Watch the video on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrBnhOYF6A4
Description:
Are you concerned about "forever chemicals" in your water, food, and everyday products?
PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) are a group of over 12,000 man-made chemicals designed to repel oil and water, found in everything from non-stick cookware to firefighting foam. But these "forever chemicals" don't break down in the environment or our bodies, leading to growing concerns about their impact on our health and the safety of our planet.
In this video, we dive deep into the PFAS crisis, uncovering the broken trust between corporations, regulators, and the public. We'll explain:
- What PFAS are and why they're EVERYWHERE
- The disturbing history of PFAS
- The potential health risks associated with PFAS exposure
- Evidence of research suppression and corporate cover-ups
- What YOU can do to protect yourself and your community
- Individual actions
- Collective actions
We'll explore the ethical and regulatory considerations surrounding PFAS contamination, including the need for transparency, accountability, and stricter regulations to limit PFAS production and exposure.
Learn about ongoing research, innovative remediation technologies, and the long-term strategies being developed to mitigate the risks of PFAS. Discover how you can make informed choices, advocate for policy changes, and support organizations working to address PFAS contamination.
Join the conversation! What are your thoughts on the PFAS crisis? Have you been personally affected by PFAS contamination? Let us know in the comments below!
Don't forget to like this video and subscribe to our channel for more deep dives on timely and relevant topics. Together, we can create a healthier and more sustainable future.
- Forever Chemicals, Broken Trust: The PFAS Crisis Explained
- PFAS Contamination: Identification, Mitigation, and Long-Term Strategies
- Assessing and Mitigating PFAS Exposure Risks: A Multi-Pronged Approach
- PFAS Policy and Legal Reforms: Transparency, Accountability, Protection
- PFAS: Properties, Classifications, and Uses
- PFAS: Health Risks, Effects, and Research Summary
- PFAS Exposure Routes and Sources
- PFAS Testing and Biomonitoring: A Comprehensive Overview
- Reducing PFAS Exposure: A Guide
- PFAS Detoxification: Blood and Plasma Donation Efficacy
- PFAS Environmental Remediation Technologies and Innovations
- PFAS Contamination: Ethics, Regulations, and Governmental Actions
- PFAS: Firefighting, Research, Health Impacts, and Remediation
- PFAS: History, Health Impacts, and Regulatory Response
- PFAS: Everyday Exposure Sources and Reduction Strategies
- FOXDIE and PFAS: A Comparative Analysis of Bioaccumulation and Risks
- PFAS: Exposure, Health Concerns, and Reduction Strategies
- PFAS: Arguments For and Against Purging and Prevention
- PFAS Stakeholders: Companies, Researchers, Agencies, and Affected Groups
- PFAS: Trends in Awareness, Research, Regulation, and Remediation
- PFAS Controversies: Health, Ethics, and Regulation
To effectively identify and address historical PFAS contamination sites from firefighting foams, communities can take several steps [1-5]:
• Identify potential contamination sites: Areas where firefighting foams containing PFAS were used extensively since the 1970s, such as fire stations, fire training bases, airports, military facilities, and industrial facilities, are likely contamination sites [4-6].
• Conduct thorough testing: Test the soil and groundwater in and around potential contamination sites to determine the extent of PFAS contamination [3, 7]. The Minnesota Department of Health developed analytical methods tailored to PFAS found in 3M waste disposal sites and to evaluate Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) and other sites [8].
• Assess exposure pathways: Identify how people might be exposed to PFAS in contaminated areas. The primary exposure route to PFAS in non-occupational settings is likely ingestion, including drinking contaminated water and eating contaminated foods [9]. Inhalation is the most common pathway in occupational settings and for people living near fluorochemical plants or incinerators [10].
• Engage with stakeholders: Collaborate with environmental and health agencies, community members, and other stakeholders to gather information and develop solutions [7, 11-13].
• Implement mitigation strategies: Implement strategies to reduce or eliminate PFAS exposure, such as providing alternative water sources, installing filtration systems, and remediating contaminated soil and water [9, 12, 14-17]. In the Greater Cincinnati area, water filtering techniques resulted in a 40-60% reduction in PFOA levels [15].
Long-term strategies to mitigate the ongoing risk of exposure from legacy PFAS pollutants include [2, 11, 14, 18, 19]:
• Establish exposure surveillance systems: Create systems to monitor and track potential harms associated with chemical exposures [2].
• Update clinical guidance: Regularly update clinical guidance for managing PFAS exposure based on emerging scientific evidence [2].
• Support research: Promote further research to understand the clinical effects of reducing PFAS levels in the body [11, 18, 20, 21].
• Develop remediation technologies: Invest in developing and implementing effective technologies for PFAS remediation in liquids, such as granular activated carbon, ion exchange, and membrane filtration [17, 22, 23].
• Implement stricter regulations: Tighten regulations on PFAS production and usage to lessen human exposure [24].
• Phase out PFAS: Adopt plans to phase out all but essential uses of PFAS [24, 25].
• Promote alternatives: Encourage the use of fluorine-free alternatives in firefighting foams and other products [17, 26, 27].
• Blood and plasma donations: Regular blood or plasma donations can reduce blood PFAS levels [4, 6, 28, 29].
To accurately assess cumulative PFAS exposure risks across different populations, public health officials and regulatory agencies can adopt comprehensive, multi-pronged approaches that consider geographical location, occupation, dietary habits, and consumer product usage. These assessments can then inform targeted interventions to reduce exposure and protect vulnerable groups [1, 2].
Exposure Assessment Strategies:
• Geographical Location: Identify communities with known or suspected PFAS contamination through environmental sampling of water sources, soil, and air [2-4]. Use geographical information systems (GIS) to map contamination levels and overlay demographic data to identify vulnerable populations living in affected areas [5, 6].
• Occupational Exposure: Implement exposure monitoring programs in industries where PFAS are used, such as fluorochemical production plants, manufacturing facilities, and firefighting [7-9]. Regularly test blood PFAS levels in exposed workers and provide training on exposure reduction strategies [5, 8].
• Dietary Habits: Conduct dietary surveys and food sampling to determine the levels of PFAS in commonly consumed foods, including fish, meat, dairy products, and processed foods [2, 10, 11]. Develop targeted dietary guidelines for populations at high risk of exposure through food, such as those who consume large amounts of local fish or game [5, 12].
• Consumer Product Usage: Assess the presence of PFAS in consumer products such as non-stick cookware, stain-resistant fabrics, personal care products, and food packaging [1, 2, 13]. Educate consumers about products that may contain PFAS and provide guidance on safer alternatives [5, 14].
Multi-Pronged Approaches:
• Biomonitoring Programs: Establish national biomonitoring programs to measure PFAS levels in representative samples of the population [15, 16]. Use this data to establish baseline exposure levels, identify trends, and assess the effectiveness of interventions [17, 18].
• Exposure Surveillance Systems: Create exposure surveillance systems to track potential sources of PFAS contamination and identify communities with high exposures [15, 16]. This may include monitoring drinking water quality, industrial discharges, and waste disposal sites [2].
