By Will Atwater
As the holiday season approaches, conversations about family gatherings and meals are ramping up. For many hosts, planning a festive spread involves more than choosing recipes — it means accommodating guests with food allergies, dietary restrictions or preferences like avoiding meat and dairy.
But increasingly, health-conscious cooks are taking a second look at their kitchen tools and food packaging — especially nonstick pans and wrappers that may contain toxic chemicals.
That’s amid growing calls to minimize exposure to harmful “forever chemicals,” known as PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) — a class of more than 14,000 identified synthetic compounds linked to cancer, reproductive harm and hormone disruption. These substances are prized for their ability to resist water, grease and stains. The compounds are found in a host of products across multiple industries, including cosmetics, clothing and food packaging, even mascara and dental floss.
PFAS are also the key ingredients behind the slick coating on Teflon pans — a familiar fixture in many home kitchens.
And do cooks need to worry about the water they boil the potatoes in too?
A 2024 analysis by the Environmental Working Group estimates that at least 143 million Americans — nearly half of the U.S. population — have detectable levels of PFAS in their tap water, making it one of the most pervasive environmental exposures in the country. Despite the growing scientific consensus around the risks, regulation remains uneven — and personal exposure continues, often without consumers even realizing it.
New research by scientists at the UNC Chapel Hill Gillings School of Global Public Health is adding to the conversation — not by focusing on drinking water or consumer goods, but by exploring how dietary choices may influence the amount of PFAS that accumulate in our bodies.
Some of the findings are surprising.
Is it the packaging?
Published in August in the International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, a study analyzed blood samples from more than 11,000 people aged 12 and older to explore how diet might influence PFAS levels in the body. The researchers used data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2003–2018) and classified foods using the NOVA system, a classification framework that organizes them into four categories: unprocessed/minimally processed foods, processed culinary ingredients, processed foods and ultra-processed foods.
Those who ate more ultra-processed foods — particularly adolescents and people with a healthy body weight — had higher levels of two types of PFAS compounds, PFHxS and MeFOSAA, in their blood, suggesting that food packaging or processing methods may be a significant source of exposure.
Surprisingly, even those who mostly consumed unprocessed foods showed elevated levels of some other PFAS compounds, such as PFDA and PFUnDA. This indicates that avoiding processed foods alone may not completely eliminate exposure — PFAS can still enter the body through drinking water, contaminated soil or other environmental pathways like contaminated fish or meat.
“It’s a little disappointing that if we were to make recommendations for people to focus on eating unprocessed foods, that it doesn’t solve this issue,” said Jessie P. Buckley, study co-author and associate professor in the Department of Epidemiology at the Gillings School.
She emphasized that systemic solutions — like food safety regulations and environmental cleanup — are crucial to reducing PFAS exposure at the population level.
It’s complicated
In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom recently vetoed state Senate Bill 682, which would have banned the sale of nonstick cookware containing PFAS by 2030. In a letter to the California Senate, Newsom offered the following, in part:
Tips from experts to reduce PFAS exposure:
Avoid using damaged nonstick pans: If you’re still using nonstick cookware that may contain PFAS, stop using it if the surface becomes scratched, flaking or worn down. Damage to the coating can increase the risk of PFAS and other chemicals leaching into food during cooking.
Cook with truly PFAS-free cookware: Choose cookware explicitly labeled PFAS-free, PTFE-free and PFOA-free. PTFE (polytetrafluoroethylene), best known by the brand name Teflon, is itself a type of PFAS — so even some “ceramic” or “PFAS-free” cookware may contain it. For help selecting safer options beyond cast iron and stainless steel, see LeafScore’s guide to nontoxic nonstick pans.
Filter your drinking water, check private wells: Install a certified water filter (granular activated carbon or reverse osmosis) to reduce PFAS levels. If you use a private well, consider having it tested for PFAS. Public system results may be available through your local water utility.
