RIVM finds PFAS in all breast-milk samples tested
In 82 per cent of the samples tested, levels were below the risk threshold used by the institute.
RIVM found PFAS in all tested samples of Dutch breast milk. The measurement says something about exposure in the population, but is not an individual medical assessment and does not prove that every level detected causes harmful effects.
For the study, RIVM examined breast milk from 1,629 women from across the Netherlands. The researchers tested for 29 different PFAS, a group of man-made substances that are resistant to water, grease and heat, among other things.
At least one PFAS was detected in every sample. Four substances — PFOS, PFOA, PFNA and PFHxS — were found together in 93 per cent of the samples. According to RIVM, the measured level was below the risk threshold used in 82 per cent of cases. The institute does not expect harmful effects below that threshold.
A risk threshold is not a dividing line between completely safe and immediately dangerous. It is a scientific reference point for assessing exposure. Its significance depends, among other things, on the substance, the amount, the duration of exposure and the uncertainty in the available knowledge.
The study is an RIVM research report. The publication page consulted does not state that the report has been published as a peer-reviewed scientific article. The results instead supplement earlier blood tests, which according to RIVM show that almost everyone in the Netherlands has PFAS in their bodies.
PFAS break down very slowly and can enter the body through food, drinking water and air. The European Commission is working on broader restrictions. Since 2026, member states have been required to monitor PFAS in drinking water; bans or limit values already exist for some applications.
The policy choice therefore concerns not only whether PFAS can be detected, but also the speed at which production and use can be replaced. The European Commission calls consumer products a priority, while exceptions may remain for industrial applications if alternatives are unavailable. The study substantiates exposure, but does not by itself determine which applications should disappear.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- PFAS was found in all tested breast-milk samples.
- RIVM reported that 82 per cent were below the risk threshold used.
- European regulation is being further developed and includes exceptions for some applications.
Left
Arguments The presence of PFAS in all samples shows that voluntary reduction is insufficient. Production and use must be restricted as quickly as possible, with priority given to protecting children and future generations.
Values Precaution, public health and environmental justice.
Consequences Faster bans could reduce exposure, but could make products more expensive and create difficult replacement challenges for companies.
Centre
Arguments Rules should be based on exposure, toxicity and available alternatives. A phased European approach with clear exceptions for essential applications avoids both paralysis and false certainty.
Values Scientific evidence, feasibility and proportionality.
Consequences A phased transition gives companies time, but allows some sources of exposure to remain for longer.
Right
Arguments A broad ban could affect essential industrial applications, innovation and security of supply. The government should tackle specific high-risk substances and discharges while giving companies room to develop alternatives.
Values Economic continuity, innovation and limited government intervention.
Consequences Targeted rules could limit economic damage, but may reduce the overall spread of PFAS less quickly.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The size of the study, the substances detected and the percentages were directly confirmed by RIVM. The text clearly distinguishes between measurement, risk assessment and policy choice.
- confirmed RIVM examined breast milk from 1,629 women and tested for 29 PFAS. — Stated on the RIVM publication page. source
- confirmed PFAS was detected in every sample, and in 82 per cent the level was below the risk threshold. — RIVM reports both findings. source
- confirmed Four PFAS were found in 93 per cent of the samples. — RIVM names PFOS, PFOA, PFNA and PFHxS. source
- confirmed Since 2026, member states have been required to monitor PFAS in drinking water. — The European Commission states this obligation. source
Editor's note
The measurement results come from an RIVM study. The publication does not state a peer-review status; individual conclusions about health or treatment cannot be drawn from it.Sources
- PFAS in moedermelk van Nederlandse vrouwen — RIVM
- PFAS pollution — Europese Commissie
- Regels voor PFAS — Rijksoverheid
More on this in Dutch media
- Het Parool — „pfas moedermelk”
- Trouw — „pfas moedermelk”
- NRC — „pfas moedermelk”