• Risk Communication: Communicate potential health effects of PFAS, limitations of testing, and benefits and harms of PFAS testing [17, 19]. Provide clear and accessible information to the public about sources of exposure and steps they can take to reduce their risk [4, 5, 14].
• Clinical Guidance and Testing: Offer PFAS blood testing to patients likely to have a history of elevated exposure [17]. Discussions about PFAS testing should include information about how PFAS exposure occurs, potential health effects of PFAS, limitations of PFAS testing, and the benefits and harms of PFAS testing [19].
• Regulatory Measures: Enforce stricter regulations on the use and disposal of PFAS, including setting enforceable cleanup standards, limiting industrial discharges, and restricting the use of PFAS in consumer products [20-23].
Targeted Interventions for Vulnerable Groups:
• Pregnant women and infants: Counsel parents of infants on PFAS exposure, discussing infant feeding and steps to lower sources of exposure [7, 17]. Because PFAS can transfer to the fetus during pregnancy and in early life through formula or breastfeeding, these groups merit targeted intervention [7].
• Communities with contaminated water: Provide water filtration systems or alternative water sources to communities with contaminated drinking water [5, 24, 25].
• Occupational groups: Provide resources and guidance for occupational health and safety professionals about reducing exposure [5].
By integrating these approaches, public health officials and regulatory agencies can more effectively assess and mitigate the risks associated with PFAS exposure, ultimately protecting the health of all populations [15, 26].
To ensure transparency, accountability, and ethical conduct in the chemical industry and regulatory bodies regarding PFAS, and to better protect and support whistleblowers and independent researchers, the following legal and policy reforms are necessary:
• Transparency in Research and Data:
◦ Mandatory disclosure of internal studies: Require chemical companies to disclose all internal studies related to the health and environmental impacts of PFAS [1].
◦ Open data policies: Implement open data policies for government agencies, ensuring that research findings, risk assessments, and monitoring data related to PFAS are publicly accessible [2].
◦ Independent review boards: Establish independent review boards to evaluate the scientific rigor and objectivity of research funded by the chemical industry [3].
• Accountability for Misconduct:
◦ Stricter penalties: Impose stricter penalties for corporations that suppress research, conceal information about health risks, or mislead regulatory agencies regarding PFAS [4].
◦ Personal liability: Extend liability to corporate executives and managers who are aware of the risks associated with PFAS and fail to take appropriate action to protect public health and the environment.
◦ Funding for remediation: Require companies to pay for investigations and cleanup of PFAS contamination [5].
• Protection for Whistleblowers and Researchers:
◦ Whistleblower protection laws: Strengthen whistleblower protection laws to shield individuals who report misconduct or illegal activities related to PFAS from retaliation [6].
◦ Confidential reporting channels: Establish confidential reporting channels within regulatory agencies and research institutions to encourage individuals to come forward with information about potential harm [7].
◦ Funding for independent research: Increase funding for independent researchers to conduct studies on the health and environmental effects of PFAS, free from industry influence [8, 9].
◦ Legal support: Provide legal support and resources for whistleblowers and independent researchers who face legal challenges or other obstacles in bringing forward evidence of potential harm [10].
• Regulatory Reforms:
◦ Designating PFAS as hazardous substances: Designate PFAS chemicals as "hazardous substances" under Superfund law [11].
◦ National drinking water standards: Establish national drinking water standards for PFAS contamination [12].
◦ Effluent guidelines: Revise effluent guidelines for businesses that discharge PFAS in their wastewater [13].
◦ Restrictions on use: Implement restrictions on the use of PFAS in various products and applications, phasing out non-essential uses [12].
• Ethical Conduct:
◦ Ethics training: Require ethics training for employees in the chemical industry and regulatory bodies to promote a culture of transparency, accountability, and ethical decision-making [14].
◦ Conflict of interest policies: Strengthen conflict of interest policies for government officials and advisors to prevent undue influence from the chemical industry [15].
◦ Code of conduct: Develop a code of conduct for the chemical industry that emphasizes the importance of protecting public health and the environment, and encourages responsible innovation and risk management [7].
Here are some answers to your questions about PFAS, based on the provided sources:
Topic: What are PFAS?
• PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) are a group of synthetic organofluorine chemical compounds characterized by multiple fluorine atoms attached to an alkyl chain [1, 2]. These chemicals have unique properties because of the carbon-fluorine bond, which is one of the strongest in organic chemistry, making them resistant to degradation [3, 4]. This resistance to breaking down is why they are often called "forever chemicals" [1, 4, 5]. When PFAS do break down, they result in other PFAS compounds [5].
• There are estimates of between 8,000 and 15,000 chemicals that fall under the PFAS classification [2, 6]. PFAS can be generally classified based on their chemical structures and properties, and some of the most commonly found PFAS in the environment and human bodies include:
◦ Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) [7, 8]
◦ Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) [7, 8]
◦ Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS) [7]
◦ Perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA) [7, 9]
◦ Perfluorodecanoic acid (PFDA) [7]
◦ Perfluoroundecanoic acid (PFuDA) [7]
◦ Methyl-perfluorooctane sulfonamide (MeFOSAA) [7]
• PFAS have been used in consumer products around the world since about the 1950s [3]. PFAS are used in various everyday products [3]. For example, PFAS are used to:
◦ Keep food from sticking to packaging or cookware [3]
◦ Make clothes and carpets stain-resistant [3]
◦ Create firefighting foam that is more effective [3]
◦ Water and stain proof fabrics [10]
◦ Non-stick cookware [10, 11]
◦ Water-resistant materials and paints [12]
◦ Microwave popcorn bags [11]
◦ Cosmetics and personal care products [1]
Here are some answers to your questions about the health effects of PFAS, based on the provided sources:
Topic: Health Effects of PFAS
• Exposure to PFAS has been linked to several health risks [1]. The level of exposure and individual factors can influence the severity of these effects [2]. Some of the health risks include:
◦ Certain cancers [1]
◦ Thyroid dysfunction [1]
◦ Small reductions in birth weight [1]
◦ High cholesterol [1]
◦ Altered metabolism and body weight regulation [3]
◦ Risk of childhood obesity [3]
◦ Reduced ability of the immune system to fight infections [3]
◦ Hypertensive disorders in pregnancy [4]
◦ Ulcerative colitis [4]
◦ Decreased fertility [4]
◦ Reduced infant and fetal growth and developmental issues in children [4]
• PFAS can affect various organs and systems in the body [5]. Fetuses and infants can be exposed to PFAS through the placenta or breast milk, potentially leading to developmental issues [2, 6]. The National Toxicology Program (NTP) has stated that PFOA and PFOS can suppress the antibody response and pose a hazard to the immune system [3].
• Studies have linked PFAS exposure to an increased risk of certain cancers [1, 4]. These include kidney, prostate, and testicular cancer [4]. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified PFOA as carcinogenic to humans based on sufficient evidence in animals and strong mechanistic evidence in exposed humans [7]. IARC has also determined that PFOS is possibly carcinogenic to humans [7].
• PFAS exposure during pregnancy can lead to several adverse outcomes [4, 6]. These include reduced infant and fetal growth, hypertensive disorders, and interference with the body's natural hormones [4, 8]. Studies also suggest that PFAS exposure may delay the onset of puberty in girls, potentially leading to long-term health issues such as a higher incidence of breast cancer, renal disease, and thyroid disease [3].
