The Environmental Protection Agency is moving forward with plans to approve two new pesticides that contain so-called “forever chemicals,” despite mounting health concerns. Critics say the decision contradicts any claim that the U.S. is prioritizing public health.
Former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich criticized the approvals on social media, writing, “So much for ‘Make America Healthy Again,’ huh?” He pointed out that the approvals come after a reported $60 million lobbying campaign by the chemical industry.
The pesticides in question, cyclobutrifluram and isocycloseram, contain PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances), a class of chemicals known for persisting in the environment and the human body.
These pesticides are intended for use on crops like romaine lettuce, broccoli, and potatoes.
PFAS chemicals have been linked to several serious health issues, including liver damage, immune system disruption, birth defects, and certain cancers.
Despite these risks, the EPA has also proposed relaxing rules that require companies to report when their products contain PFAS, and is considering weakening federal drinking water standards for the chemicals.
“We are creating new pathways for more PFAS to get into the environment when we already have so much,” Melanie Benesh, vice president of government affairs at the Environmental Working Group, told The Washington Post.
“We’re already inundated with PFAS.”
According to the Environmental Working Group, nearly 15 million pounds of PFAS pesticides were sprayed on California crops between 2018 and 2023. The group says these chemicals are already showing up in the food supply and water systems.
Industry and EPA Defend the Move
The EPA argues that the pesticides offer benefits. “Many fluorinated compounds registered or proposed for U.S. pesticidal use in recent years offer unique benefits for farmers, users, and the public,” EPA spokeswoman Brigit Hirsch said in a statement.
Manojit Basu, vice president of science policy at CropLife America, a pesticide industry group, added:
“EPA’s scientifically rigorous and transparent evaluation process for pesticides provides America’s farmers with access to innovative tools essential to delivering an affordable, abundant, and healthy food supply.”
Political Response and Public Backlash
According to The Washington Post, former EPA officials said that PFAS-related applications had previously been deprioritized due to concerns over their persistence and potential irreversible harm.
One unnamed former official said, “We made a deliberate decision to spend resources on other pesticides because of the PFAS concerns.”
In contrast, EPA spokesperson Hirsch claimed that opposition to the approvals was “just another example of partisan organizations peddling mistruths,” adding that both Republican and Democratic administrations have approved pesticides containing fluorinated compounds.
Larger Pattern of Deprioritizing Public Health?
The pesticide decision follows another controversial policy push: a Republican-led effort to roll back automatic emergency braking and other safety mandates in vehicles.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) announced a January 14 hearing to examine how federal safety and environmental regulations have contributed to rising vehicle prices.
According to The Wall Street Journal, Republican lawmakers are questioning whether safety requirements like automatic emergency braking and child-seat reminder alarms are worth the cost.
Cruz argued, “The average price of a car has more than doubled in the past decade, driven up by onerous government-mandated technologies and radical environmental regulations.”
But safety experts disagree. A spokesperson for the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety told the Journal, “Regulation is the best way to make sure everybody’s got this technology that’s highly effective.”
Critics argue these moves reflect a larger trend: shifting focus away from public health and safety in favor of short-term cost savings and deregulation.
Whether it’s PFAS on food or fewer protections on the road, the consistent outcome is more risk for the average American.
With PFAS chemicals now set to be used more widely in food production, and life-saving car features potentially on the chopping block, many are questioning whether basic health and safety are still national priorities.