The linked study reported 7-337 ng of PFOA emitted per pan, over the span of 20 minutes. According to [1], the concentration of PFOA in the average american's blood is 2.1 μg/L, which is orders of magnitude more. I concede that there's technically some PFOAs left over in pans, but I stand by my claims that the pans themselves are a non-issue.
I don't dispute that the amounts are "pertinent", whatever that means, but going back to the original claim of the pans being "poisonous", I'm not sure the concentration is high enough to warrant that. The first result for maximum allowed concentration for PFAS is drinking water says it's 0.3 ug/L[1]. It's hard to compare drinking water standards to atmospheric standards, but at least intuitively it seems to be several of orders of magnitude higher than what's being emitted from pans during normal use. Given that, it seems a bit irresponsible to call pans "poisonous" when they're meeting all safety standards. I mean, arsenic is poisonous, a detectable amount can be found in most rice, and people eat a lot of rice, but it still seems a bit irresponsible to call rice "poisonous".
According to this [1] the limit for PFAS in the states ranges from 13 ng/L - 1000 ng/L. So it’s on the same order of magnitude. I also would guess that the limits are conservative, just because it’s so wide-spread already.
Plastic is made from oil. Do you think there's literally oil in your plastic water bottle?