• PFAS exposure can impact the immune system [3, 9]. The NTP has concluded that PFOA and PFOS can suppress the antibody response and were a hazard to immune system function in humans [3]. This can reduce the body's ability to fight infections [3].
Here are some answers to your questions about PFAS exposure routes, based on the provided sources:
Topic: PFAS Exposure Routes
• People are exposed to PFAS through various pathways, but the most common include consuming contaminated water or food, using products made with PFAS, or breathing air containing PFAS [1]. PFAS can be ingested through contaminated dust [2]. Exposure may also occur through inhalation, especially for those living near fluorochemical plants or incinerators, and in occupational settings [2]. PFAS can transfer to a fetus during pregnancy and in early life through formula made with contaminated water or through breastfeeding [2].
• Drinking water is a significant source of PFAS contamination [1, 3]. This contamination often stems from industrial sites, military fire training areas, and wastewater treatment plants [4]. In the Greater Cincinnati area, research indicated that exposures to a specific PFAS chemical, PFOA, were likely due to contamination of the water supply [5]. Implementing water filtering techniques led to a 40-60% reduction in PFOA levels in the girls and other residents [5]. If individuals have elevated PFAS levels in their drinking water, they should filter their water [6].
• Beyond drinking water, common sources of PFAS exposure include:
◦ Food: PFAS can be present in fish, wildlife, meat, and dairy, especially in areas of known contamination [6].
◦ Consumer Products: These include water and stain-resistant fabrics, non-stick cookware, and firefighting foams [7]. PFAS are used in household items including non-stick pans, waterproof fabrics, and microwave popcorn bags [8]. They are also used in cosmetics and personal care products [9].
◦ Occupational Settings: Workers in industries such as aerospace, automotive, construction, and electronics may be exposed [1]. Those with occupational exposure to PFAS should consult with occupational health and safety professionals about reducing exposure [6].
• Dermal exposure to PFAS is possible but has not been well-studied [2]. PFAS compounds are readily absorbed through human skin [10].
Here are some answers to your questions about PFAS testing and biomonitoring, based on the provided sources:
Topic: PFAS Testing and Biomonitoring
• PFAS blood testing measures the levels of specific PFAS chemicals in a person’s blood at the time of the test [1]. Clinicians should offer PFAS blood testing to patients with a history of elevated exposure to PFAS [2]. People in communities with local contamination sources or those with high workplace exposure may also seek testing [3]. Testing offers an opportunity to identify people who may need to reduce PFAS exposure and who are at increased risk of certain health outcomes [4].
• A PFAS blood test indicates how much PFAS has entered the body over time, and results can be compared to levels found in other groups of people to determine whether your levels are elevated [1]. The results can provide a baseline to monitor changes over time and inform conversations with a doctor about reducing PFAS exposure and monitoring your health [1, 5]. However, a blood test cannot tell you where the PFAS came from or how long you've been exposed [6]. It also doesn’t directly indicate whether any health conditions you are experiencing were caused by PFAS exposure or definitively predict future health problems [6].
• PFAS blood tests can be ordered through a doctor, who may use specific codes for the test [7]. If this isn't possible, a lab can be contacted directly [7]. Several labs in North America offer PFAS blood testing, including AXYS Analytical, EmpowerDX, and Eurofins [8]. NMS Labs provides blood testing to entities like Quest and LabCorp, which offer testing to individuals through clinicians [8]. The cost of a PFAS blood test typically ranges from $400 to $600, but health insurance may not cover it [9, 10]. New Hampshire requires insurance providers to cover test costs [11].
• Detection limits refer to the lowest levels of PFAS in blood that a lab can identify and measure [12]. Lower detection limits are preferable [12]. When choosing a lab, consider these questions [10]:
◦ What is the cost, and does it include shipping and a blood draw? [10]
◦ Do they conduct testing for individuals or only for multiple samples? [10]
◦ How do I get a blood sample, and are there clinics they work with? [10]
◦ How many PFAS chemicals does the lab test for, and which ones? [12]
◦ What are the lab’s detection limits? [12]
◦ Does the lab test both linear and branched isomers? [13]
◦ How long does it take to get my results? [14]
◦ Does the lab work with any insurance companies? [14]
• Clinicians can use PFAS test results to inform clinical care, considering publications from organizations like the Human Biomonitoring Commission in Germany and the European Food Safety Authority [15]. These organizations have determined guidance values:
◦ Normal levels are considered below 2 ng/mL (nanograms per milliliter) [4].
◦ There is a potential for adverse effects, especially in sensitive populations, between 2 and 20 ng/mL [4].
◦ There is an increased risk of adverse effects above 20 ng/mL [4]. The report advises ATSDR to update its guidance to say clinicians should offer PFAS blood testing to patients who are likely to have a history of elevated exposure to PFAS [2].
• Some limitations of PFAS testing include [9, 15]:
◦ Expense: Testing can be costly and may not be covered by health insurance [9, 10].
◦ Limited scope: The maximum number of PFAS that can be tested is around 40, a small fraction of the thousands of PFAS that exist [9].
◦ Timing: Testing measures exposure at the time of sample collection and might not reflect past exposure levels [16].
◦ Inability to predict outcomes: Test results cannot indicate or predict the likelihood of developing a particular condition [15].
• The sources do not specify how frequently at-risk individuals should be tested.
Here are some answers to your questions about reducing PFAS exposure, based on the provided sources:
Topic: Reducing PFAS Exposure
• Practical steps people can take to reduce their exposure to PFAS in their daily lives include [1]:
◦ Determine if and how they might be exposed to PFAS by talking with clinicians [1].
◦ If you have elevated PFAS levels in your drinking water, filter your water [2].
◦ If living in areas of known PFAS contamination, be aware that PFAS can be present in fish, wildlife, meat, and dairy [2].
◦ Discuss infant feeding with clinicians and take steps to lower sources of exposure to PFAS for infants [3].
◦ Consider regular blood or plasma donations, which have been found to reduce blood PFAS levels [4]. However, it is important to consider that when donating blood with PFAS, the recipient is effectively receiving blood containing PFAS [5].
• Carbon filters can remove PFAS from water, reducing exposures in communities dealing with PFAS-contaminated drinking water [6].
• If living in areas of known PFAS contamination, be aware that PFAS can be present in fish, wildlife, meat, and dairy [2].
• For individuals with occupational exposure to PFAS, consulting with occupational health and safety professionals about reducing exposure is recommended [2]. Several strategies can protect those at greatest risk of occupational exposure to PFAS, including exposure monitoring, regular blood testing, and the use of PFAS-free alternatives [7].
• PFAS-free alternatives include fluorine-free firefighting foam and plant-based ski wax [7].
Here are some answers to your questions about PFAS removal and detoxification, based on the provided sources:
Topic: PFAS Removal and Detoxification
• It is possible to remove PFAS from the body. Regular blood or plasma donations have been found to reduce blood PFAS levels [1]. A study of Australian firefighters showed that both blood and plasma donations resulted in a significant reduction in serum PFAS levels [2].
