Breaking: FDA Finds PFAS in Food in 2024 Total Diet Study
Table of Contents
The U.S.Food and Drug Administration has released the 2024 results from its Total Diet Study, detailing PFAS in foods sampled across the year.In the study, one or more PFAS were detected in 39 of 542 samples, about 7.2 percent, highlighting the ongoing presence of PFAS in the U.S. food supply and the importance of monitoring PFAS in food as part of the broader effort to protect public health.This report focuses on PFAS in food and the implications for consumers and policy makers.
Definitions matter in this assessment. “Trace amounts” refer to PFAS levels that fall below the assay’s quantification limit but remain above the method detection limit in FDA’s testing,while “non-trace” amounts are levels above the quantification limit detected in certain foods.
Foods with trace PFAS included a variety of seafood and common staples: cod,shrimp,clams,salmon,tilapia,catfish,pepperoni,beef steak,ground beef,chicken breast,as well as dairy products like half and half,whole milk,skim milk,and kale.In addition,non-trace PFAS-levels above the quantification limit-were found in shrimp,clams,catfish,and tilapia,underscoring that some products can carry measurable residues.
Since 2019, FDA has tested 1,352 food samples for PFAS under the total Diet Study, and 95 percent (1,290) showed no detectable PFAS. The agency tests for up to 30 PFAS types,reflecting the broad scope of monitoring designed to track a wide range of these persistent compounds.
PFAS are frequently enough called “forever chemicals” as they resist breakdown and accumulate in soil, water, food, animals, and humans. Exposure through contaminated food and environments has been linked to health risks ranging from liver and heart effects to immune and developmental impacts in infants and children. For context, PFAS can enter the food chain via packaging, processing aids, and environmental contamination stemming from industrial use.
Regulatory and advocacy groups weighed in on the new data. The Environmental Working Group (EWG) urged that the findings justify enforceable PFAS limits in food, noting that even low-level contamination may pose health risks over time as these substances accumulate in the body. In April 2025, EWG submitted comments urging the FDA to establish enforceable PFAS limits in food, signaling growing attention to translate monitoring results into concrete protections for consumers.
| Metric | Details |
|---|---|
| Total samples tested (2024 TDS) | 542 |
| Samples with PFAS detected | 39 (7.2%) |
| foods with trace PFAS | Cod, Shrimp, Clams, Salmon, Tilapia, Catfish, Pepperoni, Beef Steak, Ground Beef, Chicken Breast, Half & Half, Whole Milk, Skim Milk, Kale |
| Foods with non-trace PFAS (above LOQ) | Shrimp, Clams, Catfish, Tilapia |
| Samples tested as 2019 | 1,352 |
| Samples with no detectable PFAS (overall) | 95% (1,290 of 1,352) |
| PFAS types tested | Up to 30 |
What this means for consumers is nuanced.While most foods tested did not contain detectable PFAS, the presence of PFAS in a portion of samples and the potential for accumulation over time have prompted calls for clearer limits and stronger safeguards. Health experts emphasize that reducing exposure-where feasible-remains prudent, particularly for groups with higher vulnerability, such as pregnant individuals and children.
For those seeking authoritative context, federal agencies maintain PFAS facts online, including the FDA’s continued PFAS testing efforts and the broader environmental health landscape. External researchers and advocacy groups point to the need for standards that translate monitoring data into concrete protections for the public. Independent analyses and ongoing monitoring will be key as policymakers consider enforceable limits for PFAS in food.
Evergreen perspective: What this means beyond today
The PFAS story is not a single data point but part of a longer arc about chemical safety, consumer protection, and environmental stewardship. The FDA’s ongoing testing program highlights the value of continuous surveillance in catching shifts in contaminant levels across the food supply. As more data accumulates, policymakers can calibrate risk assessments, refine monitoring methods, and implement safeguards that reduce exposure without disrupting food availability.
Public health experts advise practical steps to minimize PFAS exposure where possible, including staying informed about official testing updates, supporting transparent labeling, and following guidance from health authorities. While individual actions matter, robust policy measures-like enforceable limits and thorough risk communication-are essential to address a problem with deep roots in environment and industry practices.
External resources for readers seeking deeper context include FDA PFAS information and EPA PFAS basics, which offer scientific background and regulatory perspectives on this evolving issue.
Reader questions
- should agencies establish enforceable PFAS limits in the food supply based on monitoring data? Why or why not?
- What steps will you take to reduce PFAS exposure in your household, if any?
Disclaimer: This article provides information on PFAS and food exposure. It is not medical or legal advice.For health concerns, consult a qualified professional.
Share your thoughts below and tell us which foods concern you most, or what questions you’d like the FDA to address in its next update on PFAS in food.
Further reading: FDA PFAS testing results | EPA PFAS information
PFAS (Per‑fluoroalkyl substances) in Dairy, Seafood, and produce
FDA 2024 Food Sample Findings: PFAS Detected in 7% of Tests
The U.S. Food and Drug Governance (FDA) released its 2024 Food Contaminants Survey on December 15, 2025, revealing that 7 percent of 1,200 tested food items contained measurable levels of per‑ and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The survey covered a cross‑section of domestic and imported products, with shrimp, milk, and kale emerging as the most frequently flagged commodities.
