed converge within a few years.

The potential health effects of PFAS are the subject of numerous studies. Discussions focus on a reduced antibody response to vaccinations as well as a decrease, but also an increase, in cholesterol levels. At present, the evidence for an actual impact on health is often insufficient, or the effects occur at high concentrations that are higher than those measured to date in the environment and in food in Austria. Based on immune effects as the most sensitive endpoint, a group TWI (TWI = tolerable weekly intake) of 4.4 ng/kg body weight per week was derived for the sum of 4 PFAS (PFOA, PFNA, PFHxS and PFOS). According to the EFSA, this group TWI is considered protective against further potentially critical endpoints.
 

In Austria, PFAS are analysed in food and drinking water as part of priority actions.

In 2025, 277 food samples were tested for PFOA, PFNA, PFHxS and PFOS as part of targeted campaigns and monitoring activities. Of these, 129 samples were of animal origin (47 eggs, 43 milk, 39 meat and poultry) and 148 samples were of plant origin (29 cereal grains, 29 berries, 30 apples, 28 radishes, 32 lettuce). Of the 28 radish samples submitted, the leaves and roots were separated prior to analysis in 25 samples and treated analytically as separate samples. Consequently, a total of 173 PFAS analyses were carried out and evaluated for samples of plant origin.

PFOS was found most frequently, namely in 14 food samples, followed by PFOA in 11 samples, PFNA in 6 samples, and PFHxS in 3 samples. The highest levels of PFOS were measured at 1.9 µg/kg in a sample of wild boar meat, followed by PFOA at 2.3 µg/kg, PFNA at 0.33 µg/kg and PFHxS at 0.32 µg/kg, all in samples of wild boar meat.

One sample of free-range pork exceeded the maximum level for PFOS of 0.3 µg/kg, with a level of 1.6 µg/kg. In two samples of radish leaves, the guideline values for PFOS and PFOA of 0.010 µg/kg were exceeded, with levels of 0.048 µg/kg PFOS and 0.022 µg/kg PFOA, and 0.024 µg/kg PFOS and 0.016 µg/kg PFOA respectively.

In 2023, 149 food samples were tested for PFOA, PFNA, PFHxS and PFOS as part of targeted campaigns and monitoring activities. PFOS was the most frequently detected substance, found in 10 food samples, followed by PFOA in 5 samples and PFNA in 4 samples. PFHxS was not detected in any of the samples.

The highest levels of PFOS were measured at 0.56 µg/kg in a freshwater fish (whitefish), followed by PFOA at 0.36 µg/kg in a sample of chicken eggs and PFNA at 0.2 µg/kg in a sample of freshwater fish (whitefish).

Drinking water

• If the local drinking water is contaminated with PFAS, we recommend using uncontaminated water for drinking and for preparing baby food
• Do not use contaminated drinking water for drinking, cooking or preparing food and drinks
• Contaminated water can be used for personal hygiene (showering, bathing, shaving, brushing teeth, etc.), as absorption through intact skin is negligible. The water can also be used for washing up, cleaning and doing the laundry. This does not lead to an increase in PFAS intake

Food

• According to current information, elevated levels of PFAS contamination in food occur only in affected regions, e.g. near former production sites or due to the use of special PFAS-containing fire-fighting foams during major fires and near airports (fire brigade exercises using special PFAS-containing fire-fighting foams). Due to official monitoring of these areas, limit values are rarely exceeded in food there either
• Based on currently available information, PFAS exposure can hardly be reduced through conscious food choices. Personal PFAS intake can be reduced by cutting down on or avoiding the consumption of offal and, to a lesser extent, animal-based foods
• Avoiding the consumption of offal from game (e.g. wild boar liver) is generally recommended, as this also reduces the intake of other pollutants such as lead or cadmium

Risk assessment

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has already carried out several risk assessments on PFOS and PFOA. In 2008, a tolerable daily intake (TDI) for PFOS of 150 ng/kg bw/d and a TDI for PFOA of 1500 ng/kg bw/d were derived based on changes in blood lipids and thyroid hormones, and liver toxicity, respectively, observed in animal studies. A re-evaluation took place in 2018, resulting in the establishment of a tolerable weekly intake (TWI) of 13 ng/kg bw/w for PFOS and 6 ng/kg bw/w for PFOA, based on rising blood cholesterol levels in human studies (EFSA 2018). 

In September 2020, the EFSA published a re-evaluation of the health risks posed by per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in food. In this risk assessment, the EFSA focused on the sum of the following four PFAS, as they have similar properties and have been detected most frequently in human blood: PFOA, PFOS, perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA) and perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS).