• Plasma donation has proven more effective at reducing PFAS levels than blood donation [3]. In a study, plasma donors reduced their PFAS levels by 30%, while blood donors experienced a 10% reduction [2]. Researchers suggest that plasma donation was more effective because the firefighters in the plasma donation group donated every six weeks, while the blood donation group donated every 12 weeks [4, 5]. Plasma PFAS concentrations are also about two times higher than blood PFAS concentrations, which could make plasma donation more efficient at reducing the body burden of PFAS chemicals [4, 6]. More research is needed to determine the ideal frequency and volumes of donations that can be effective for lowering PFAS, balancing the treatment efficacy with the obstacles to frequent donations [4, 7].
• There are potential risks associated with donating blood to remove PFAS. When you donate blood with PFAS, the recipient is effectively receiving blood containing PFAS [8]. It's important to remember that PFAS are already ubiquitous, and blood recipients generally need blood much more urgently than they need to worry about PFAS [8]. The American Red Cross states that there are no regulatory limitations on PFAS in blood due to the absence of any documented evidence of harm [9].
• There may be other ways to remove PFAS from your body. Researchers explained that the reduction in levels of the toxic chemicals was likely because PFAS are bound to proteins primarily found in the serum [5, 10].
Here are some answers to your questions about the environmental remediation of PFAS, based on the provided sources:
Topic: Environmental Remediation of PFAS
• Several technologies are currently available for remediating PFAS in liquids [1]. These technologies can be applied to:
◦ Drinking water supplies [1]
◦ Groundwater [1]
◦ Industrial wastewater [1]
◦ Surface water [1]
◦ Landfill leachate [1] These technologies include [2]:
◦ Sorption using granular activated carbon or biochar [2]
◦ Membrane filtration, including reverse osmosis and nanofiltration [2]
◦ Precipitation/flocculation/coagulation [2]
◦ Redox manipulation, such as chemical oxidation and reduction technologies [2]
◦ Supercritical water oxidation [2]
◦ Low Energy Electrochemical Oxidation (EOx) [2]
◦ Photodegradation [2]
◦ Foam fractionation [2]
◦ Ion exchange [2] The effectiveness of these technologies can be influenced by the influent concentrations of PFAS, as well as other water quality parameters such as pH [1]. The type of PFAS remediation technology selected often depends on the PFAS contamination levels and the combination of short- and long-chain PFAS substances present, in conjunction with the site-specific water chemistry and cross-contaminants present in the liquid stream [3]. More complex waters such as landfill leachates and WWTP waters require more robust treatment solutions which are less vulnerable to blockage [3].
• Foam fractionation utilizes the air/water interface of a rising air bubble to collect and harvest PFAS molecules [4]. The hydrophobic tail of many long-chain PFAS compounds adheres to this interface and rises to the water surface with the air bubble, where they present as a foam for harvesting and further concentration [4]. This technique is a derivation of traditional absorptive bubble separation techniques and offers a simplistic, low-operational-cost alternative for complex PFAS-impacted waters [4].
• Innovative approaches being developed to destroy PFAS include:
◦ Nanoreactors: The Michigan State Superfund Research Center is developing energy-efficient nanoreactors capable of breaking the carbon-fluorine bond that keeps PFAS from degrading [5].
◦ Plant-based remediation: There are researchers teaming up with a Tribe and community to fight PFAS with plants [6].
◦ Supercritical water oxidation: A 2022 study found that supercritical water oxidation destroyed 99% of the PFAS present in a water sample [7]. During this process, oxidizing substances are added to PFAS-contaminated water, and then the liquid is heated above its critical temperature of 374 degrees Celsius at a pressure of more than 220 bars [7].
◦ Electrochemical oxidation system: A possible solution for PFAS-contaminated wastewater treatment has been developed by the Michigan State University-Fraunhofer team, which uses boron-doped diamond electrodes for an electrochemical oxidation system that is capable of breaking PFAS molecular bonds, essentially eliminating the contaminates and leaving fresh water [8, 9].
◦ Activated Carbon at lower temperatures: Researchers at the University of Missouri demonstrated in small scale the degradation of PFAS chemicals can be done using readily available Activated Carbon at significantly lower temperatures that previously needed, 300C as opposed to 700C [10].
Here are some answers to your questions about the ethical and regulatory considerations surrounding PFAS contamination, based on the provided sources:
Topic: Ethical and Regulatory Considerations
• Regarding ethical considerations surrounding PFAS contamination:
◦ Companies like DuPont and 3M knew about the toxicity of PFAS as early as the 1970s but suppressed unfavorable research and distorted public discourse [1].
◦ There are ethical questions around donating blood to reduce PFAS, as recipients of blood donations would then receive blood containing PFAS [2]. However, it's important to consider that PFAS are ubiquitous, and blood recipients generally need blood more urgently than they need to worry about PFAS [2].
• Regarding regulations to limit PFAS production and contamination:
◦ The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants has listed PFOS, its salts, and perfluorooctanesulfonyl fluoride, as well as PFOA and PFHxS as persistent organic pollutants due to their toxic nature [3].
◦ Some jurisdictions, such as China and the European Union, are planning further reductions and phase-outs [4].
◦ The United States, Israel, and Malaysia have not ratified the agreement, and the chemical industry has lobbied governments to reduce regulations or has moved production to countries with less regulation, such as Thailand [4].
◦ Maine has passed legislation banning the sale of new carpets or fabric treatments that contain intentionally added PFAS as of 2023, and the sale of any products containing added PFAS by 2030 [5].
◦ Connecticut, Minnesota, New York, Vermont and Washington have also taken steps to limit PFAS production [5].
◦ The EPA issued health advisories for four specific PFASs in June 2022, significantly lowering their safe threshold levels for drinking water [6]. While not enforceable, these health advisories are intended to be acted on by states in setting their own drinking water standards [6].
◦ In April 2024, the EPA issued a final rule that requires polluters to pay for investigations and cleanup of PFOA and PFOS [6].
◦ Drinking water utilities are required to monitor PFAS levels and may receive subsidies to do so [7]. There are also regulations regarding wastewater (effluent guidelines) for industries that use PFASs in the manufacturing process as well as biosolids (processed wastewater sludge used as fertilizer) [7].
◦ The Biden-Harris Administration proposed the first-ever national standard to protect communities from PFAS in drinking water [8].
• Regarding governmental actions to address PFAS contamination:
◦ The NIEHS uses its research to help federal and state regulatory, environmental, and public health agencies develop new standards to protect people's health [9].
◦ The Biden-Harris Administration is taking action to protect communities from PFAS pollution [10].
◦ In New Hampshire, the Department of Environmental Services submitted a final rulemaking proposal for new, lower maximum contaminant levels (MCLs)/drinking water standards and ambient groundwater quality standards (AGQS) for four PFAS [11].
◦ The state of Michigan established an enforceable cleanup standard of 70 ppt for PFOA and PFOS, individually or combined [12].
◦ The Michigan PFAS Action Response Team (MPART) was launched in 2017 to investigate sources and locations of PFAS contamination, take action to protect people's drinking water, and keep the public informed [13].
