The controversy over the health effects of Teflon, the widely used non-stick coating in cookware, has been raging in the United States since the early 2000. Teflon was invented in the 1930s and marketed by DuPont the only company that still manufactures it in the US. Today it is widely used in clothing, apparel, carpeting and other products. Though Teflon is a brand name, its manufacturing requires the use of a chemical called perfluorooctanioc acid – PFOA or C8 -  that has been found to cause birth defects and cancer in humans. Indeed in 2005, an independent panel reporting to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) declared PFOA a likely human carcinogen.

While the battle against DuPont and the phasing out of PFOA is still ongoing in the US, a group of McGill management students are planning an anti-Teflon campaign in the Montreal area. They got involved in this issue as part of a “social context of business” class at university. “Through all of the research that we have done on this issue, we have grown to feel very strongly about it. The public needs to be aware of the health and environmental risks that this substance poses” says Anna Roumiantseva, the campaign organizer. “The main points of our campaign are to get the public aware of the health and environmental effects of using Teflon, and to reduce their exposure to it. Therefore, our number one goal is to get as much media exposure as possible. Also, we feel that when consumers dine out, they should have the option of choosing restaurants that do not use Teflon cookware: an option that is currently unavailable since there is no way of knowing what kind of cookware is being used. As such, our number two goal is to get an official “Teflon-free” label approved, which restaurants can display signaling that they are a health-conscious and environmentally-friendly zone. We are hoping to start on the municipal level, and then expand the campaign nationally in the future.”

Similar to other fluorochemicals, PFOA, is widely used and found almost everywhere. It never breaks down in the environment and is toxic to humans when exposed. The specific health concern related to its use in cookware is that at temperatures staring at around 202.2°C (396°F) PFOA is released as a gas. This outgassing can cause “polymer fume flu,” also known as “Teflon flu,” in humans. The symptoms are similar to regular flu, such as chills, headache, fever and nausea. Because of this similarity most people mistake it for the regular flu. Nevertheless, exposure to PFOA can cause birth defects in humans. EPA studies confirmed that 90% of Americans have PFOA in their bloodstream.

Apart from PFOA, Teflon off-gassing studies show that at the temperatures of conventional kitchen appliances, Teflon chemicals break apart to form the following particulates and gases:

• Two chemicals linked to cancer or tumors in laboratory studies (PFOA and TFE)
• Two chemicals that are potent global warming gases (PFB and CF4)
• Two chemical warfare agents (PFIB and MFA)
• A chemical analog of WWII nerve gas phosgene (COF2)
• At least two chemicals that have widely contaminated the world (PFOA and TFA), one currently undergoing a rigorous safety review at the EPA
• Four gaseous chemicals and some components of the particulate matter that are highly persistent environmental pollutants, that likely never break down in the environment (TFA, PFOA, CF4, PFB, and the perfluorinated particulate alkanes)
• Four chemicals that are considered highly toxic relative to most other industrial chemicals (PFIB, MFA, COF2, HF).

The first class action lawsuit on behalf of 50,000 residents was in West Virginia. It alleged that the Ohio River had been polluted by the chemical used at the DuPont plant, causing birth defects and other health hazards. In 2004 DuPont settled out of court paying $16.5 million in damages but admitted no liability. A larger lawsuit that is still ongoing was filed in 2006 by two New Jersey residents on behalf of the residents near the Chambers Works plant in Salem County for “intentional, knowing, reckless, and negligent acts and omissions of DuPont in connection with the contamination of human drinking water supplies.” This suit follows a petition filed in 2003 with the EPA by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) that alleges DuPont covered up a 1980s study that was never published and which found tumors in lab rats linked to PFOA. The suit claims that DuPont had a duty to warn consumers of the dangers of Teflon but failed to do so. The allegations were already being investigated by EPA in 2005 and since 2004 various cases have been brought to the courts. They have been consolidated by the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multi-district Litigation and transferred to Iowa. Although a specific financial value has not been specified it is estimated that, if successful, the suit could cost DuPont some $5 billion in damages for approximately 10 million people.

DuPont continues to argue against the allegations stating on its website: “Based on an evaluation of human health and toxicology studies, DuPont concludes that PFOA exposure does not pose a cancer risk or any health risk to the general public. There is no significant potential for exposure to PFOA from using products made with DuPont materials, hence, there is no risk to consumers.” Indeed, in June this year, the federal court in Des Moines dismissed 22 consolidated suits stating that “individual issues differing among the plaintiffs would each require their own inquiry, making the suits improper”.

While over 70% of cookware contains a non-stick coating, Roumiantseva points out that there are many substitutes already used and preferred by many chefs such as copper, cast iron and stainless steel cookware that pose no health problems. Using Teflon-free labeling can also be argued to give businesses a “competitive advantage when it comes to the environmentally and health conscious consumers. We also hope to target grocery and department stores in the future and urge them to carry more alternatives to Teflon, if not boycott Teflon altogether. If the public is more aware of the dangers of Teflon, there will be a bigger push for its regulation from the authorities.”