How to Poison the Credibility of Regulators: Responding to Hollywood's Advocacy on PFAS
Popular media portrayals of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in documentaries like "How to Poison a Planet" and films such as "Dark Waters" present communities devastated by PFAS exposure, depicting clusters of cancer cases in alarming concentrations. These dramatic narratives create public risk perceptions that often exceed scientifically established risks by orders of magnitude, without acknowledging uncertainties inherent in the evidence base. This presents a significant challenge for regulatory agencies and government risk communicators who must convey nuanced scientific assessments alongside uncertainties regarding PFAS carcinogenicity in humans. Recent surveys indicate that individuals previously unaware of PFAS exhibit rapidly escalated concern after exposure to even minimal information about these substances. It is possible that psychological impacts from PFAS-related anxiety may now rival or exceed documented physical health effects in some contexts.
This presentation contrasts popular media narratives with government risk communication on PFAS to examine the widening gap between public perception and current scientific understanding. This disconnect undermines trust in regulatory institutions, potentially exacerbating psychological distress among community members uncertain about whom to trust or what information is reliable. Furthermore, this perception gap may distort societal resource allocation for health and environmental protection and generate unwarranted stigmatization with attendant economic consequences. While environmental advocacy films have proliferated since "Erin Brockovich" popularized the genre, research on their influence on chemical risk perception remains surprisingly limited.
We will explore potential response strategies ranging from developing alternative narratives for communicating cancer risk based on IARC monographs that are more relatable to a community. Could we consider a proposal for collaborative movie reviews produced by professional societies such as ACTRA and SETAC? The discussion aims to identify approaches that maintain scientific integrity while acknowledging legitimate community concerns and rebuilding regulatory credibility in an era of competing information sources.
Dr Craig Dalton is a Public Health Physician with a 25 year history of working with communities and government assessing and communicating infectious and toxicological risks to health. Author of "How NOT to Piss Off a Community – How to work in low-trust environments with integrity and compassion".