• Regarding what the EU is doing to combat PFAS:
◦ The European Council requested the European Commission to develop an action plan to eliminate all non-essential uses of PFAS [14].
◦ Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden submitted a restriction proposal based on the REACH regulation to achieve a European ban on the production, use, sale, and import of PFAS [14].
Here are some answers to your questions about PFAS in firefighting, research, and emerging trends, based on the provided sources:
Topic: PFAS in Firefighting
• Fluorine-free firefighting foams are firefighting foams that do not use fluorochemicals [1]. They were developed and marketed as manufacturers of firefighting foam "moved away from PFOS and its derivatives as a result of legislative pressure" [1].
Topic: Research and Emerging Trends
• Current research areas related to PFAS include [2]:
◦ How, where, and the extent to which people are exposed to PFAS [2].
◦ How PFAS can affect organs and systems in the body [2].
◦ How and where PFAS move through the environment, such as through water, air, and dust [2].
◦ Determining ways to identify, detect, and measure PFAS in the environment [2].
◦ Development of technologies and devices to get rid of or destroy PFAS [2].
◦ Determining effective ways to tell people about PFAS risk and what they can do to prevent or reduce their exposure [2].
• The biggest unanswered questions about PFAS are [3]:
◦ More research is needed to fully understand all sources of exposure [3].
◦ If and how they may cause health problems [3].
• The NIEHS supports research on PFAS in three main ways [3]:
◦ NIEHS funds research grants primarily at universities, but also non-profit research centers and a few small businesses [3].
◦ Some NIEHS scientists conduct PFAS research at in-house laboratories [3].
◦ NIEHS also collaborates with federal partners [3].
• Key projects NIEHS is funding include [4]:
◦ The Sources, Transport, Exposure, and Effects of PFASs (STEEP) project, at the University of Rhode Island, is identifying sources of PFAS contamination, assessing human health effects, and educating communities on ways to reduce exposure [4].
◦ The Michigan State Superfund Research Center is developing energy-efficient nanoreactors capable of breaking the carbon-fluorine bond that keeps PFAS from degrading [4].
◦ Scientists at the University of California, Berkeley, are working on options to contain aqueous film-forming foams used for firefighting, a major source of PFAS contamination [4].
◦ The Brown University Superfund Research Center has developed databases that exploit land use data to identify cities and towns at high risk for PFAS exposure [4].
◦ Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) grantee CycloPure, Inc., has developed a new way to remove hazardous PFAS from water and provide affordable water pitcher-based filters [5].
◦ A team at the North Carolina State University SRP Center is studying alligators living in PFAS-contaminated water to understand possible effects on the immune system and developed a new high-throughput tool to quickly characterize how PFAS may be transported within the body and potentially cause harm [5].
◦ Another SBIR project by EnChem Engineering, Inc. is developing an innovative technology to speed up removal of PFAS at Superfund sites [5].
◦ SRP-funded small business AxNano developed a portable tool that relies on nanoparticles to quickly detect PFAS in samples, offering a more affordable and efficient method than traditional mass spectrometry [5].
• PFAS mixtures are more harmful to health than exposure to a single compound [6].
• Emerging technologies and devices being developed to detect and remove PFAS from the environment include [5, 7, 8]:
◦ Nanoreactors that can break the carbon-fluorine bond [4].
◦ Plant-based remediation [6].
◦ Water pitcher-based filters [5].
◦ A high-throughput tool to quickly characterize how PFAS may be transported within the body [5].
◦ A portable tool that relies on nanoparticles to quickly detect PFAS in samples [5].
◦ Foam Fractionation, which utilizes the air/water interface of a rising air bubble to collect and harvest PFAS molecules [7].
◦ Activated Carbon at lower temperatures to degrade PFAS chemicals [8].
Here are some answers to your questions about the historical context and case studies related to PFAS, based on the provided sources:
Topic: Historical Context and Case Studies
• Regarding the history of PFAS use and early evidence of harmful effects:
◦ PFAS were originally developed in the 1930s and were used in a variety of industrial and consumer products [1].
◦ In 1954, an employee at DuPont received an inquiry about C8's "possible toxicity" [2].
◦ A 1955 study found that "PFAS binds to proteins in human blood" [2].
◦ In the 1970s, researchers at 3M documented the presence of PFOS and PFOA in fish [3].
◦ Early occupational studies revealed elevated levels of fluorochemicals in the blood of exposed industrial workers, but cited no ill health effects [4].
◦ Since the 1970s, DuPont and 3M were aware that PFAS was "highly toxic when inhaled and moderately toxic when ingested" [5].
◦ From 2005 to 2013, a science panel measured PFOA serum concentrations in 69,000 individuals from around DuPont's Washington Works Plant and found a mean concentration of 83 ng/mL, compared to 4 ng/mL in a standard population of Americans [6].
◦ This panel reported probable links between elevated PFOA blood concentration and hypercholesterolemia, ulcerative colitis, thyroid disease, testicular cancer, kidney cancer as well as pregnancy-induced hypertension and preeclampsia [6].
• Regarding the story of the Teflon cover-up:
◦ PFAS came into use with the invention of Teflon in 1938 to make fluoropolymer coatings and products that resist heat, oil, stains, grease, and water [7].
◦ DuPont used several strategies to influence science and regulation, most notably, suppressing unfavorable research and distorting public discourse [5].
◦ In 2018, under the Presidency of Donald Trump, White House staff and the EPA pressured the U.S. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry to suppress a study that showed PFASs to be even more dangerous than previously thought [5].
• Regarding the Weinberg proposal:
◦ In 2003, the Weinberg Group's then Vice-President of Product Defense wrote a letter urging DuPont to prepare a defense strategy for future litigation related to the health impacts of PFOAs [8].
◦ The letter mentioned that, "DuPont must shape the debate at all levels" and offered strategies which included the establishment of "blue ribbon panels", the coordination of papers on PFOA and on junk science, the "publication of papers and articles dispelling the alleged nexus between PFOA and teratogenicity as well as other claimed harm" [8].
• Regarding how agencies responded to studies on PFAS:
◦ In 1998, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) "was first alerted to the risks" of PFAS [9].
◦ In early 2018, three branches of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) exchanged chains of emails with multiple agencies to put pressure on the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) to censor a report that measured the "health effects" of PFAS [10].
• Regarding the scandal in Ronneby:
◦ This query is not specifically addressed in the provided documents.
Here are some answers to your questions about where PFAS might be found in everyday life, based on the provided sources:
Topic: PFAS in Everyday Life
• Beyond well-known sources, people might unexpectedly encounter PFAS in their daily routines via:
◦ Fish, wildlife, meat, and dairy in areas of known PFAS contamination [1].
◦ Dust [2].
◦ Personal care products, such as nail care products, fragrances, makeup, hair dyes and hair sprays [3].
◦ Plant-based straws, such as paper straws [4, 5].
◦ Food [6].
◦ Consumer products [6].
• PFAS in food packaging contributes to overall exposure [7-9]:
◦ PFAS are used to keep food from sticking to packaging [7].
◦ The FDA has made available testing results from surveys of processed foods [10].
◦ The FDA has made available results from the second round of testing for PFAS in foods from the general food supply [11].
