Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and related chemicals in eggs from Sweden and China

Abstract: Dietary intake is one of the major routes of human exposure to perfluoroalkyl and/or polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The objective of this study was to measure perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (PFHxS) in organic and conventional egg from Sweden (n=8, consisted of 4 pooled eggs and 4 individuals) and China (n=9, consisted of 4 pooled eggs and 5 individuals) and compare the concentrations of PFAS between the two categories (organic and conventional). Also, to evaluate if there was any difference in concentrations of PFAS between both countries. In the end, evaluation of tolerable weekly intake of PFOS and PFOA due to consumption of egg recommended by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) was conducted if consuming these eggs would cause any human health risk. Liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) was used to analyze PFOS, PFOA and PFHxS in the egg samples. In egg samples from China, PFOA was the predominant PFAS; in an organic egg sample from Shenzhen with concentration up to 2000 pg/g, making up to 86% of the 3 PFAS. In contrast, PFOS had the greatest concentration of all PFAS in egg samples from Sweden and was detected in organic egg sample with concentration up to 184 pg/g, making up to 78% of the 3 PFAS. PFOA in samples from China was 18 times higher compared to egg samples to Sweden; results showed no significant differences in PFAS concentrations in egg samples between Sweden and China. In samples from China, concentrations of PFAS had total mean of 50 pg/g for PFOS, 373 pg/g for PFOA and 13 pg/g for PFHxS. In Sweden, mean concentrations of PFOS, PFOA, and PFHxS were found to be 5, 2, and 1,5 times (respectively) higher in organic eggs when compared to conventional. However, significant difference was only observed for PFOS in Swedish organic eggs (p<0.05, t-7.96, df=6). The different concentrations of contamination between organic and conventional egg could be due to the fish powder in organic chicken feed and ingestion of soil through pecking. The result suggests that current concentrations of PFOS and PFOA in organic and conventional chicken eggs are unlikely to cause any immediate harm to Swedish populations. For Chinese population since the consumption of egg has a high risk of exceeding the TWI, the current concentration of PFOA in organic chicken eggs may cause harm to the population based on TWIs established by EFSA. Further investigation is needed with more samples to be analyzed to confirm this point.