By Jane van Dis MD, Rochester, NY; Megan Wolff PhD, MPH, New Paltz, NY; and Elizabeth Ryznar MD MSc, Silver Spring, MD

New York State has a habit of modeling smart and impactful legislation that protects both citizens and the market. It currently has an opportunity to do so again with A.7738A/S.9073A, which bans intentionally added PFAS in a range of the products we use at home every day. This public health measure has already received the thumbs-up from the Senate, and it is currently under consideration in the Assembly. Our hope is that it will withstand the swirl of disinformation intended to derail it. 

The arguments are familiar: the products are safe, the science is uncertain, and reform will hurt consumers. We have heard this before. The playbook is familiar because New York has seen it before. Tobacco companies used it against smoke-free air laws. Food industry groups used it against trans fat bans. Such arguments are as long-lived and damaging as PFAS itself. Continue reading.

“Sustainability teams across the world are looking at how we can slow our plastics consumption without changing patient care…Look at it this way: The less plastic we consume, the less often patients will end up on dialysis and, in turn, the less plastic we will consume. Of course, it isn’t as simple as that. But if all of us in health care take a look at what plastics we don’t need, what can be reduced and reused, and where can we change to a different material, we can consume less. All of this is beneficial to us, our patients, the planet and, frequently, the bottom line,” says Bridget Lee, MD, is an emergency physician who lives and works in Boston at NeighborHealth in Boston.

Hospitals generate large volumes of single-use plastics from clinical care, pharmaceuticals, and sterile supply chains, accounting for nearly one-quarter of hospital waste. These materials, largely derived from fossil fuels, introduce more than 13,000 chemicals into the environment and frequently degrade into microplastics and nanoplastics that contaminate air, water, soil, and human biological systems.

“We don’t put our seatbelts on at the start of a collision… We should be buckled in for this entire journey in plastics. We have nothing to lose and everything to gain by putting safety first.” Family physician and P‑SNAP member Anne Halsey uses this analogy in her January 26 commentary in the New Hampshire Bulletin critiquing a recent Guardian article that downplays the significance of micro‑ and nanoplastics in human health. She argues that the piece distracts from the strong and growing scientific consensus that plastic production and pollution expose communities to hazardous chemicals, (including PFAS, dioxins, furans, and heavy metals) which are well‑documented to harm health. While research on micro‑ and nanoplastics continues to evolve, Halsey emphasizes that uncertainty should not be mistaken for lack of evidence. For clinicians and scientists, the real “bombshell” is the scale of plastic‑related exposures already affecting communities—and the urgent need for action, not distraction.

A weak plastic treaty is not the end of the fight — it is a reminder that real change has always come from people, not from closed‑door negotiations.

On May 17th 2024, Lohud, Lower Hudson Valley’s regional newspaper, published an editorial titled, “New York lawmakers must heed warnings from PFAS research. Our kids’ health depends on it” by Chase Moon, one of P-SNAP’s featured speakers in the Speakers Bureau.

Moon urges NY legislators to pass 3 bills including “PFAS in Personal Care and Cosmetic Products,” “PFAS in Menstrual Products,” and “PFAS in Consumer and Household Products,” and points out various history, resources, and articles readers can look up to learn more about why and how PFAS threatens children in our communities, and our environment as a whole.

Reading the full article requires a Lohud subscription, or can be downloaded in PDF form below.