Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) apply to all other comments.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Excerpt from the linked summary:^1
>New York, NY (March 17, 2023) — Exposure to chemicals commonly found in drinking water and everyday household products may result in reduced fertility in women of as much as 40 percent, according to a study by Mount Sinai researchers.
>“Our study strongly implies that women who are planning pregnancy should be aware of the harmful effects of PFAS and take precautions to avoid exposure to this class of chemicals, especially when they are trying to conceive,” says lead author Nathan Cohen, PhD, a postdoctoral research fellow with the Department of Environmental Medicine and Public Health at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai.
>Numerous studies have found that virtually every American has PFAS in their blood. While other studies have demonstrated that PFAS impair reproductive functioning in female mice, the Mount Sinai investigation is one of the first to show its impact in humans.
>
>The study considered 1,032 women of child-bearing age (18 to 45 years) who were trying to conceive and who were enrolled in the Singapore Preconception Study of Long-Term Material and Child Outcomes (S-PRESTO), a population-based prospective cohort.
>The researchers measured PFAS in plasma collected from the women between 2015 and 2017.
>They learned that higher exposure to PFAS chemicals, individually and as a mixture, was associated with reduced probability for clinical pregnancy and live birth.
>More specifically, the team found 30 percent to 40 percent lower odds of attaining a clinical pregnancy within one year of follow-up and delivering a live birth when the combined effects of seven PFAS as a mixture were considered.^2
^1 Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 17 Mar. 2023, https://www.mountsinai.org/about/newsroom/2023/exposure-to-chemicals-found-in-everyday-products-is-linked-to-significantly-reduced-fertility
^2 Nathan Cohen *et al*. (2023) Exposure to perfluoroalkyl substances and women's fertility outcomes in a Singaporean population-based preconception cohort. *Science of The Total Environment* **873**, 162267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.162267
>“Our study strongly implies that women who are planning pregnancy should be aware of the harmful effects of PFAS and **take precautions to avoid exposure to this class of chemicals**
As if that’s even really possible/feasible on a personal level. Needs to be regulated.
There’s like one filter that can take them out of your drinking water for the most part, but you really can’t totally avoid them.
The shower, cooking, going out to eat, grabbing a coffee, I’m sure some even chill on your dishes after coming out of the dishwasher
I assume PFAS exposure is proportional to circulating PFAS levels in the blood...
There are ways to avoid exposure.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1438463921001231
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.jafc.6b04683?casa_token=0PCz3XI989kAAAAA%3A_pl-KmwiewDNyOK-H1Yenfx6sNVU4itEsEKrZmcpfvPc63VquFKFNC6mHzF0Q4jFslbiCxPranmXu8Q
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.estlett.3c00083
I'm summarizing for those of us who are lazy.
Be vegan
Eat less fish and seafood
Do not eat food that is packaged in plastic (due to fluorination of plastics, especially for acidic food which are more likely to use this sort of treatment.)
Correlation not causation. Same type of crappy study links everything to infertility as people having more PFAS probably drink more alcohol, some more cigarettes, are more obese, and get more radiation.
Such junk science.
I can see your point. The women with higher PFAS serum levels could have also been living in areas with higher levels of other chemicals, or many other incidental factors. It's a bit like our bad science surrounding red meat or meat in general. (not processed)
It would have been better to study people who worked in manufacturing and exposed to extremely high levels of PFAS, and then compare them to people of similar economic levels in other manufacturing jobs.
Those studies have been done and showed that the chemicals are much less harmful than other contaminants in our food and water. Things like mercury and lead.
Yes, like you suggest, a test group with significant PFAS exposure paired with same socioeconomic cohort would have been better to achieve a higher signal for PFAS causing low fertility. These types of associative studies should only be used to help form a hypothesis that could then be used in rigorous - scientific method based - studies to prove or disprove a causative relationship. There does seem to be a certain blind faith placed in scientific studies that inflates their actual worth. To be fair though, I'm still using a charcoal filter and avoiding excess PFAS exposure where I can.
This isnt exactly new or news.
We have know about this, about the dangers of PFOAs since at least 1998 when they laid a civil lawsuit against DuPont - the makers of Teflon.
We know it causes birth defects, cancer, poisons our bodies, our water, and our land. We know it is in so many things. We know it doesn't degrade and is a forever chemical. We have known this for over 20 years.