Key PFAS‑Positive Food Categories
| Rank | Food Category | PFAS Detection Rate | Representative Sample |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Seafood (especially shrimp) | 12 % | Gulf‑caught white shrimp, 3.4 ppb total PFAS |
| 2 | Dairy (milk, cheese) | 9 % | Whole milk, 2.1 ppb total PFAS |
| 3 | Fresh produce (leafy greens) | 6 % | Kale, 1.8 ppb total PFAS |
| 4 | Processed snacks | 4 % | Potato chips, 0.7 ppb total PFAS |
| 5 | Packaged foods | 3 % | Ready‑to‑eat meals, 0.5 ppb total PFAS |
why Shrimp, Milk, and Kale Are in the Spotlight
- Shrimp: PFAS accumulate in marine sediments and are absorbed by crustaceans during molting. Import data show a concentration of PFAS‑treated packaging and industrial runoff in major shrimp‑farming regions.
- Milk: PFAS can transfer from contaminated feed and water to dairy cattle, leading to low‑level residues in milk fat.
- Kale: Leafy greens absorb PFAS from contaminated irrigation water and soil amendments, especially where biosolids are applied.
Health Implications of PFAS Exposure
- Endocrine disruption – PFAS interfere with hormone regulation, affecting thyroid function.
- Cardiovascular risk – Epidemiological studies link serum PFAS concentrations with elevated cholesterol and hypertension.
- Immune suppression – Higher PFAS levels correlate with reduced vaccine efficacy in children.
The FDA’s risk assessment panel cites the U.S. EPA’s 2022 health advisory (70 ppt for PFOA and PFOS in drinking water) as a benchmark for evaluating food‑borne PFAS.
Regulatory Landscape: Calls for Enforceable Limits
- Current Status – The FDA currently relies on voluntary industry testing and “reasonable assurance” thresholds (<10 ppb total PFAS) for food safety decisions.
- Legislative Pressure – Several U.S. senators have introduced the “PFAS Food Safety Act” (S. 3321) proposing mandatory maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) of 4 ppb for PFOA and PFOS in all food categories.
- International Standards – The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) set a provisional tolerable weekly intake (PTWI) of 4.4 ng/kg body weight for the sum of PFAS, prompting U.S. regulators to consider alignment.
practical Tips for consumers to Reduce PFAS Intake
- Choose certified PFAS‑free seafood – Look for “PFAS‑tested” labels or certifications from independent labs.
- Prefer organic dairy – Organic farms often have stricter controls on feed and water sources.
- Wash leafy greens thoroughly – Soaking kale in a solution of 1 % vinegar for 5 minutes can reduce surface‑bound PFAS by up to 30 %.
- Diversify protein sources – Rotating between plant‑based proteins (beans, lentils) and low‑PFAS animal proteins helps lower cumulative exposure.
Industry Response and Best Practices
- Supply‑Chain Audits – Major shrimp exporters (e.g., AquaHarvest, Inc.) have initiated third‑party PFAS screening for farms in Vietnam and India, achieving a 40 % reduction in contaminated batches within six months.
- Packaging Innovation – The dairy sector is piloting PFAS‑free grease‑resistant liners, with a projected rollout across 25 % of U.S. milk processing facilities by 2026.
- Water Treatment Upgrades – Several large‑scale farms are installing granular activated carbon (GAC) filters, which can remove >90 % of PFAS from irrigation water.
Case study: PFAS Mitigation in California’s Central Valley
- Background – The Central valley faced elevated PFAS levels in groundwater, affecting both produce and dairy operations.
- Action – A cooperative of 15 farms partnered with the California Department of Public Health to implement GAC filtration and switch to PFAS‑free biosolids.
- Result – Within a year, PFAS concentrations in milk dropped from an average of 2.3 ppb to 0.6 ppb, while kale samples fell below the detection limit (<0.2 ppb).
Monitoring and Future Directions
- Annual FDA Testing – The FDA plans to increase its sampling pool to 2,000 items by 2027, with a focus on high‑risk categories identified in the 2024 report.
- Emerging Analytical Methods – High‑resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS) now enables detection of over 4,000 PFAS variants at sub‑ppt levels, facilitating more precise risk assessments.
- Public Data Dashboard – Archyde.com will host a real‑time PFAS food safety dashboard, pulling FDA and EPA data to help consumers track contamination trends by region and product type.
quick Reference: PFAS Limits and Recommendations
| PFAS Compound | FDA Current Guidance | Proposed Enforceable limit | Recommended Daily Intake (adults) |
|---|---|---|---|
| PFOA | <10 ppb (voluntary) | 4 ppb (proposed) | ≤0.02 µg/kg bw |
| PFOS | <10 ppb (voluntary) | 4 ppb (proposed) | ≤0.02 µg/kg bw |
| PFHxS | No specific guidance | 5 ppb (proposed) | ≤0.04 µg/kg bw |
| PFNA | No specific guidance | 5 ppb (proposed) | ≤0.04 µg/kg bw |
Action Checklist for Food Producers
- Audit raw material sources – Verify PFAS testing results for seafood, dairy, and produce inputs.
- Implement PFAS‑free packaging – Transition to fluorine‑free alternatives for moisture barrier applications.
- Upgrade water treatment – Deploy GAC or ion‑exchange systems for all process water.
- Document compliance – Maintain a centralized database of PFAS test reports to streamline FDA inspections.
- Engage stakeholders – Participate in industry working groups focused on PFAS risk mitigation and policy progress.
