The CC0 Public Domain is a credit.
A new Duke University-led study found that the anti-fogging sprays and cloths people use to prevent condensation on their eyeglasses may contain high levels of per- and polyfluorinated alkyl substances.
The anti-fogging sprays and anti-fogging cloths were tested. They found that all nine products contained fluorotelomer alcohols and fluorotelomer ethoxylates, two types of PFAS that have largely been under the radar.
Exposure to some perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid is associated with impaired immune function, cancer, and other health disorders. Chemicals can affect reproductive and developmental health of mothers and young children.
Nicholas Herkert, a researcher at Duke's Nicholas School of the Environment, led the study that found the sprays contained up to 20.7 milligrams of PFAS per liter of solution.
Scientists don't yet know what health risks they might pose, Herkert noted, but research suggests that once FTOHs have been absorbed through the skin, they could break down in the body to PFOA. The new study found that the spray mixture used in all four of them exhibited significant cell-altering toxicity and conversion to fat cells in lab tests.
If we assumed that the toxicity of the two compounds was similar, one spray from these bottles would expose you to the higher levels of PFOA and PFOS than you would get from drinking a liter of water with the same toxicity.
"It's disturbing to think that people who have been using products to keep themselves safe may be exposing themselves to a different risk," said Heather Stapleton, the Ronie-Richele Garcia-Jones Professor of environmental chemistry and health at Duke.
It was advertised as safe and nontoxic. It said to rub it on your glasses.
None of the other products tested listed their ingredients, making it next to impossible to tell if they contained harmful chemicals until they were analyzed using high-resolution mass spectrometry in her research laboratory.
The study was published in the journal Environmental Science & Technology.
They said that more research is needed to flesh out the initial findings of their study, which was only the second ever to focus on FTEOs. The next step is studies with living organisms.
The only way to tell if a molecule is a metabolic disrupter is through in-vivo testing on whole organisms. Herkert said that they only did lab dish testing.
Studies with larger sample sizes might be able to identify other undisclosed chemicals that are being used in the sprays or cloths.
More people are using sprays and cloths to keep their glasses from fogging up when they wear masks or face shields because of COVID. They should know what's in the products they're using.
The study was conducted with Lee Ferguson and Sharon Zhang of Duke, Christopher Kassotis of Wayne State University, and Yuling Han, Vivek Pulikkal and Mei Sun of the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.
"Characterization of Polyfluorinated Alkyl Substances (PFASs) Present in Commercial Anti-Fog Products and Their Intro Adipogenic Activity," Environmental Science & Technology was published in 1992. There is a book called "acs.est.1c06990."
Environmental Science & Technology is a journal.
There were high levels of PFAS found in anti-fogging sprays and cloths.
The document is copyrighted. Any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research cannot be reproduced without written permission. The content is not intended to be used for anything other than information purposes.