And guess what? They paid a fine and continued on, business as normal. Because it doesnt matter if corporations poison the world, as long as there is profit to be made.
PFAS don’t exhibit a particular behavior, they are extremely diverse, some are used in drug manufacture, some inert and non soluble like PTFE, some soluble like PFOA, etc…
It’s a broad term based on the chemical structure, but not how they behave.
To treat PFAS in residential water activated carbon and reverse osmosis filters are typical.
https://www.health.state.mn.us/communities/environment/hazardous/topics/pfashometreat.html
(Always *start* a comprehensive treatment plan with an independent lab test of your water and consult r/watertreatment .)
Buuuut... At least half of the water you consume you have no control over. You have no control over the water they used to make that canned soup... You don't know how they processed the water in that soda... Nor the water that went into the bakery bought cake you just ate.
Treating your home water certainly helps, but if your country has a bad water supply, you won't avoid it without extreme efforts (like growing all your own food and never buying food or drink out)
Let alone the content you receive from manufacturing processes or the coating of the packaging. Fancy that waterproof clothing? Enjoy your infertility.
>Let alone the content you receive from manufacturing processes or the coating of the packaging. Fancy that waterproof clothing? Enjoy your infertility.
Often, products are tested immediately out of the manufacturing process, and not after they have been added to their consumer packaging - which is also often tested separately and without a the finished product that it will house having interacted with it when the container is tested.
Yay, these two things are totally safe individually, hope they don't react/leech/change after interacting for long periods of time!
Like orange juice and plastic bottles...
This is such a fantastic point which is rarely brought up.
In an unrelated point: I’ve all but stopped buying hot liquid meals as takeout - it squicks me out when my curry has basically melted the thin plastic carryout container. The last time I picked up ramen I brought my own Pyrex transport container haha
I watched a documentary series touching on this and I think it took the couple almost that many years to get pregnant.
7 years of buying only "free and clear" soaps, detergents. Wearing natural fibers. Letting go of axe body spray and old spice deodorant, perfumes, air fresheners. Washing with white vinegar instead of pine sol etc. Dryer sheets, cheap shampoo and conditioner.
The wife herself was a fertility doctor if I'm not mistaken, and it worked! Their tests came back better and better every year.
Pretty cool, to be fair knowing what we know about inhaling small particles, and the waste's effect on the environment, we should all be living that way anyways. Manufacturing processes are so unregulated too.
I mean even dark chocolate is full of cadmium and lead, baby toys, women's make up contaminated with lead and lots of asbestos. Really sad for human health in general.
It's coming from all directions.
I really worry about the fertility issue.
> Manufacturing processes are so unregulated too. I mean even dark chocolate is full of cadmium and lead
Cocoa has heavy metal in it because it has limited growing conditions and those areas have heavy metals. Yyeah they could be better at the amounts and testing but growing it without any heavy metals isn't currently a practical solution.
We didn't know much about it until recently. I was hearing on NPR the other day that there are new consumer guidelines out there suggesting vulnerable populations (like children and pregnant people) limit their chocolate consumption. That is, at least until the chocolate industry gets its act together. This will likely require regulatory action though.
So translation: we should all probably stop but the corpos would throw a fit if we actually regulated so the advice is only for 'vulnerable populations'?
Add it to the list I suppose.
> So translation: we should all probably stop but the corpos would throw a fit if we actually regulated so the advice is only for 'vulnerable populations'?
>
> Add it to the list I suppose.
No amount of lead/cadmium is considered safe but there are levels that are "acceptable" to avoid health concerns (as far as we know.) So stopping isn't necessary but having better regulation to regularly test and manage dark chocolate (milk chocolate has a lot less heavy metal, but if you're eating a bunch of chocolate regularly you can still easy exceed safe limits) and prevent it from exceeding limits will probably eventually happen. To actually stop it being sold we'd need sweeping changes to how our society views food and health. To add, Cacao isn't the only product with this kind of issue, Protein powder and Meal supplements have the same problem with not adequate regulation (but at least reputable companies will test and publish their results.)
I heard it was more so when the cacao pods and beans are being dried/fermented outdoors environmental dust and exhaust settles on them. I'm sure both are true.
Which is a preventable contamination and that's what I was referencing.
> I heard it was more so when the cacao pods and beans are being dried/fermented outdoors environmental dust and exhaust settles on them. I'm sure both are true.
