PFAS are now a silent and pervasive presence in our lives. These perfluoroalkyl substances, used for decades in industry for their non-stick and waterproofing properties, have proven to be extremely persistent in the environment, earning them the nickname “forever chemicals“, eternal chemical substances. We find them in drinking water, in food and not even one of the most identifying products of our territory is saved: wine.
New research from Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, published in the scientific journal Environmental Pollution, analyzed 76 bottles produced between 2017 and 2023 in the provinces of Verona, Vicenza and Padua, areas historically affected by the environmental disaster linked to the former Miteni factory. The study detected the presence of PFAS in 75 samples, specifying that in 73 of these the concentration was quantifiable, i.e. higher than the minimum limits of analytical measurement.
What they found in Venetian wine
Among the various compounds identified, one stands out for its diffusion and concentration: PFBA (perfluorobutanoic acid), found in 93.5% of the wines analyzed, with a median concentration of 196 nanograms per liter and peaks that reached 18,067 nanograms per liter. It is a degradation byproduct of PFOA, a PFAS now banned due to its toxicity.
PFBA is a short-chain molecule, a characteristic that makes it particularly mobile in the environment and capable of easily infiltrating aquifers, as well as being absorbed by plant matrices.
Following, by frequency of detection, we find PFPeA (61.5% of samples) and PFBS (51.3%), confirming how contamination by short-chain PFAS is now a structural phenomenon in these areas.
One of the most significant aspects of the study concerns the direct relationship identified between the contamination of the aquifer and that found in the finished product. The researchers observed that, for vineyards located within 75 meters of the nearest groundwater point, there was a statistically significant correlation between PFBA levels in groundwater and those found in wine.
In other words, the vines absorb from the soil what is found in the water with which they are irrigated or to which they are otherwise exposed, effectively transforming themselves into environmental bioindicators. It is therefore not surprising that the highest concentrations of PFBA were measured in wines coming from the lands overlapping the areas where the groundwater is most contaminated, the so-called “plume” of pollution generated by the former Miteni plant.
How much do we risk by drinking contaminated wine?
Faced with these data, the question that many will ask is how much this can actually affect our health. The coordinator of the study himself, Antonio Marcomini, professor of environmental chemistry at Ca’ Foscari University, responds and urges us not to give in to alarmism. According to what was declared to Corriere del Veneto, the occasional consumption of a glass of wine does not entail significant risks. The situation changes, however, for those who consume it on a high and continuous basis, a situation in which wine can be added as a further source of overall exposure to PFAS, together with all the other foods in the daily diet.
What makes the picture more worrying is the comment by Isde (Association of Doctors for the Environment), which underlined the potential risks to public health. The association highlights the most critical steps of the research, where the authors estimate that:
In the highest consumption scenarios, a wine may lead to exceeding the tolerable weekly intake established by the European Food Safety Authority; applying the relative power factors, the exceedance would concern from 3 to 8 wines. For 3 wines, the estimated daily intake of specific PFAS would exceed their respective oral reference doses.
It should be remembered that the EFSA, already in 2020, had set a tolerable weekly group dose of 4.4 nanograms per kilogram of body weight, calculated for four PFAS in particular (PFOA, PFOS, PFNA and PFHxS), precisely due to their ability to accumulate in the body over time. According to Isde, the critical effect to be monitored most carefully concerns the possible reduction of the immune response to vaccinations.
It should be noted that the effects of PFAS on human health are still being studied, and that exposure to these substances does not only occur through wine, but is multiple and comes from all food, water and daily consumer products.
These new data confirm once again that PFAS can no longer be treated as an episodic emergency, but must be addressed as a structural problem of primary prevention. The fact that these substances, so persistent, have been found in a food as important for the economy and culture of the area as wine, requires more extensive controls, transparent publication of data, real protection of exposed populations and direct interventions on the sources of contamination.
For this reason, according to experts, we now need integrated monitoring involving water, soil, crops and food, accompanied by targeted human biomonitoring, especially in areas already marked by historical contamination by PFAS.