Avoid highly processed foods when possible: Ultra‑processed foods may be linked to increased PFAS exposure due to packaging or manufacturing practices, according to recent research.
Limit heating food or liquids in plastic containers: Heating in plastic may release PFAS or other chemicals into food or drinks — use glass or stainless steel when practical.
Stay informed about local contamination: PFAS levels in water and soil vary widely by region. Use tools like the Environmental Working Group’s PFAS map or check local health advisory information.Support policy change: While legislation has lagged, experts say public pressure matters. Advocating for stricter regulations, safer product standards and environmental cleanup can help reduce exposures at the population level.
“I appreciate the efforts to protect the health and safety of consumers, and while this bill is well-intentioned, I am deeply concerned about the impact this bill would have on the availability of affordable options in cooking products.” He added, “I believe we must carefully consider the consequences that may result from a dramatic shift of products on our shelves.”
Some see the failure to get the California legislation passed — given its position as the fourth-largest economy in the world — as a missed opportunity to force retailers and other states to move faster to protect consumers from these contaminants.
Still, progress is happening elsewhere. As of Jan. 1, 2025, Minnesota became the first state to ban the sale of nonstick cookware coated with PFAS. Meanwhile, Vermont, Connecticut, Rhode Island and Colorado are moving ahead with bans or restrictions on cookware containing intentionally added PFAS, with enforcement dates ranging from 2026 to 2028.
Marketplace outpaces legislation
While legislation and legal battles to curb “forever chemicals” play out in North Carolina and beyond, several national retailers are already phasing out products made with PFAS. In 2023, REI announced that its cookware and textile products would be PFAS‑free by fall 2024.
“We’re proud of our efforts to shift away from the use of PFAS in multiple product categories — including cookware,” a company spokesperson shared in an email. “Since Fall 2024, we’ve required all vendors supplying cookware to the co-op to ensure their products are free of PFAS.”
Target has set a goal to remove intentionally added PFAS from its own brand products — including cookware — by 2025.
Meanwhile, Walmart says it will restrict the sale of products containing intentionally added PFAS on its marketplace in states that ban those chemicals.
The retail shift also includes PFAS‑free cookware options, such as GreenPan’s ceramic nonstick line. But reaching price‑sensitive consumers remains a challenge: at Walmart, a Mainstays 9.5‑inch nonstick skillet sells for about $9.96, while an 8‑inch GreenPan model with a PFAS‑free coating runs $19.96 — a $10 difference, or a little more than double the cost.
What can consumers do?
As researchers continue to untangle the complex pathways of PFAS exposure, they say there are immediate steps consumers can take to reduce their risk — though eliminating exposure entirely may not yet be feasible.
“We’re not saying people should avoid eating fruits, vegetables, or fish — those foods are still important for your health,” said Gillings School postdoctoral researcher and lead author Diana C. Pacyga in a news release.
Pingping Meng, assistant professor in the Department of Chemistry at East Carolina University, said this study — along with her own research — has prompted her to rethink everyday choices in the kitchen.
“The biggest change I’ve made in my home because of PFAS is to get rid of all nonstick pans in my kitchen,” Meng said.
When offering advice to others, Meng said one of the most important steps is to pay attention to the source of certain foods. In the case of meat and fish — two food sources where PFAS can bioaccumulate — that means having a conversation with the provider to learn more about their origin and production practices if possible, such as whether biosolids have been applied on the farm.
In addition to individual precautions like checking food sources, Buckley and Pacyga encourage consumers to take practical steps that can reduce exposure in daily life. These include using PFAS-capturing water filters, swapping out scratched or damaged nonstick pans for stainless steel or cast iron if possible and vacuuming regularly to reduce household dust that may contain PFAS particles. But both researchers stressed that these are stopgap measures.
“We really advocate for cleanup and population-based measures that are going to take these chemicals out of foods to begin with, so that it’s not up to an individual to have to try to protect themselves,” Buckley said.
KEEP UP WITH THE LATEST
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
