Low quantities of “forever” chemicals were discovered by researchers in a variety of “eco-friendly” straws, casting doubt on their suitability as an alternative.

Researchers have discovered that some paper and bamboo straws contain so-called “forever chemicals” that may make them a less-than-ideal replacement for plastic.

The majority of the straws tested by Belgian scientists from supermarkets, shops, and fast-food joints contained PFAS, a class of synthetic chemicals used in the production of consumer goods due to their resistance to stains, grease, and water.

39 different kinds of straws made of paper, bamboo, glass, stainless steel, and plastic were sampled by the researchers. Of those, 27 were discovered to have PFAS, albeit at low amounts.

On Thursday, the findings were released in the journal Food Additives and Contaminants.

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, are frequently referred to as “forever chemicals” because of how long they persist in soil, water, and the atmosphere. They are typically found in cosmetics, carpet, furniture, food packaging, and textiles like raincoats or athletic wear.

Paper straws were the most likely to contain PFAS out of all the straws evaluated in the study. 18 out of 20 brands tested positive for the substances. Compared to three out of four plastic straws and two out of five glass straws, four out of five bamboo straws analyzed had PFAS. The five stainless steel straws that were examined were clear of PFAS.

In addition to numerous other types of cookware and packaging, PFAS have been found in the past in paper and other plant-based straws in the United States.

Although low birth weight, high cholesterol, thyroid illness, and an increased risk of kidney and liver cancer have all been linked to PFAS exposure, researchers are still learning about these health effects and are unsure of which exposure levels are hazardous.

It’s unclear, according to research author and environmental scientist Thimo Groffen of the University of Antwerp, if the producers of the straws he examined included PFAS as a waterproof coating on purpose or not. He further suggested that PFAS can inadvertently enter the straw-making process or that bamboo straws might contain trace amounts of PFAS as a result of the plants’ exposure to polluted soil.

It’s likely that manufacturers aren’t checking for the chemicals in their own products, according to Graham Peaslee, a PFAS researcher at the University of Notre Dame who was not involved in the new study.

“All the straw manufacturers should take warning and say, ‘Hey, do we use this stuff?’ Because at the moment, they’re not even asking that question,” Peaslee said.

Groffen said straw users probably don’t need to panic about their individual risk.

“This is just one very small source of additional exposure which could be easily avoided, but I don’t expect straws themselves to be very harmful,” he said.

But he added that because PFAS accumulate in the body, people should ideally reduce exposures where they can: “It all adds up together with other exposure routes and the combination could cause health effects,” he said.

Does PFAS leach into food and water?

There is no federal limit for PFAS in food packaging in the U.S., though some states have their own restrictions. The Food and Drug Administration allows PFAS to be used

 in certain food processing equipment and as a grease-proofing agent in paper food packaging.

The Environmental Protection Agency, meanwhile, has proposed limits for PFAS in drinking water but not yet issued a final rule.

Keith Vorst, director of the Polymer and Food Protection Consortium at Iowa State University, said some of the straws in the study exceeded the proposed EPA concentrations for water. However, he pointed out that the researchers didn’t test whether PFAS leaches from the straws into beverages, or whether using a straw necessarily causes someone to ingest the chemicals.

Plus, Vorst said, he has detected far higher concentrations of PFAS in drink carriers, take-home containers and microwave popcorn bags.

“I have a little fear about, ‘OK, now let’s focus on straws’ when we have much, much bigger issues that are contaminating the environment,” he said.

Peaslee said the amount of PFAS that transfers from packaging to food and drink is generally minimal, especially if the items aren’t in contact for very long.

“If you let a straw sit for a day, you’ll get some in the water, but how many of us leave our straw in the water for a day and then still drink out of it?” he said.

Weighing the harms of paper versus plastic straws

Various states, including California, Colorado, New York and Oregon, have banned plastic straws from food establishments in the last five years, and chains like Starbucks have phased them out.

The main reason is that the straws generally can’t be recycled, so they wind up in landfills, get burned in incinerators or become litter that contaminates oceans, rivers, lakes and streams. Since plastic doesn’t decompose easily, it can persist in the environment for up to 200 years, threatening the lives of marine mammals.

Paper and bamboo straws have risen in popularity as alternatives, but researchers said the cure is sometimes not much better than the disease.

“If they come with PFAS on them, they’re not so eco-friendly anymore,” Peaslee said.

PFAS can leach out of landfills into water and soil, and have toxic effects on animals, including liver damage or reproductive issues. Groffen’s study detected one particular compound that’s highly soluble in water, trifluoroacetic acid, in five paper straws and one bamboo straw.

But Groffen said plant-based straws are still better for the environment than plastic.

“I still would expect plastic straws to be more harmful to the environment because of course you also have the degradation of the plastics into microplastics that can be consumed by animals,” he said.

The researchers interviewed agreed that stainless steel straws are preferable over paper, bamboo or plastic, but they questioned whether people will adopt them widely.

“If we could all switch to stainless steel, that’d be great,” Vorst said. “I don’t think it’s practical.”

SOURCE: STUDY