I would like to see regulation that continues to allow more beneficial uses of PFAS while restricting the high-exposure, low-benefit uses. For example, your ph

I would like to see regulation that continues to allow more beneficial uses of PFAS while restricting the high-exposure, low-benefit uses. For example, your phone screen is likely coated in a very very thin, factory applied coating of large molecules that are perfluorinated at one end and covalently bonded to the glass at the other end. It might even be applied by a CVD or similar machine without the use of solvents. It makes the screen easy to swipe and much less smudge-prone. And there is very little of it, and only the tiniest amount is likely to come off in your fingers. Compare to essentially any anti-fog goggle spray. You spray it and probably inhale it. And it is made out of soluble PFAS [0] that don’t stick very well to your goggles, and you put those goggles on your face, and probably get some of the chemicals in your eye and nose, and then you do it again and again. (Seriously, what’s wrong with gel toothpaste for this application? Good old sodium lauryl sulfate is an excellent defogger, and any gelled version sticks to glass or plastic well enough for a long swim, and the entire formulation is extremely non-toxic. And in the tiny amounts needed for goggles, it doesn’t even irritate eyes.) PFAS are everywhere, and it’s uses really do vary widely in how problematic they are and how useful they are! [0] https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/acs.est.1c06990 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/acs.est.1c06990