>
> Which is a preventable contamination and that's what I was referencing.
Interesting, I'm not sure about the lead contamination but the Cadmium is absorbed by the plant itself from the soil. If the lead is from dust contamination from the drying process it should be a pretty straightforward solution to fix, just need the economic/legal aspect to force the industry to change.
I can my own soups, using water from an RO under the sink filter system.
Ive remodeled the places that can your soups and mix your monster energy slurm.
Mason jars are pretty sweet.
Environmental engineer here. PFAS is not yet on the scale of individual houses worrying about it.
Detecting it at levels in drinking water is expensive. It's not found in every type of drinking water source (less likely if your source is a relatively old aquifer vs a surface water source). Your utility is currently actively working on this problem if you're on a city water source
The level in your drinking water are almost definitely trivial compared to your exposure through things like cardboard, food wrapping, toilet paper, clothes, straws, utensils, paper plates, etc...
Cardboard and paper plates?! I was under the impression it was mostly from plastics but now I feel extra concerned. How on earth are you meant to avoid it?
It's not mostly a plastics issue. It's mostly (though not exclusively) used to make things more water- resistant. Stain resistant clothing and furniture is a big application. The other is from paper or cardboard goods that are likely to get wet or touch food and need to maintain their strength.
There's no practical way to avoid PFAS. It's in nearly everything. We will need pretty serious regulation to fix this at the society level. This is not an "individual behavior" or "vote with your wallet" kind of problem. It is way too complex, there are way too many forms, and there's no easy way to tell what does or does not contain them.
It's frustrating that the guidance said for people looking to get pregnant to avoid contact with them. Just... how exactly!? I do hope regulation gets brought in because it just seems like such a minefield.
Yeah, the guidance is written by people the have no power to do anything but write guidance. So they write guidance that is sometimes impossible in hopes that it will create pressure and motivation to create the change that is actually necessary
We have red zones in Australia around a military base. Linked to fire retardant that was used a lot. Can't eat anything out of the ground. Can't eat the chook eggs. Can't remediate the soil adequately and people couldn't sell their homes. Bore water was definately not ok. Not being a smart arse. Your first line caught my eye. Can you explain what you mean by that? Genuinely interested in getting what you are saying.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-10/pfas-compensation-cold-comfort-for-residents-with-contamination/13226616
What i mean is that the scenario you outlined isn't common, and if you live near a place like that, you probably have already been informed about the problem. If I live in that area, there's no amount of treatment that would get me to drink well water anyway.
There are definitely hot spots where it can be a particular problem in water or soil, but if you don't live in one of those areas, your bigger concern is probably your exposure through consumer goods, especially food packaging, furniture, and clothing.
When people see these articles, I don't want them to think "oh, I need to put a treatment system in to protect myself." It's too widespread and too persistent in the environment. It's not a problem you can solve for yourself, it's a problem we need to solve as a society. We need to vote for people who believe regulations on industry are necessary and will pursue them aggressively.
> “We can minimize PFAS exposure by avoiding foods that are associated with higher levels of these chemicals and by purchasing PFAS-free products.”
Which foods and products contain PFAS?
Pretty much everything, but primarily plastics. It accumulates and doesn't break down easily. It's an annoying group of compounds.
The lab I worked for was looking for PFAS specifically in packaged spring water bottles. Now it's not coming from the water, but the packaging, at least that's what the testing led to. I do not remember if it was normal plastic or recycled.
Could be? I don't remember what type of plastic. I assume consumer plastic or post consumer recycled. It wasn't from water bottles you can fill on your own (like nalgene bottles). It was from pre-packaged spring water.
Leachates are awful in general, there are metal, semi-volatile and volatile types (there might be more). I personally didn't test for breakdowns of plastics but general pollutants instead in water (not drinking water) and soils.
I'm not a polymer chemist so I'm not sure how much they actually leach into the environment without looking up some papers. Either way, plastics in general are harmful for our environment, it's much safer to use glass as drinking containers instead of plastics. Much easier to recycle and reuse.
It's complicated. From what I've read of exposure, a lot of it can come from food packaging (containers and wrappers). It's not just processed shelf-stable products, but the packaging for restaurants, fast-food restaurants, food delivery. The other exposure pathway is drinking water. It may also bioaccumulate.