◦ The FDA is making efforts for a voluntary phase-out by the industry of certain PFAS used in food packaging [11].
• Surprising products or materials that may contain PFAS, and what consumers can do to avoid them:
◦ PFAS are used in thousands of products, such as water and stain proof fabrics, non-stick cookware, and fire-fighting foams [12].
◦ PFAS are used to keep food from sticking to packaging or cookware and to make clothes and carpets resistant to stains [7].
◦ PFAS are used in waterproof fabric such as Nylon, yoga pants, carpets, shampoo, feminine hygiene products, mobile phone screens, wall paint, furniture, adhesives, food packaging, heat-resistant non-stick cooking surfaces such as Teflon, firefighting foam, and the insulation of electrical wire [9].
◦ Consumers with elevated PFAS in their drinking water should filter their water [1].
◦ The EPA has information available online regarding reducing exposure to PFAS in food, air, and water [13].
• The presence of PFAS in artificial turf or plant-based straws affects exposure:
◦ PFASs were found in many plant-based straws, such as paper straws [4, 5].
Here are some points of comparison between FOXDIE and PFAS, based on the sources:
Topic: Foxdie Comparison
• In terms of bioaccumulation, stealth, and unintended consequences:
◦ Both FOXDIE and PFAS accumulate in the body. PFAS accumulate in the bloodstream over time [1].
◦ Like FOXDIE, PFAS exposure can have unpredictable long-term health effects [2].
◦ Both FOXDIE and PFAS are linked to long-term health issues [1]. PFAS exposure has been linked to health issues like cancer and immune suppression [1].
◦ PFAS, developed for industrial purposes, have become an unintentional "slow-acting" hazard due to their widespread presence [1].
◦ The risks of FOXDIE were hidden from Snake, much like how PFAS contamination was downplayed for decades by corporations, despite known health risks [3].
• Regarding unpredictability and difficulty of removal from the body:
◦ PFAS exposure has unpredictable long-term health effects, and different individuals may be more susceptible to certain diseases based on genetics [2].
◦ PFAS are extremely difficult to eliminate from the body and the environment, requiring advanced filtration methods or years for the body to slowly excrete them [2].
◦ PFAS were toxic and built up in human blood, yet companies chose to suppress research rather than halt production, leading to global contamination [4].
Here's what you should know about PFAS and how to reduce them in your body:
What are PFAS?
• PFAS stands for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, a class of over 12,000 different synthetic chemicals [1].
• They're nicknamed "forever chemicals" because they don't degrade in our bodies [2].
• PFAS are used in many household items like non-stick pans, waterproof fabrics, and microwave popcorn bags [3]. They can also contaminate water, air, soil, crops, and animal products [3].
• Due to the large number of PFAS, assessing their risks is challenging, and more research is ongoing [4].
Where are PFAS found?
• PFAS are used in thousands of products because they are water and stain-proof [1]. This includes:
◦ Water and stain-resistant fabrics [1]
◦ Non-stick cookware [1, 3]
◦ Fire-fighting foams [1, 3]
◦ Microwave popcorn bags [3, 5]
◦ Food packaging [5]
• They're also used in industries like aerospace, automotive, construction, and electronics [6, 7].
• PFAS can leak into the environment over time, contaminating soil, water, and air [6]. Soil contamination can lead to higher PFAS levels in foods like rice, coffee, and animals raised on that soil [8].
• PFAS can be found in imported goods, even if they are not manufactured locally [9].
How are people exposed to PFAS?
• The primary way people are exposed is through ingestion, such as drinking contaminated water or eating contaminated food (vegetables, fish, wildlife, meat, or dairy products) [5]. Food contact materials like microwave popcorn bags and fast food packaging can also be sources [5].
• Exposure can also occur by ingesting dust containing PFAS [10].
• Inhalation is a common route in occupational settings and for people living near fluorochemical plants or incinerators [10].
• PFAS can transfer to a fetus during pregnancy and in early life through contaminated formula or breastfeeding [10, 11].
• Personal care products like nail care products, fragrances, makeup, hair dyes, and hair sprays can contribute to PFAS exposure, especially in pregnant women and lactating mothers [11].
What are the health concerns related to PFAS?
• Exposure to PFAS has been linked to various health effects, including:
◦ Certain cancers [1, 4, 8, 12, 13]
◦ Thyroid dysfunction [1, 4, 8, 14]
◦ Small reductions in birth weight [1]
◦ High cholesterol [1, 4, 8]
◦ Altered metabolism and body weight regulation [13]
◦ Reduced immune system function [4, 12, 13]
◦ Liver damage [13]
◦ Ulcerative colitis [4, 8, 14]
◦ Kidney cancer [4, 8, 14]
◦ Testicular cancer [4, 8, 14]
◦ Pregnancy-induced hypertension [8, 11]
◦ Decreased fertility [4]
◦ Developmental issues in children [4]
How can you reduce your exposure to PFAS?
• Identify potential sources: Talk with your doctor to determine how you might be exposed to PFAS [15].
• Occupational exposure: If you have occupational exposure, consult with occupational health and safety professionals about reducing it [15].
• Filter your water: If you have elevated PFAS levels in your drinking water, use a filter [15]. Carbon filters can remove PFAS from water [16].
• Be mindful of food sources: If you live in an area of known PFAS contamination, be aware that PFAS can be present in fish, wildlife, meat, and dairy [8, 15, 17-19].
• Infant feeding: If you're a parent, discuss infant feeding options and steps to lower PFAS exposure with your clinician [20].
• Avoid certain products: Limit the use of products that may contain PFAS, such as non-stick cookware, stain-resistant fabrics, and certain personal care items [1, 3, 5, 11, 21].
• Stay informed: Keep up-to-date with testing results and regulatory actions related to PFAS in food [22].
Can PFAS blood testing help?
• PFAS blood testing can show your exposure levels at the time of testing and might guide clinical follow-up [4, 23].
• Clinicians should offer PFAS blood testing to patients likely to have a history of elevated exposure [20].
• However, testing has limitations [21, 23, 24]:
◦ It can't tell you where the PFAS came from or how long you've been exposed [24].
◦ Low levels today don't mean you didn't have higher levels in the past [23].
◦ It can't predict if you'll develop a particular condition [23].
• Discussions about testing should include information on exposure, potential health effects, testing limitations, and the benefits and harms [21].
• Testing can be expensive, typically costing $400-$600 [25].
• If considering legal action, consult a lawyer before testing, as it may affect the statute of limitations [26].
How can you remove PFAS from your body?
• Donate blood or plasma: Regular blood or plasma donations can reduce PFAS levels [27-29]. A study showed plasma donors reduced their PFAS levels by 30%, and blood donors by 10% [29, 30]. Plasma donation may be more effective since PFAS concentrations are higher in plasma [31].
• Consult professionals: Discuss with your doctor whether blood or plasma donation is appropriate for you [15].
Additional considerations:
• More research is needed to determine the ideal frequency and volumes of donations for lowering PFAS [31, 32].
• It's not yet clear if reducing PFAS levels leads to improved long-term health outcomes [29, 32, 33].
• There's no identified PFAS threshold that poses an increased risk to blood recipients, but blood authorities should monitor the potential health effects [33, 34].
