Forever, Unlimited: Why India sets no limit for PFAS, the 'forever chemicals', why no standard is not the same as no exposure, and how listing them would begin to protect the people who carry them

What are PFAS, and are they in India's water? Is there a limit? And who decided? PFAS, the 'forever chemicals', are the coatings in non-stick pans, stain- and water-repellent fabrics, grease-proof food wrappers and firefighting foam; many break down very slowly and build up in people, animals and the environment. The United States now limits two of them in drinking water to four parts per trillion each, and the European Union limits the sum of 20 to 0.10 µg/L. India sets no limit at all. We verified this instrument by instrument: the national drinking-water standard, the packaged-water regulation, the food contaminants regulation and the Jal Jeevan Mission's testing framework contain no PFAS parameter, and the Central Pollution Control Board told the National Green Tribunal in 2024 that 'there is no standard prescribed for PFAS in drinking water'. Under the Stockholm Convention, India accepts new chemical listings one by one; it has accepted seven, and not PFOS, PFOA or PFHxS. Meanwhile, researchers have found PFAS in seven rivers of southern India, in groundwater in Assam, in sediments of the upper Ganges and Chennai's Cooum, and among 55 PFAS-based pesticides tracked on Indian grapes. Forty-two years after methyl isocyanate escaped a pesticide plant in Bhopal, India still counts chemical harm after it happens: the Supreme Court's record carries three death tolls for that night, from 2,660 to 5,295, and the Act that empowers environmental standards came after the leak, not before it. The paper argues that no standard is not the same as no exposure: a country without a limit records no exceedance, and so produces no evidence that it needs one. It recommends an interim limit, a finished test method, PFAS testing in state laboratories starting where exposure is likely highest, and acceptance of the Stockholm listings, and it sets out every claim with the source read to verify it.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2026-10-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23444988
Primary Topic
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Forever, Unlimited: Why India sets no limit for PFAS, the 'forever chemicals', why no standard is not the same as no exposure, and how listing them would begin to protect the people who carry them

Vijay Ramprasad
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
article

Forever, Unlimited: Why India sets no limit for PFAS, the 'forever chemicals', why no standard is not the same as no exposure, and how listing them would begin to protect the people who carry them

Vijay Ramprasad
article en

Abstract

What are PFAS, and are they in India's water? Is there a limit? And who decided? PFAS, the 'forever chemicals', are the coatings in non-stick pans, stain- and water-repellent fabrics, grease-proof food wrappers and firefighting foam; many break down very slowly and build up in people, animals and the environment. The United States now limits two of them in drinking water to four parts per trillion each, and the European Union limits the sum of 20 to 0.10 µg/L. India sets no limit at all. We verified this instrument by instrument: the national drinking-water standard, the packaged-water regulation, the food contaminants regulation and the Jal Jeevan Mission's testing framework contain no PFAS parameter, and the Central Pollution Control Board told the National Green Tribunal in 2024 that 'there is no standard prescribed for PFAS in drinking water'. Under the Stockholm Convention, India accepts new chemical listings one by one; it has accepted seven, and not PFOS, PFOA or PFHxS. Meanwhile, researchers have found PFAS in seven rivers of southern India, in groundwater in Assam, in sediments of the upper Ganges and Chennai's Cooum, and among 55 PFAS-based pesticides tracked on Indian grapes. Forty-two years after methyl isocyanate escaped a pesticide plant in Bhopal, India still counts chemical harm after it happens: the Supreme Court's record carries three death tolls for that night, from 2,660 to 5,295, and the Act that empowers environmental standards came after the leak, not before it. The paper argues that no standard is not the same as no exposure: a country without a limit records no exceedance, and so produces no evidence that it needs one. It recommends an interim limit, a finished test method, PFAS testing in state laboratories starting where exposure is likely highest, and acceptance of the Stockholm listings, and it sets out every claim with the source read to verify it.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Openalex Percentile: Top 23%
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.