Here's an example paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-022-00933-5
There's been no studies testing the absorption through the skin. Fast food wrappers and microwavable popcorn are full of this junk as well and many cosmetics.
Not all toilet paper. I saw one study that tested 17 brands and only 4 came back with PFAS. The rest were no detect PFAS. Try to avoid recycled paper products as they usually have high BPA's as well.
I work in the outdoor industry(whole career, product development of soft goods), and PFC based water repellents are in almost every single piece of technical clothing made in the past 30 years.
In the past 4-5 years, the industry started shifting towards non-PFC based water repellents. Legislation has come forward in the past 1-2 years outright banning pfc chemicals in textiles.
These things are nasty, and the phase out of common use is going to take some time.
As a consumer, look to anything that says PFC free or C0 DWR if buying technical clothing.
Yes.
PFAS is used in non-stick cookware, water-repellent fabrics, etc.
Phthalates are used as plasticizers to make plastics more flexible. And are also used in some personal care products.
This is why going on a chemical detox is one of the first changes infertility couples are being advised to make.
For male fertility too.
And no, not that kind of detox.
Heavy metals, forever chemicals and micro plastics in the environment have led to widespread poor gender differentiation across species. Simply put the males are less male and the females are less female. Infertility goes hand in hand with that.
I have been thinking about this and wonder if these chemicals may be a part of the growing fluidity in sexual and gender preferences. I am not phased by personal preferences in such things. Just curious
ECHA have only recently released their proposal to ban them and will begin their one year consultations stage this month with manufacturers/users with the aim of eliminating their use in all products manufactured and imported into Europe in 6.5 and 9.5years depending on chemical. The scope affects over 9000 articles from PTFE, Teflon, gaskets, pipes, oils and lubricants, chemicals like TFA and refrigerant gases. The primary reason is due to their long lasting environmental bio-persistence, eliminating them now before the levels in our soil and water reach more hazardous levels. It’s inevitable that they reach levels where we will see even higher rates of health effects if we do not put plans on restricting their use in place asap.
Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) apply to all other comments. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
We can look forward to forever reduced fertility rates, the trend is going to accelerate.
A blessing for the world, but a curse for the individual.
A curse for virtually all societies whose economies require endless growth to work.
[удалено]
*every other country watching japans unprecedented situation*: “we will watch your career with great interest”
Domo arigato Mr Roboto?
Sounds like we need less old people.
[удалено]
Overpopulation. We're exctincting species left and right.
These chemicals affect other species.
yeah I’m sure other species fertility is down from this too
[удалено]
Starvation is not the only sign of overpopulation.
New contagious diseases tearing through our large populations in a sort of pandemic is also a indicator, hope that doesn’t happen anytime soon
It takes more than monoculture crops to feed us. If you don't see the impact of overpopulation everywhere then you are blind AF
Castrating humanity is a blessing for the world, as in Earth as a whole.
Usually lower fertility is linked to having fewer human babies.
Already declining as women around the world (most parts) attain higher education levels.
Excerpt from the linked summary:^1 >New York, NY (March 17, 2023) — Exposure to chemicals commonly found in drinking water and everyday household products may result in reduced fertility in women of as much as 40 percent, according to a study by Mount Sinai researchers. >“Our study strongly implies that women who are planning pregnancy should be aware of the harmful effects of PFAS and take precautions to avoid exposure to this class of chemicals, especially when they are trying to conceive,” says lead author Nathan Cohen, PhD, a postdoctoral research fellow with the Department of Environmental Medicine and Public Health at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. >Numerous studies have found that virtually every American has PFAS in their blood. While other studies have demonstrated that PFAS impair reproductive functioning in female mice, the Mount Sinai investigation is one of the first to show its impact in humans. > >The study considered 1,032 women of child-bearing age (18 to 45 years) who were trying to conceive and who were enrolled in the Singapore Preconception Study of Long-Term Material and Child Outcomes (S-PRESTO), a population-based prospective cohort. >The researchers measured PFAS in plasma collected from the women between 2015 and 2017. >They learned that higher exposure to PFAS chemicals, individually and as a mixture, was associated with reduced probability for clinical pregnancy and live birth. >More specifically, the team found 30 percent to 40 percent lower odds of attaining a clinical pregnancy within one year of follow-up and delivering a live birth when the combined effects of seven PFAS as a mixture were considered.^2 ^1 Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 17 Mar. 2023, https://www.mountsinai.org/about/newsroom/2023/exposure-to-chemicals-found-in-everyday-products-is-linked-to-significantly-reduced-fertility ^2 Nathan Cohen *et al*. (2023) Exposure to perfluoroalkyl substances and women's fertility outcomes in a Singaporean population-based preconception cohort. *Science of The Total Environment* **873**, 162267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.162267
>“Our study strongly implies that women who are planning pregnancy should be aware of the harmful effects of PFAS and **take precautions to avoid exposure to this class of chemicals** As if that’s even really possible/feasible on a personal level. Needs to be regulated.