By understanding the sources of PFAS exposure and taking proactive steps, you can reduce your levels of these chemicals and protect your health.
Here's a breakdown of the arguments for and against purging PFAS from the body, avoiding future consumption, and preventing environmental release:
Arguments in Favor:
• Health Concerns: PFAS exposure has been linked to a range of adverse health outcomes, including certain cancers, thyroid dysfunction, reduced birth weight, high cholesterol, altered metabolism, reduced immunity, and liver damage [1, 2]. These concerns drive the desire to purge PFAS from the body and prevent further exposure [2, 3].
• Ubiquity and Persistence: PFAS are "forever chemicals" that persist in the environment and accumulate in the body over time [4-6]. They are found in many common household items and can contaminate water, air, soil, crops, and animal products, making exposure widespread [6-8].
• Bioaccumulation: PFAS bioaccumulate, meaning the body takes in more of these chemicals than it excretes over time [3]. This leads to increasing concentrations in tissues and organs, raising the risk of adverse health effects [3, 9].
• Exposure Pathways: People are exposed to PFAS through multiple pathways, including contaminated drinking water and food, inhalation, and dermal contact [2, 10-12]. Reducing exposure at each of these points is seen as crucial [2, 10-12].
• Medical Guidelines: Health agencies recommend blood testing for individuals with a history of elevated PFAS exposure, suggesting clinical follow-up and exposure reduction strategies [13-15].
• Reducing Blood Levels: Studies show that interventions like blood or plasma donation can effectively reduce PFAS levels in the body [16-18]. This provides a tangible means to lower the body burden of these chemicals [16-18].
• Ethical Considerations: Some sources raise ethical concerns about "offloading toxin-laced blood" onto blood recipients when donating blood to reduce PFAS [19]. However, it's also noted that blood recipients often need blood urgently, and there are currently no regulatory limitations on PFAS in blood due to a lack of documented harm to recipients [19, 20].
Arguments Against (or Considerations):
• Uncertainty about Safe Levels: The science is unresolved regarding safe levels of PFAS exposure [17]. This uncertainty can lead to debate about the necessity and urgency of purging PFAS [17].
• Exposure Complexity: PFAS can come from many different sources, making it difficult to pinpoint and eliminate specific sources of exposure [21]. A blood test cannot determine the source of PFAS or duration of exposure [21].
• Testing Limitations: PFAS blood tests have limitations, including the inability to determine the source or duration of exposure, and they cannot predict future health conditions [14, 21, 22].
• Blood Donation Concerns: Ethical questions exist around blood donations and the potential transfer of PFAS to blood recipients [19]. While current evidence suggests no documented harm, this remains a point of discussion [20].
• Incomplete Understanding of Health Outcomes: More research is needed to fully understand the long-term health outcomes of reducing PFAS levels in the body [18, 23, 24].
• Economic Factors: Mitigation and remediation efforts can be very costly [25]. Some sources note that external costs related to PFAS pollution, including remediation and treatment of related diseases, could amount to trillions of dollars annually [25].
• Disparities in Testing and Counseling: Without funded testing programs, there could be unintended consequences of aggravating disparities in exposure to PFAS [26].
Regarding Dumping PFAS into Nature:
• There are virtually no arguments for dumping PFAS into nature; the literature overwhelmingly shows concern and the need to prevent further contamination [4, 6, 8].
• Evidence suggests that companies suppressed research and distorted public discourse regarding the dangers of PFAS [27-29].
• Environmental persistence, mobility, and bioaccumulation of PFAS make environmental release unacceptable [4, 6].
• Regulatory agencies such as the EPA and international agreements like the Stockholm Convention aim to eliminate or restrict PFAS production and use due to environmental and health concerns [30, 31].
In summary, the debate is not so much about whether to avoid PFAS, but how urgently and effectively to do so, given the uncertainties, complexities, and costs involved [17, 25].
Here's a comprehensive overview of the key stakeholders and involved parties related to PFAS, including responsible companies, research groups, governing agencies, and affected populations:
1. Responsible Companies (Manufacturers & Distributors):
• 3M [1-14]. 3M is a major producer of PFAS, having been involved since the mid-20th century [15]. They face lawsuits over water contamination and suppression of health risks [6, 11].
• DuPont [1-19]. DuPont also has a long history of PFAS manufacturing and faces litigation over PFOA pollution and associated health issues [5, 15-19].
• Chemours [6-10, 12-14, 19]. Chemours is a spin-off of DuPont that also faces lawsuits related to PFAS contamination [19].
• Corteva [8]. Corteva has reached agreements in principle for settlements related to PFAS contamination of US public water systems [8].
• AGC Inc. [10].
• Archroma [10].
• Arkema [10, 12]. Arkema is accused of financial responsibility for remediation of PFAS [12].
• BASF [10].
• Bayer [10].
• Daikin [10].
• Honeywell [10, 13].
• Merck Group [10].
• Shandong Dongyue Chemical [10].
• Solvay [10, 12]. Solvay faces accusations regarding PFAS contamination and is developing non-fluorosurfactant technologies [12].
• W. L. Gore & Associates [10].
• Entegris (formerly Fluoroware) [20].
• FSI International (now TEL FSI) [20].
2. PFAS Exposure Study/Research Groups:
• National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) [21-33]. NIEHS funds and conducts research on PFAS exposures and health effects [23, 24, 30, 31].
• Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) [21, 29, 34-42]. ATSDR provides guidance on PFAS exposure, testing, and clinical follow-up [21, 34, 35, 37, 40-42].
• Silent Spring Institute [29, 43]. Silent Spring Institute provides resources to help protect health from PFAS [29].
• University of Rhode Island Superfund Research Center [27, 43]. The University of Rhode Island is identifying sources of PFAS contamination and assessing health effects [27, 43].
• Michigan State Superfund Research Center [27]. The Michigan State Superfund Research Center is developing technologies to break down PFAS [27].
• University of California, Berkeley [27, 43]. The University of California, Berkeley is working on containing firefighting foams [27, 43].
• Brown University Superfund Research Center [27]. The Brown University Superfund Research Center has developed databases to identify high-risk areas for PFAS exposure [27].
• North Carolina State University SRP Center [44]. The North Carolina State University SRP Center is studying the effects of PFAS on the immune system [44].
• C8 Science Panel: This panel conducted health studies in the Mid-Ohio Valley as part of a settlement related to DuPont's PFAS dumping [18, 19].
• The Sources, Transport, Exposure, and Effects of PFASs (STEEP) project [27].
• Human Biomonitoring Commission in Germany and the European Food Safety Authority [45].
• National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) [22, 46].
3. Responsible Governing Agencies:
• United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) [4, 7, 11, 13, 20, 38, 40, 42, 47-52]. The EPA sets health advisories, conducts research, and proposes regulations for PFAS [4, 7, 11, 13, 20, 38, 40, 42, 47-52].
• Michigan PFAS Action Response Team (MPART) [53-55]. MPART investigates PFAS contamination sources, protects drinking water, and informs the public [53-56].
• U.S. Department of Health & Human Services's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) [37, 39, 42].
• European Chemicals Agency [42].
• Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) [17].
• Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) [47, 55, 57].
• New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) [12].
• Washington State Department of Ecology [13].
4. People/Populations Affected & Advocacy Groups:
• General Population: The CDC found PFAS in the blood of 97% of Americans [22].
• Residents in Contaminated Areas: Those living near industrial facilities, military bases, and fire training areas are at higher risk [34, 47, 58-61].
• Occupationally Exposed Workers: Firefighters, ski wax technicians, and workers in fluorochemical production plants have elevated PFAS levels [62-65].
• Infants and Children: PFAS exposure can affect growth, learning, and behavior [37, 66].
• Pregnant Women and Breastfeeding Mothers: PFAS can transfer to the fetus and infant, with potential developmental and hormonal effects [66, 67].
• Consumers of Contaminated Products: Individuals using products like non-stick cookware, treated fabrics, and certain personal care items [43, 68-70].
• Environmental Working Group (EWG) [69].
• Nantucket PFAS Action Group [43].
• Concerned Residents for South Dearborn [43].
• North Carolina Stop Gen-X In Our Water [43].
• Westfield Residents Advocating for Themselves [43].
• Wisconsin Environmental Health Network [43].
• Citizens for Safe Water Around Badger [43].
• GreenCAPE [71].
• Save Our Water [71].
• Cape Fear River Watch [71].
• Silent Spring Institute [71].
• Mothers for Safe Air & Safe Water [71].
• Center for Public Environmental Oversight [71].
• Gray’s Creek Residents United Against PFAS in our Wells and Rivers [71].
• North Carolina Black Alliance [71].
• Great Lakes PFAS Action Network [71].
5. People Peddling PFAS
• Chemical Companies' Executives: Individuals in leadership roles at companies like DuPont and 3M who allegedly suppressed or downplayed the risks associated with PFAS [1-3, 11, 72, 73].
• Industry Risk Assessors: Companies hired by DuPont, like ChemRisk, have been accused of downplaying the health risks of PFAS [47, 74].
• Government Officials: Individuals within regulatory agencies who allegedly interfered with or censored studies on the health effects of PFAS [10, 11, 38, 39].
This overview encapsulates the broad network of stakeholders involved in the PFAS issue, from those responsible for its production and dissemination to those studying its effects and those most impacted by its presence in the environment and their bodies.
Based on the sources, major trends in the PFAS topic include:
• Increasing Awareness and Research: There's growing public and scientific awareness of PFAS contamination [1-3]. Research efforts are expanding to understand the extent of PFAS exposure, their health effects, and how they move through the environment [2]. The NIEHS is actively involved in research to determine how PFAS affects organs and systems in the body and to find ways to detect and measure PFAS in the environment [2].
• Regulatory Actions and Standards: Governments are taking action to regulate PFAS [3]. The EPA is developing national drinking water standards for PFOA and PFOS [4]. There are also efforts to revise wastewater standards for manufacturers of PFAS chemicals [4].
• Health Concerns and Clinical Guidance: There are increasing concerns about the health effects associated with PFAS exposure [1]. These include potential links to thyroid dysfunction, testicular and kidney cancer, and ulcerative colitis [5].
• Voluntary Phase-Outs and Alternatives: Some industries are voluntarily phasing out certain PFAS used in food packaging [6]. Research is being conducted to find and implement fluorine-free alternatives, such as in firefighting foams [7, 8].
• Remediation Technologies: Technologies for remediating PFAS in liquids are being developed and applied to various water sources, including drinking water, groundwater, and industrial wastewater [8, 9]. These technologies include granular activated carbon, ion exchange, and membrane filtration [9].
• Litigation and Legal Battles: There is ongoing litigation related to PFAS contamination, involving companies like 3M and DuPont [4].
• Bioaccumulation and Exposure Pathways: Studies have found PFAS in the blood and urine of people [1]. People are exposed to PFAS through contaminated water and food, the use of products made with PFAS, and breathing air containing PFAS [10]. PFAS can bioaccumulate in the body over time [1].
• Global Contamination: PFAS contamination is a global issue, with detections in various environmental samples worldwide [1].
• Focus on Specific PFAS: While PFAS is a large class of chemicals, much of the focus has been on specific compounds like PFOA and PFOS [11]. However, attention is also shifting to replacement chemicals like GenX chemicals and PFBS [11].
• Non-Targeted Analysis: Development of non-targeted analytical methods to get a broader understanding of PFAS [12].
• Occupational Exposure: Addressing occupational exposure to PFASs in industries using these chemicals, with proposed strategies including exposure monitoring and PFAS-free alternatives [8, 13].
Based on the sources, the major controversies related to PFAS include:
• Suppression of Information on Health Effects: There are allegations that companies like DuPont and 3M knew about the dangers of PFAS since the 1970s but suppressed unfavorable research and distorted public discourse [1, 2]. The Trump administration was also accused of pressuring the U.S. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) to suppress a study showing PFAS to be more dangerous than previously thought [1].
• Ethical Concerns Regarding Blood Donations: A recent study found that regular blood or plasma donations can reduce blood PFAS levels [3]. However, there are ethical concerns about whether donating PFAS-containing blood is morally acceptable, especially for blood recipients who may be more vulnerable to toxic chemicals [4].
• Safety of Blood Supply: Increased public understanding of chemical contaminants in blood raises concerns about the safety of the blood supply [5].
• Industry Influence on Science and Regulation: Producers allegedly used strategies to influence science and regulation, suppressing unfavorable research and distorting public discourse [1].
• Contamination of Military Bases: There are controversies surrounding the contamination of water in and around U.S. military bases due to the use of firefighting foams containing PFAS since the 1970s [6].
• Filibustering of Bills Regulating PFAS: The Republican Party has filibustered bills regulating PFAS [6, 7].
• Impacts on vulnerable populations: Concerns were raised regarding the implications for susceptible populations [8]. Dr. Bruce Lanphear raised concerns about testing blood for chemicals, especially for premature babies requiring multiple transfusions [4].
• Use of PFAS in Food Packaging and Consumer Goods: The use of PFAS in food packaging and consumer goods continues to be a concern.
• Lack of Government Standards for PFAS in Beef: In 2022, PFOS was found in beef produced at a Michigan farm, leading to a consumption advisory but no recall due to the absence of government standards for PFOS contamination in beef [9].
• ** перенаправление Cost Allocation and Responsibility:** There are debates regarding who should bear the financial burden for remediating PFAS contamination, treating related diseases, and monitoring PFAS pollution [7].
• Efficacy and obstacles to frequent donations: More research is needed to understand the ideal frequency and volumes of donations that will be effective for lowering PFAS, balancing the treatment efficacy with the obstacles to frequent donations [10].
• Improved health outcomes in the longer term: It is also not clear whether reducing PFAS leads to improved health outcomes in the longer term [10].
• Effectiveness of Alternatives: Concerns exist regarding the safety of fluorosurfactants with shorter carbon chains as replacements, as they may still be harmful to humans and the environment [1].
• Public relations nightmare: There was concern from the EPA and the Department of Defense that the public, media, and Congressional reaction to numbers in a PFAS study would be a "huge... public relations nightmare" [8].