What is PFAS?
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a group of synthetic chemicals widely used across industries due to their resistance to heat, water, and oil. Often referred to as “forever chemicals,” PFAS do not break down easily in the environment or human body, leading to long-term accumulation. Research by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has linked PFAS exposure to serious health issues, including liver damage, immune system suppression, and an increased risk of certain cancers.
The Australian Government website on PFAS states:
“Unfortunately, the properties that make some PFAS useful in many industrial applications and particularly in fire-fighting foams also make them problematic in the environment. The PFAS of greatest concern are highly mobile in water, which means they travel long distances from their source point; they do not fully break down naturally in the environment, and they are toxic to a range of animals. While understanding about the human health effects of long-term PFAS exposure is still developing, there is global concern about the persistence and mobility of these chemicals in the environment. Many countries have discontinued or are progressively phasing out their use. The Australian Government has worked since 2002 to reduce the use of certain PFAS.”
A further review of government actions revealed an incomplete chemical review of fipronil, a substance nominated for review in 2002 by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA). More than two decades later, in 2025, this review remains unfinished.
- Australian Government PFAS Information
- EPA PFAS Health Risks
- CDC PFAS Health Effects
- APVMA Chemical Review – Fipronil
Are Baits Used in the NFAEP Formulated with PFAS?
The National Fire Ant Eradication Program (NFAEP) has publicly denied that its baits contain PFAS chemicals. According to an official statement:
“Beware of false information about fire ant treatment. Claims that our fire ant treatment products are formulated with perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl (PFAS) substances are false. We do not use PFAS-coated pesticides and never have. We clarified this with the individual/s making these claims, but they continue to spread misinformation.”
Pesticide Action Australia has published a letter of concern about PFAS use in Australia which specifically mentions the application of pesticides found to contain PFAS linked with the National Fire Ant Eradication Program or the complementary work of the Queensland Government’s Fire Ant Suppression Taskforce (FAST); and the National Fire Ant Eradication Program’s list of approved treatments for use by residents, schools, sports clubs, farmers, and operators of public spaces, which have been found to contain PFAS.
With conflicting information questions are raised and a closer examination is required. The table included in the NFAEP PFAS denial statement lists active ingredients such as Fipronil, Hydramethylnon, and Indoxacarb. Contradictorily, the Australian PFAS Chemicals Map identifies Fipronil, , Hydramethylnon, and Indoxacarb—all of which are used in NFAEP baits—as fluorinated pesticides that contain PFAS chemicals and are used as active ingrediants, registered with the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) under differnet branding.
Bifenthrin, also listed as a PFAS chemical in the Australian PFAS chemcial map, is used in the FAST program to treat turf, other organic products and also vehicles to prevent fire ants spread. This is genarally implemented by primary producers and regulated by the NFAEP. Permit Link below.
What Are the Potential Long-Term Effects of PFAS Chemicals?
Decades of research indicate that prolonged exposure to PFAS can have lasting health and environmental consequences. For wildlife, ingestion of PFAS-laced baits could lead to bioaccumulation, disrupting ecosystems and food chains. In humans, PFAS exposure has been linked to reproductive issues, thyroid dysfunction, and developmental delays in children. The persistence of these chemicals means that contamination of soil and water sources could continue long after baiting operations have ceased.
A report published in Science Direct raises concerns about PFAS concentrations in insecticides:
“The concentrations of Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) found in the studied insecticides raise concerns regarding environmental contamination, particularly in rural and agricultural areas. These substances are known for their environmental stability, leading to persistent soil contamination and potential accumulation in food crops. The historical use of insecticides containing Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) could result in high concentrations of these substances in agricultural soils, posing risks to human and animal health.”
Delays in the NFAEP Review: A Growing Concern
Adding to the community’s concerns, the review into the NFAEP has now been delayed until 2026, meaning residents will have to wait in excess of 12 months for any concrete answers regarding the safety of these baits. This delay only deepens frustration, particularly given the government’s track record of protracted chemical reviews, as evidenced by the unresolved fipronil review that has been ongoing since 2002. The inability to complete these reviews in a timely manner raises serious questions about regulatory oversight and the prioritization of public and environmental health.
Final Thoughts: Transparency, Regulation, and Public Awareness
The debate surrounding PFAS in NFAEP baits underscores the urgent need for transparency, regulatory oversight, and public awareness. Despite official statements denying PFAS use, documented research suggests otherwise. The delay in reviewing and regulating chemicals like fipronil only adds to public concern.
With increasing global efforts to phase out PFAS due to their persistence and toxicity, Australians deserve clarity on what chemicals are being used in national programs. The long-term consequences of exposure—both environmental and human—should not be underestimated. It is imperative that regulatory bodies conduct thorough, up-to-date reviews and provide clear, evidence-backed information to the public. Until then, the question remains: Are we simply being kept in the dark?
Leave a Reply