Raleigh, NC: (919) 277-9299
A new study on PFAS, the toxic compound in aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), confirmed that dermal absorption is a viable and likely exposure pathway for firefighters. The active ingredients in foam suppressants are PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances). Fluorine and carbon atoms in PFAS form the lasting bond that prevents these chemicals from breaking down easily, earning them the moniker ‘forever chemicals.’ When used in firefighting foam, PFAS produces a strong barrier, but its resistance to degradation also impacts human health and the environment.
Manufacturers concealed the health risks associated with PFAS in firefighting foams, never warning the fire industry or military against adopting it for widespread use. Thousands of firefighters and service members fell ill with kidney, testicular, liver, and thyroid cancers linked to AFFF exposure. But thanks to lawsuits against firefighting foam manufacturers, the harm caused to these service members and firefighters will not be ignored.
The University of Birmingham’s recent Dermal Bioavailability of Perfluoroalkyl Substances study provides firefighters pursuing the AFFF lawsuit the updated research that’s essential for backing their claims. Though health agencies have understood the hazards of breathing, consuming, and handling firefighting foam for some time, most undervalued the significance of dermal absorption until now. The news that PFAS can be readily absorbed through the skin will also likely impact how firefighters handle situations with possible AFFF exposure, hopefully improving safety in these hazardous environments.
Past & Current PFAS Exposure Studies
Analyzing whether PFAS can be absorbed through the skin isn’t a novel idea. Dermal absorption research on rats concluded compounds permeate animal skin and accumulate. A human study measured the effects of a sunscreen-PFAS mixture and found dermal absorption continues for an extended time. The Dermal Bioavailability of Perfluoroalkyl Substances is the first of these studies to forego animal or human subjects, opting to use 3D models of human skin equivalents.
The 2024 PFAS study tested 17 common compounds, including perfluorooctane sulfonic acid, or PFOS, a primary ingredient in legacy AFFF. Researchers applied the chemicals to the skin models and measured the amount absorbed, unabsorbed, and retained. The results show significantly higher absorption rates than previously thought, which was especially true of the short-chain compounds used in modern versions of AFFF. The study also offers the possibility that the PFAS remaining on the skin, which were largely long-chain iterations, could also slowly cross the barrier and enter the bloodstream.
What the Dermal Bioavailability PFAS Study Means for Firefighters
When PFAS in firefighting foam are absorbed through the skin, they permeate outer layers until they reach the bloodstream. These chemicals accumulate in the human body and cause epigenetic changes that result in cancer. Before this PFAS study, most assumed—incorrectly—that dermal exposure to toxins in AFFF was low. The research suggests the opposite, and any firefighter who dismissed skin as an exposure pathway must reconsider it. Preventing skin contact with PFAS when fighting fuel fires or handling contaminated gear should be as rigid as rules against breathing or ingesting it.
Companies that manufacture products with PFAS for its waterproof and heat-resistant attributes argue those features make the compounds difficult to absorb, but this research suggests otherwise. As firefighters suspected, their years of contact with AFFF through training exercises and saturated gear, not to mention emergency responses, may lead to devastating diagnoses—if they haven’t already.
The authors of this study also observed that short-chain PFAS had a higher absorption rate than long-chain. When firefighting foam manufacturers shifted from using long-chain compounds to short-chain at the Environmental Protection Agency’s urging, they also began touting the concentrate’s harmlessness. Skeptics who argued that changing from C8 to C6 didn’t improve firefighter safety, now have data to support their suspicions. The PFAS study offers evidence that both types of PFAS permeate the skin and expose people to persistent, dangerous chemicals. Firefighters who believe the myth that modern AFFF is safe should consider the source—the manufacturers profiting off every purchase.
AFFF made with PFAS is toxic, whether inhaled, ingested, or absorbed into the skin, and firefighters must understand the risks of exposure through any of these pathways. This warning comes too late for many in the firefighting community already pursuing an AFFF lawsuit and awaiting updates. But we can still hope that the study’s completion during the transition to PFAS-free alternatives encourages departments everywhere to adopt safer suppressants.