Posted on 10/20/2024 10:09:22 PM PDT by ConservativeMind
New research has revealed that the connection between per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, and kidney damage may be tied to dysregulation of the gut microbiome, which is made up of bacteria and other microorganisms that live in the digestive tract.
They found that increased PFAS exposure was associated with worse kidney function four years later, and that changes in the gut microbiome and related metabolites explained up to 50% of that decrease in function.
The researchers analyzed data from 78 participants, ages 17 to 22, enrolled in the Southern California Children's Health Study, a large-scale longitudinal effort to understand the effects of pollution on health.
At baseline, the researchers collected blood and stool samples that allowed them to measure PFAS exposure. At a follow-up appointment four years later, the researchers collected a second round of data on kidney function.
They found that when PFAS exposure increased by one standard deviation, kidney function was 2.4% worse at the follow-up visit.
The analysis revealed two separate groups of bacteria and metabolites that helped explain the effect of PFAS exposure on kidney function. One group explained 38% of the change in kidney function, and one group explained 50% of the change. Both groups of bacteria and metabolites performed beneficial activities, such as lowering inflammation in the body, that were hindered when PFAS exposure went up.
"We saw that exposure to PFAS was potentially altering the composition of the microbiome, associated with lower levels of beneficial bacteria and lower anti-inflammatory metabolites," Hampson said.
The findings provide a roadmap for researchers seeking to better understand the link between PFAS and kidney health. Hampson and her colleagues observed reductions in anti-inflammatory metabolites, as well as the bacteria that produce them, and increases in inflammatory metabolites.
(Excerpt) Read more at medicalxpress.com ...
Regardless, it would seem helpful to consider probiotic supplementation (kefirs or supplements) and healthy foods that may not be in high abundance in late teens, who served as the sample. This likely means fiber and nutrient-dense foods were not eaten, meaning these gut bacteria colonies don’t have what they need to recover.
Additionally, consider purified water sources and reducing the use of older Teflon-type pans, as other options. Catalytic carbon, followed by activated carbon, can sequester PFAS, and other filter types like ion exchange and reverse osmosis can also help.
Some city water has been found to have PFAS. I will provide information with a link, next.
Information on PFAS removal from water, with a map of areas of concern:
https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/official-correspondence/2023/08/pfas-drinking-water
For all that is holy.
DUDE: Avoidance is key.
For those reading this:
It is stated that PFAS are no longer used in food packaging
But who are you going to trust?
https://www.food-safety.com/articles/9574-pfas-in-packaging-what-the-food-industry-needs-to-know
And is your prior exposure cumulative, or reversible?
But the point is: Eff the kefir. Avoid the toxins.
And by the way, ditch the ‘non-stick’ pans altogether.
If you don’t know how to cook in a metal pan with non-toxic oils, you shouldn’t be cooking.
One way to reduce PFAS in you is to regularly give blood.
Of course, this means someone else gets your PFAS.
Taken in context, one must first recognize that it must have been BAD NEWS to finally prompt FDA to move to ban PFAS in food packaging.
I suspect that this study was the catalyst
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09603123.2024.2338269
or perhaps it masks a more serious, unacknowledged health risk, serious enough for the FDA to actually ACT.
We may not know for years or decades the true degree of damage wrought by this material which should NEVER have been permitted into the consumer materials market (ScotchGuard et al) let alone food packaging.
The FDA action this year is a glaring red flag for anyone with a high risk factor.
The overarching question is whether the feds granted the manufacturer(s) immunity...
Never much cares for PEAS
Not PFAS. Vexxationation.
A ‘study’ based on data association with a minuscule cohort , no control group, thousand of confounding factors and insignificant risk factor is not a study, it’s junk science like all modern epidemioly.
Pfas are inert, the very reason why they are called ‘eternal chemicals’ (about the only thing the fear mongerers have it right) and are found in concentrations of ppb (one drop per olympic size pool).
They are no less safe than glasswares (lead) or metal ustensils (copper or alloys toxicity) or bisphenol (banned for zero scientific reason).
The constant ‘chemicals” hysteria is a ridiculous and stupid modern superstition, alongside the climate hysteria.
Enough with the greenies nonsense.
Guess what also does it, from 2 years ago...
Persistent Damage to the Gut Microbiome Following Messenger RNA SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine
What a coinkydink.
See my reply #10.
Had read that same article IIRC.
They are all in cover-up mode.
Trying desperately to hide the ball.
PFAS is just the latest in a long line of chemical compounds that environmentalist whackos have used to unnecessarily scare the public.
First, they stop teaching basic science in schools. Then they feed you just enough information to frighten you but without any context or any attempt to anchor their claims to legitimate scientific inquiry.
Then they demand that everything be banned, regardless of level of risk involved.
In the case of PFAS, the dangerous ones have already been removed from commerce, and overall PFAS use is in steep decline.
But if the whackos get their way, they’d have us adopt the UN definition of PFAS - one fully fluorinated carbon atom - and if that comes to pass many pharmaceuticals will come under this definition. That is not good, folks.
Stop accepting this (bad word that has something to do with cows)at face value.
—> Pfas are inert
Perplexity AI disagrees.
“ PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are not completely inert. While some PFAS molecules are considered chemically inert due to the lack of active groups, others have reactive sites that can interact with biological systems.
“The dangers of PFAS stem from their persistence in the environment and human body, leading to potential health risks. PFAS exposure has been linked to liver damage, immune system suppression, low birth weight, and increased cholesterol levels.
“They are also associated with cancers and other health issues, making them a significant environmental and health concern.”
You can ingest my allotment. I’ll pass.
I wonder how much of that crap was in those masks we had to wear during Covid?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.