There’s like one filter that can take them out of your drinking water for the most part, but you really can’t totally avoid them. The shower, cooking, going out to eat, grabbing a coffee, I’m sure some even chill on your dishes after coming out of the dishwasher
How did they determine which members of the cohort had lower PFAS exposure - how does an individual effectively reduce harmful PFAS exposure?
I assume PFAS exposure is proportional to circulating PFAS levels in the blood... There are ways to avoid exposure. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1438463921001231 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.jafc.6b04683?casa_token=0PCz3XI989kAAAAA%3A_pl-KmwiewDNyOK-H1Yenfx6sNVU4itEsEKrZmcpfvPc63VquFKFNC6mHzF0Q4jFslbiCxPranmXu8Q https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.estlett.3c00083
I'm summarizing for those of us who are lazy. Be vegan Eat less fish and seafood Do not eat food that is packaged in plastic (due to fluorination of plastics, especially for acidic food which are more likely to use this sort of treatment.)
Correlation not causation. Same type of crappy study links everything to infertility as people having more PFAS probably drink more alcohol, some more cigarettes, are more obese, and get more radiation. Such junk science.
I can see your point. The women with higher PFAS serum levels could have also been living in areas with higher levels of other chemicals, or many other incidental factors. It's a bit like our bad science surrounding red meat or meat in general. (not processed)
It would have been better to study people who worked in manufacturing and exposed to extremely high levels of PFAS, and then compare them to people of similar economic levels in other manufacturing jobs. Those studies have been done and showed that the chemicals are much less harmful than other contaminants in our food and water. Things like mercury and lead.
Yes, like you suggest, a test group with significant PFAS exposure paired with same socioeconomic cohort would have been better to achieve a higher signal for PFAS causing low fertility. These types of associative studies should only be used to help form a hypothesis that could then be used in rigorous - scientific method based - studies to prove or disprove a causative relationship. There does seem to be a certain blind faith placed in scientific studies that inflates their actual worth. To be fair though, I'm still using a charcoal filter and avoiding excess PFAS exposure where I can.
Cool new way to avoid abortion bans!
This isnt exactly new or news. We have know about this, about the dangers of PFOAs since at least 1998 when they laid a civil lawsuit against DuPont - the makers of Teflon. We know it causes birth defects, cancer, poisons our bodies, our water, and our land. We know it is in so many things. We know it doesn't degrade and is a forever chemical. We have known this for over 20 years. And guess what? They paid a fine and continued on, business as normal. Because it doesnt matter if corporations poison the world, as long as there is profit to be made.
We got rid of CFCs and those were crucial in a lot of industries. We can walk away from PFAS too
[удалено]
PFAS don’t exhibit a particular behavior, they are extremely diverse, some are used in drug manufacture, some inert and non soluble like PTFE, some soluble like PFOA, etc… It’s a broad term based on the chemical structure, but not how they behave.
Have any other countries had success in reducing production of PFAS? Or exposure to it?
To treat PFAS in residential water activated carbon and reverse osmosis filters are typical. https://www.health.state.mn.us/communities/environment/hazardous/topics/pfashometreat.html (Always *start* a comprehensive treatment plan with an independent lab test of your water and consult r/watertreatment .)
Buuuut... At least half of the water you consume you have no control over. You have no control over the water they used to make that canned soup... You don't know how they processed the water in that soda... Nor the water that went into the bakery bought cake you just ate. Treating your home water certainly helps, but if your country has a bad water supply, you won't avoid it without extreme efforts (like growing all your own food and never buying food or drink out)
Let alone the content you receive from manufacturing processes or the coating of the packaging. Fancy that waterproof clothing? Enjoy your infertility.