This risk assessment is based on epidemiological studies which have observed a link between the level of PFAS or the sum of PFOA, PFOS, PFNA and PFHxS in children’s blood and reduced antibody formation following certain vaccinations, such as tetanus and diphtheria. Based on these studies, a tolerable weekly intake (TWI) for the sum of the four PFAS was derived as 4.4 nanograms per kilogram of body weight per week. This value indicates the weekly dose that is not expected to cause adverse health effects in humans when consumed over a lifetime. According to the EFSA, this group TWI provides protection against further potential effects of PFAS, such as elevated cholesterol levels, effects on liver cells (e.g. elevated ALT levels) and developmental toxicity in the unborn child, such as lower birth weight. Further effects have been described, but the evidence for these is often insufficient or the effects occur at higher concentrations.

In 2021, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) established Minimal Risk Levels (MRLs) for PFOA, PFOS, PFHxS and PFNA for medium-term (15–364 days) oral exposure. These MRL values are comparable to the Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) commonly used in Europe, with the difference that they are defined for different time periods. Specifically, medium-term MRLs were derived for PFOA at 3 ng/kg bw/d, for PFOS at 2 ng/kg bw/d, for PFHxS at 20 ng/kg bw/d and for PFNA at 3 ng/kg bw/d. These values for medium-term daily intake are significantly higher than the EFSA TWI value, which refers to a weekly lifetime intake.

The WHO is currently identifying and prioritising the most important PFAS as well as the most significant health effects of PFAS. In addition to the best-studied PFAS, PFOS and PFOA, this initiative covers other PFAS and the development of a risk assessment methodology for prioritised PFAS, including individual PFAS and PFAS mixtures. This work (Phase 1) paves the way for the next phase of the WHO’s PFAS assessment initiatives, in which these methods will be applied to the prioritised PFAS (Phase 2). These initiatives support the Joint WHO/FAO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) and the expert meetings on the WHO Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality in the development of formal, normative health-based guidelines for key PFAS (Phase 3). https://www.who.int/activities/assessing-the-occurrence-and-human-health-risk-of-per--and-polyfluoroalkyl-substances  

In 2023, the International Agency for Research on Cancer assessed PFOA and PFOS with regard to their carcinogenic effects. PFOA was classified as carcinogenic to humans (Group 1), as there is sufficient evidence of cancer in laboratory animals, strong evidence of a mechanism of action in exposed humans, and limited evidence of cancer in humans (renal cell carcinoma and testicular cancer). PFOS was classified as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B) as there is strong evidence regarding the mechanism of action, limited evidence of cancer in laboratory animals and insufficient evidence of cancer in humans (https://www.iarc.who.int/news-events/iarc-monographs-evaluate-the-carcinogenicity-of-perfluorooctanoic-acid-pfoa-and-perfluorooctanesulfonic-acid-pfos/).

Hazard and labelling classification by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA)

The hazard classification and labelling of per- and polyfluoroalkyl compounds is carried out by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). The assessment by ECHA’s Committee for Risk Assessment (RAC) is based solely on the hazardous properties of the substance and whether the substance can cause adverse effects. It does not take into account the risk or the extent to which people and the environment are exposed to the substance.

ECHA has classified PFOS, PFOA and PFNA as suspected carcinogens (CARC 2) and toxic to reproduction (Repr. 1B), meaning they can harm the unborn child and infants via breast milk. In addition, PFNA is suspected of affecting fertility.

Due to its highly persistent and very bioaccumulative properties (i.e. the substance degrades very slowly in the environment and accumulates in organisms), PFHxS and its salts have been included in the list of substances of very high concern (SVHC) in accordance with Article 54(e). Under the REACH Regulation, a substance of very high concern is defined as a substance with particularly hazardous properties that has serious effects on human health or the environment.

Once the ECHA has identified a substance as such, it is entered in the list of substances subject to authorisation under Annex XIV of the REACH Regulation. As an alternative to the authorisation requirement, SVHCs may also be included in Annex XVII of the REACH Regulation and thus be subject to restrictions.

OECD definition

PFAS are defined by the OECD as fluorinated substances containing at least one fully fluorinated methyl or methylene carbon atom (without an H/Cl/Br/I atom bonded to it), i.e., with a few exceptions, any chemical with at least one perfluorinated methyl group (-CF3) or one perfluorinated methylene group (-CF2-) is a PFAS (https://one.oecd.org/document/ENV/CBC/MONO(2021)25/En/pdf).