What PFAS means for you
PFAS — per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances — are synthetic chemicals found in non-stick pans, food packaging, waterproof clothing, and firefighting foam. They do not break down in the environment, which is why they are called "forever chemicals." They are in the drinking water of millions of Europeans. They are linked to cancer, thyroid disease, and immune system damage.
The EU is considering the most comprehensive PFAS restriction in history. The outcome will determine whether these chemicals stay in products Europeans use every day. GovLens data reveals who is shaping that decision — and the imbalance is stark.
Who is lobbying and how much
Industry organisations have held 320 meetings with EU officials about PFAS — from 98 unique organisations. Health and environmental NGOs have held 88, from just 19 organisations. That is a 3.6-to-1 access gap on a public health issue that affects every European.
The European Environmental Bureau leads the NGO side with 19 meetings. But on the industry side, Chemours — one of the world's largest PFAS manufacturers — held 16 meetings. Plastics Europe had 12. Honeywell had 8. EFPIA (pharma) had 8. Veolia (waste management) had 11. These are companies whose products contain PFAS or whose business models depend on continued PFAS use.
The manufacturer in the room
Chemours — the DuPont spin-off that is one of the world's largest producers of PFAS compounds — held 16 lobby meetings with EU officials specifically about PFAS regulation. This is a company lobbying on the rules that govern its own core product. Carl Zeiss (4 meetings) lobbied on "PFAS restriction" specifically. Groupe SEB, which makes Tefal cookware, had 6 meetings.
Meanwhile, a coalition of water utilities — Svenskt Vatten (8 meetings), Dutch water authorities (8) — lobbied from the other side. They are the ones who have to filter PFAS out of drinking water at public expense. The question is whether the restriction will be strong enough to stop PFAS at the source, or weak enough that taxpayers continue paying for cleanup.
What journalists should investigate
The PFAS restriction proposal has been delayed repeatedly. Each delay benefits manufacturers who continue selling PFAS-containing products. GovLens tracks every meeting, every organisation, every date. Cross-reference the meeting timeline with the restriction proposal timeline — and ask whether the access gap explains the delay. The data is on GovLens. The story is yours.