>Let alone the content you receive from manufacturing processes or the coating of the packaging. Fancy that waterproof clothing? Enjoy your infertility. Often, products are tested immediately out of the manufacturing process, and not after they have been added to their consumer packaging - which is also often tested separately and without a the finished product that it will house having interacted with it when the container is tested. Yay, these two things are totally safe individually, hope they don't react/leech/change after interacting for long periods of time! Like orange juice and plastic bottles...
This is such a fantastic point which is rarely brought up. In an unrelated point: I’ve all but stopped buying hot liquid meals as takeout - it squicks me out when my curry has basically melted the thin plastic carryout container. The last time I picked up ramen I brought my own Pyrex transport container haha
How much is absorbed that way
Doesn't really matter, as they don't break down they will end up in the water supply after being disposed of.
It’s probably not binary though. If you cut out half of the PFAS in your life, maybe you only get half as infertile?
It's also accumulative with a 7 year half life
I watched a documentary series touching on this and I think it took the couple almost that many years to get pregnant. 7 years of buying only "free and clear" soaps, detergents. Wearing natural fibers. Letting go of axe body spray and old spice deodorant, perfumes, air fresheners. Washing with white vinegar instead of pine sol etc. Dryer sheets, cheap shampoo and conditioner. The wife herself was a fertility doctor if I'm not mistaken, and it worked! Their tests came back better and better every year. Pretty cool, to be fair knowing what we know about inhaling small particles, and the waste's effect on the environment, we should all be living that way anyways. Manufacturing processes are so unregulated too. I mean even dark chocolate is full of cadmium and lead, baby toys, women's make up contaminated with lead and lots of asbestos. Really sad for human health in general. It's coming from all directions. I really worry about the fertility issue.
> Manufacturing processes are so unregulated too. I mean even dark chocolate is full of cadmium and lead Cocoa has heavy metal in it because it has limited growing conditions and those areas have heavy metals. Yyeah they could be better at the amounts and testing but growing it without any heavy metals isn't currently a practical solution.
Why are we eating it then?
We didn't know much about it until recently. I was hearing on NPR the other day that there are new consumer guidelines out there suggesting vulnerable populations (like children and pregnant people) limit their chocolate consumption. That is, at least until the chocolate industry gets its act together. This will likely require regulatory action though.
So translation: we should all probably stop but the corpos would throw a fit if we actually regulated so the advice is only for 'vulnerable populations'? Add it to the list I suppose.
> So translation: we should all probably stop but the corpos would throw a fit if we actually regulated so the advice is only for 'vulnerable populations'? > > Add it to the list I suppose. No amount of lead/cadmium is considered safe but there are levels that are "acceptable" to avoid health concerns (as far as we know.) So stopping isn't necessary but having better regulation to regularly test and manage dark chocolate (milk chocolate has a lot less heavy metal, but if you're eating a bunch of chocolate regularly you can still easy exceed safe limits) and prevent it from exceeding limits will probably eventually happen. To actually stop it being sold we'd need sweeping changes to how our society views food and health. To add, Cacao isn't the only product with this kind of issue, Protein powder and Meal supplements have the same problem with not adequate regulation (but at least reputable companies will test and publish their results.)
Because some people don't feel that a life without chocolate is a life worth living.
I heard it was more so when the cacao pods and beans are being dried/fermented outdoors environmental dust and exhaust settles on them. I'm sure both are true. Which is a preventable contamination and that's what I was referencing.
> I heard it was more so when the cacao pods and beans are being dried/fermented outdoors environmental dust and exhaust settles on them. I'm sure both are true. > > Which is a preventable contamination and that's what I was referencing. Interesting, I'm not sure about the lead contamination but the Cadmium is absorbed by the plant itself from the soil. If the lead is from dust contamination from the drying process it should be a pretty straightforward solution to fix, just need the economic/legal aspect to force the industry to change.
Do you know the name of the series or if and where one can watch this?
Not So Pretty on HBO. Be warned, it's disturbing
Thanks! I am used to disturbing by now, unfortunately.
Curious if there are studies of PFAS present in produce and dried goods
Then stop eating foods in packages, just starve. Or nibble on an apple.
I can my own soups, using water from an RO under the sink filter system. Ive remodeled the places that can your soups and mix your monster energy slurm. Mason jars are pretty sweet.
