As I walked into the medical clinic for my blood test, all I could think about was how to avoid looking like a wimp on camera. I didn’t really contemplate what the test would reveal.
I am not great with needles – but as part of a BBC Panorama investigation into so-called forever chemicals, I was being tested to see what level of them I had in my blood. As a mum with two small children, I also wanted to know whether they may be having an impact on my family.
Forever chemicals, or PFAS, are a group of about 10,000 chemicals. They have been used for decades, in anything from waterproof clothes, to cookware, electronics and medical equipment.
They are persistent pollutants, meaning they don’t degrade easily and instead build up in the environment.
They exist in our homes, our water and in our food.
Scientists have linked a small number of them to serious harms, such as infertility and cancer.
Any level of PFAS above 2ng (nanograms) per millilitre of blood is considered to bring health risks, according to Dr Sabine Donnai, a specialist in preventative healthcare. She has never met anyone without at least some PFAS in their bloodstream.
My result was 9.8ng per millilitre.
Dr Donnai delivered the news very gently – but it still hit me hard.
The forever chemicals in my blood would “most likely” have an impact on my health, she told me.
I also learned that, sadly, my body would have rid itself of some of these chemicals during pregnancy, by passing it on to my babies.
That was the moment this investigation stopped being just work and felt very personal.
“They [PFAS levels] would have been even higher before your pregnancies,” Dr Donnai told me.
“You will have passed on to your children for sure.”
I was worried, but I also felt angry about how this could have happened without me having any knowledge, and very little control.
I wanted to know more about these substances and the health issues they have been linked to.
PFAS chemicals “don’t break down”, said Stephanie Metzger from the Royal Society of Chemistry.
“Once they get into our bodies, they stick around and build up little-by-little until they start to interfere with our systems.
“Some PFAS have been linked to thyroid problems, some to kidney and liver cancer, and some have been shown to affect fertility.”
As for me, it is “unlikely” I will be able to bring my levels to zero, said Dr Donnai.
“But you can reduce it over the next two or three years with a strategy.”
She suggested I increase my fibre intake – either by eating more oats, barley, beans, nuts and seeds, or by taking supplements of gel-forming fibre. Increased fibre in our diet is “the strongest evidence to date that might help”, she said.
If I did these things, menstruation would also help reduce my current PFAS levels over time, she added.
She also told me to identify the biggest sources of exposure in my home – change my cookware, use a water filter, switch cleaning products, check my make-up and hair-colouring and be wary of “waterproof” labels.
Similar advice was given to mum-to-be Pam Kavanagh, who we visited at home in Berkshire with Dr Federica Amati of Imperial College London.
Pam was eager to know how to reduce the possible household risks of PFAS to her baby – and Dr Amati has studied how babies and children can be affected by forever chemicals.
“When we drink tap water, we are, depending on where you live, at varying levels of exposure to PFAS,” Dr Amati said.
Just buying a water filter can help to reduce exposure, she said – whether that is a jug with a filter in it, or a filter installed into the actual sink.
Any non-stick frying pans with scratches on them should be thrown out, Dr Amati advised.
Stainless steel or ceramic pans “are far safer”, she said.
Carpets can be treated with PFAS to make them more stain resistant, she added, suggesting that people vacuum their carpets every day.
“Making sure you ventilate the room by opening the windows every single day is a good idea [because] it really collects as house dust,” she added
Dr Amati then turned to children’s clothing. Pam was left “speechless” to discover that waterproof or stain-resistant clothing can contain PFAS. Manufacturers are under no obligation to disclose this information.
Some children’s products are not PFAS-free, despite claiming to be, the BBC learned.
We found PFAS in a children’s coat we bought from the Mountain Warehouse website a few months ago, even though the site says that none of its children’s products are made with forever chemicals.
The jacket we tested came from a small batch of old stock, made more than three years ago, Mountain Warehouse told the BBC.
Although the coat “meets UK safety standards”, it added, the product has now been withdrawn from sale.
The company said it was working “to eliminate PFAS from all products as soon as possible” and that “children’s clothing manufactured since 2023 is PFAS-free”.
If fabrics containing PFAS come into “prolonged contact with human skin” there’s the potential the chemicals can be absorbed across the skin, explained Prof Stuart Harrad at the University of Birmingham, who tested the coat for us.
Our greatest exposure to forever chemicals comes from food – particularly fish, meat, eggs, fruit and fruit products, according to the European Food Safety Authority.
An innocent-looking strawberry could have PFAS exposure, I learned, because the chemicals can be added to pesticides “to help them stick better to the fruit, so when it rains it doesn’t wash off”, explained Prof David Megson of Manchester Metropolitan University.
Of the assortment of picnic items we laid out, a bottle of wine could carry the greatest PFAS risk, Prof Megson told me.
“We concentrate hundreds of grapes into each bottle. As the wider pesticide breaks down, the PFAS bit is left behind,” he said.
PFAS chemicals are so embedded in modern life that none of us can fully escape them. They have made our lives convenient and our products durable – but at a potential cost we are only now beginning to count.
The European Commission is consulting on an outright ban on about 10,000 PFAS chemicals. The UK government says it is looking to ban or restrict some chemicals but has not committed to a blanket ban. It told us that it is “working at pace with regulators to assess levels of PFAS in the environment, their sources and potential risks” to inform its approach to “policy and regulation”.
PFAS chemicals have many essential uses, and safer substitutes are not yet available, argues the Chemical Industries Association. It says “regulators and industry need to work together in setting transition periods” to bring alternatives to market.
When I first had the blood tests, I thought it would provide an interesting scene for our documentary.
But once you know these chemicals are inside you, you can’t unknow it.
Having a plan to reduce my exposure is a small comfort. But I’ll be honest, it is also another thing to worry about.
