The New Frontiers in Endocrine Disruption Research and Policy

Since the 1991 Wingspread Consensus Statement, the field of endocrine disruption has emerged as a distinct and complex area that continues to challenge conventional approaches to toxicology and risk assessment. Nonetheless, despite substantial scientific advances, including the identification of over 1,000 Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals (EDCs), the description of nonmonotonic dose–response relationships, and the elucidation of multiple mechanisms of action, regulatory progress continues to lag. Recent stagnation in research investment into EDCs reflects a persistent tension between robust scientific evidence and policy implementation for environmental chemicals, which is especially salient for those bearing the unique properties and concerns of endocrine disruptors. In this article, we delineate the lull in EDC research that began in the mid-to-late 2010s and discuss how per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) have refocused public, scientific, and regulatory attention away from EDCs. While PFAS qualify as EDCs, their structural similarity and environmental persistence enable regulatory pathways that circumvent traditional research bottlenecks confronting other endocrine disruptors. This divergence presents both opportunities and potential drawbacks: while PFAS regulation may revitalize the broader EDC field, overemphasis on PFAS could perpetuate longstanding challenges in chemical prioritization, mixture assessment, and cumulative risk evaluation. We highlight state-level initiatives in Maine, Minnesota, and Washington as promising models for adaptive regulation. Moving forward, coordinated action among states, industry, academia, and civil society will be essential to advancing protective EDC policy while maintaining scientific rigor and feasibility.