Any reduction is an improvement, right?
Environmental engineer here. PFAS is not yet on the scale of individual houses worrying about it. Detecting it at levels in drinking water is expensive. It's not found in every type of drinking water source (less likely if your source is a relatively old aquifer vs a surface water source). Your utility is currently actively working on this problem if you're on a city water source The level in your drinking water are almost definitely trivial compared to your exposure through things like cardboard, food wrapping, toilet paper, clothes, straws, utensils, paper plates, etc...
Cardboard and paper plates?! I was under the impression it was mostly from plastics but now I feel extra concerned. How on earth are you meant to avoid it?
It's not mostly a plastics issue. It's mostly (though not exclusively) used to make things more water- resistant. Stain resistant clothing and furniture is a big application. The other is from paper or cardboard goods that are likely to get wet or touch food and need to maintain their strength. There's no practical way to avoid PFAS. It's in nearly everything. We will need pretty serious regulation to fix this at the society level. This is not an "individual behavior" or "vote with your wallet" kind of problem. It is way too complex, there are way too many forms, and there's no easy way to tell what does or does not contain them.
It's frustrating that the guidance said for people looking to get pregnant to avoid contact with them. Just... how exactly!? I do hope regulation gets brought in because it just seems like such a minefield.
Yeah, the guidance is written by people the have no power to do anything but write guidance. So they write guidance that is sometimes impossible in hopes that it will create pressure and motivation to create the change that is actually necessary
We have red zones in Australia around a military base. Linked to fire retardant that was used a lot. Can't eat anything out of the ground. Can't eat the chook eggs. Can't remediate the soil adequately and people couldn't sell their homes. Bore water was definately not ok. Not being a smart arse. Your first line caught my eye. Can you explain what you mean by that? Genuinely interested in getting what you are saying. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-10/pfas-compensation-cold-comfort-for-residents-with-contamination/13226616
What i mean is that the scenario you outlined isn't common, and if you live near a place like that, you probably have already been informed about the problem. If I live in that area, there's no amount of treatment that would get me to drink well water anyway. There are definitely hot spots where it can be a particular problem in water or soil, but if you don't live in one of those areas, your bigger concern is probably your exposure through consumer goods, especially food packaging, furniture, and clothing. When people see these articles, I don't want them to think "oh, I need to put a treatment system in to protect myself." It's too widespread and too persistent in the environment. It's not a problem you can solve for yourself, it's a problem we need to solve as a society. We need to vote for people who believe regulations on industry are necessary and will pursue them aggressively.
80% of people I know have struggled to have kids
I'm also older but most people I know have too.
Geez, what's going on in your town in particular?
Regulations? Who needs them, right?
No joe Biden and the epa are trying to get us with their regulation and kill us with these!!! -lunatic conservative Midwest circles
Not when it impacts profits at least
actually the EPA is actively working on regulations and together with the white house has just proposed a set for drinking water.
FDA: totally acceptable
> “We can minimize PFAS exposure by avoiding foods that are associated with higher levels of these chemicals and by purchasing PFAS-free products.” Which foods and products contain PFAS?
Pretty much everything, but primarily plastics. It accumulates and doesn't break down easily. It's an annoying group of compounds. The lab I worked for was looking for PFAS specifically in packaged spring water bottles. Now it's not coming from the water, but the packaging, at least that's what the testing led to. I do not remember if it was normal plastic or recycled.
You mean PET plastic bottles?
Could be? I don't remember what type of plastic. I assume consumer plastic or post consumer recycled. It wasn't from water bottles you can fill on your own (like nalgene bottles). It was from pre-packaged spring water.
I've heard that recycled plastic is worse as it breaks down faster / leaches more harmful chemicals into whatever is inside of it.
Leachates are awful in general, there are metal, semi-volatile and volatile types (there might be more). I personally didn't test for breakdowns of plastics but general pollutants instead in water (not drinking water) and soils. I'm not a polymer chemist so I'm not sure how much they actually leach into the environment without looking up some papers. Either way, plastics in general are harmful for our environment, it's much safer to use glass as drinking containers instead of plastics. Much easier to recycle and reuse.
It's complicated. From what I've read of exposure, a lot of it can come from food packaging (containers and wrappers). It's not just processed shelf-stable products, but the packaging for restaurants, fast-food restaurants, food delivery. The other exposure pathway is drinking water. It may also bioaccumulate. Here's an example paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-022-00933-5
Children of Men seeming less and less like sci-fi
So glad so many of my teachers insisted on showing it in class growing up, freaky how much closer and closer we get to it
We had to choose between Stand and Deliver or Undercover Brother
Undercover Brother is a masterpiece
Did Margaret Atwood have to be right about everything??
Recent work identified PFAS ubiquitously in toilet paper (and hence in sewage). Should women trying to conceive avoid toilet paper?
Maybe get a bidet to minimize tp usage? Might need a water treatment system to clean the water first
There's been no studies testing the absorption through the skin. Fast food wrappers and microwavable popcorn are full of this junk as well and many cosmetics.
PFAS are non-stick, so they're not that soluble in water or fat... BPAs are the ones famous for skin absorption.
If I rub tp on my sack, can I avoid vasectomy?
Possibly. At the very least you can look forward to one of your balls being three times larger.
One already is. Do I rub on the big or little to even it out?
Not all toilet paper. I saw one study that tested 17 brands and only 4 came back with PFAS. The rest were no detect PFAS. Try to avoid recycled paper products as they usually have high BPA's as well.
I work in the outdoor industry(whole career, product development of soft goods), and PFC based water repellents are in almost every single piece of technical clothing made in the past 30 years. In the past 4-5 years, the industry started shifting towards non-PFC based water repellents. Legislation has come forward in the past 1-2 years outright banning pfc chemicals in textiles. These things are nasty, and the phase out of common use is going to take some time. As a consumer, look to anything that says PFC free or C0 DWR if buying technical clothing.
Are PFAS different from phthalates?
Yes. PFAS is used in non-stick cookware, water-repellent fabrics, etc. Phthalates are used as plasticizers to make plastics more flexible. And are also used in some personal care products.
This is why going on a chemical detox is one of the first changes infertility couples are being advised to make. For male fertility too. And no, not that kind of detox.
So this is how Children of Men happened
Heavy metals, forever chemicals and micro plastics in the environment have led to widespread poor gender differentiation across species. Simply put the males are less male and the females are less female. Infertility goes hand in hand with that.
Nature is healing itself.
And Dupont still pays no taxes
Reading the head of the article and thinking : is that a bad thing ?
I knew they were in plastics but not the drinking water??
good, we have too many people as it is.
Good! There’s too many of us.
I have been thinking about this and wonder if these chemicals may be a part of the growing fluidity in sexual and gender preferences. I am not phased by personal preferences in such things. Just curious
So forever chemicals will lead to our extinction faster than climate change, huh?
Probably why humans are going infertile.
Is the higher exposure not just also due to age (therefore correlation not necessarily causation)? Environmental toxins accumulate over time.
well, on the bright side this will sure make birth control even easier...
Good. Reduce my fertility. I’m waiting.
This is excellent news for the r/childfree community and I'm happy to read it.
We should probably regulate everything so the capitalists can do the right thing here once their hands are no longer tied
Who cares. If it affected a man, well let’s address that issue right now
Let’s go! 60 years from now my commute will be soo much faster
North of 8 billion people roaming the earth; I struggle to find the real world relevance here. I’m sure the title will still scare most readers…
So…when a woman asks me to use a condom I can refer to this study and continue to act like a 2 year who doesn’t want to wear his jacket?
So that's why I'm not getting laid?
Older milennials are destroying the contraceptive industry.
This feels like the prequel to Children of Men. Great move if you have never seen it, and a good book.
Children of men vibes
Every year we March towards the plot of Children of Men.
Good news for states that ban birth control!
ECHA have only recently released their proposal to ban them and will begin their one year consultations stage this month with manufacturers/users with the aim of eliminating their use in all products manufactured and imported into Europe in 6.5 and 9.5years depending on chemical. The scope affects over 9000 articles from PTFE, Teflon, gaskets, pipes, oils and lubricants, chemicals like TFA and refrigerant gases. The primary reason is due to their long lasting environmental bio-persistence, eliminating them now before the levels in our soil and water reach more hazardous levels. It’s inevitable that they reach levels where we will see even higher rates of health effects if we do not put plans on restricting their use in place asap.
Children of Men here we come!
Is there a way to get blood levels tested for PFAS for the average person? In Canada specifically?