Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Freshwater fish significantly more contaminated with toxic forever chemicals than saltwater fish and shellfish
Medical Xpress / Chicago Tribune / Environmental Research ^ | Jan. 18, 2023 | Michael Hawthorne / Nadia Barbo et al

Posted on 01/21/2023 1:20:14 PM PST by ConservativeMind

Eating just one freshwater fish a year can dramatically increase the amount of toxic forever chemicals coursing through a person's blood, according to a new study that reflects more than a half-century of pollution contaminating the Great Lakes and rivers nationwide.

The alarming finding is based on an analysis of hundreds of fish caught by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency since 2013.

Nearly every fish tested by the EPA was tainted with perfluorooctane sulfonate or PFOS, a forever chemical used for decades in Scotchgard stain-resistant fabrics, firefighting foam and food packaging manufactured by Minnesota-based 3M.

PFOS builds up in human blood, doesn't break down in the environment and triggers health problems such as liver damage, impaired fertility, immune system disorders, thyroid disease, increased cholesterol levels and reduced vaccine effectiveness. Long-term exposure also might cause cancer.

A single serving of freshwater fish during a year is equivalent to drinking water laden with 48 parts per trillion of PFOS for a month, Andrews and his colleagues concluded.

To put that number into context, the nationwide median of PFOS in drinking water is estimated to be less than 5 ppt. The highest concentration detected in Chicago drinking water so far is 2.8 ppt.

In June, the EPA announced there is effectively no safe exposure to PFOS and a related chemical, PFOA.

Freshwater fish in the United States appear to be significantly more contaminated than seafood. The median concentration of forever chemicals in the EPA testing was 278 times higher than what the Food and Drug Administration found during the past four years in saltwater fish, shrimp, lobster, clams and oysters.

(Excerpt) Read more at medicalxpress.com ...


TOPICS: Health/Medicine
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last
Well, this is not great to hear, but it seems limited to rivers and the Great Lakes.
1 posted on 01/21/2023 1:20:14 PM PST by ConservativeMind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Mazey; ckilmer; goodnesswins; Jane Long; BusterDog; jy8z; ProtectOurFreedom; matthew fuller; ...

The “Take Charge Of Your Health” Ping List

This high volume ping list is for health articles and studies which describe something you or your doctor, when informed, may be able to immediately implement for your benefit.

Email me to get on either the “Common/Top Issues” (20 - 25% fewer pings) or “Everything” list.

2 posted on 01/21/2023 1:20:47 PM PST by ConservativeMind (Trump: Befuddling Democrats, Republicans, and the Media for the benefit of the US and all mankind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

So change the name to toxic water. Fresh no longer applies


3 posted on 01/21/2023 1:23:29 PM PST by albie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

Less concerned fishing WA, MT, WY, CO.


4 posted on 01/21/2023 1:25:39 PM PST by G Larry ( "woke" means 'stupid enough to fall for the promotion of every human weakness into a virtue')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

More here:

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4124026/posts

Still wanting some catfish. 😁👍


5 posted on 01/21/2023 1:25:42 PM PST by rktman (Destroy America from within? Check! WTH? Enlisted USN 1967 to end up with this? 😕)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

Do the freshwater fish eat freshwater fish?


6 posted on 01/21/2023 1:32:06 PM PST by Larry Lucido (Donate! Don't just post clickbait!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind
EPA testing...


7 posted on 01/21/2023 1:32:48 PM PST by Cletus.D.Yokel (Machine-gun jumblies. How'd I miss that? - Austin Powers 2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

I knew that the Great Lakes weren’t salt water, but I didn’t think anyone referred to as “fresh water” for a long time. Too many city storm drains going in there.


8 posted on 01/21/2023 1:35:01 PM PST by Farmerbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

“... reduced vaccine effectiveness...”

Well, there you go. More cover for the failed covid vaccine.


9 posted on 01/21/2023 1:35:59 PM PST by dmzTahoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

Thus may be true, but keep in mind it is from the EPA, so it is not from a trustworthy source. Even they admit they only found 48 parts per trillion. That does not seem to be a lot.


10 posted on 01/21/2023 1:38:57 PM PST by EastTexasTraveler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

48 parts per trillion. Oooo scary. I like this new word “forever chemicals” too. More scaaaary. Science! Just out of curiosity is or perhaps was MTSB a forever chemical?


11 posted on 01/21/2023 1:40:10 PM PST by TalBlack (We have a Christian duty and a patriotic duty. God help us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

Great lakes and rivers near cities, I’m guessing elsewhere is safe.


12 posted on 01/21/2023 1:46:12 PM PST by jimwatx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G Larry

It is a shame the big Idaho lakes are poisoned.

Washington and Oregon are not remotely safe either in many places.


13 posted on 01/21/2023 1:50:07 PM PST by algore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind
In June, the EPA announced there is effectively no safe exposure to PFOS and a related chemical, PFOA.

The EPA lies in order to build their power over our lives.

Our ability to detect extremely tiny amounts of chemicals is at an all time high.

This is scare mongering at its worst.

The dose makes the poison.

This is from the NSW ministry of health, in Australia, for a different point of view:

How do PFASs affect human health?

There is currently no consistent evidence that exposure to PFOS and PFOA causes adverse human health effects. However, based on the evidence from animal studies potential adverse health effects cannot be excluded.

The existing limited studies on PFHxS suggest that this chemical can cause effects in laboratory test animals similar to the effects caused by PFOS. However, based on available studies, PFHxS appears to be less potent in animal studies than PFOS.

Much of the research on humans has been done with people who were exposed to relatively high levels of PFASs through their work. Workers involved in the manufacture or use of PFASs usually have higher blood PFAS levels than the general public. Studies on PFAS workers have looked for effects on cholesterol levels, male hormones, heart disease, liver changes and other effects, including cancer. These studies have not consistently shown that PFAS exposure is linked to health problems.

Does exposure to PFASs cause cancer?

In humans, there is no conclusive evidence that PFASs cause any specific illnesses, including cancer.

Studies in laboratory animals suggest that PFOS and PFOA may promote some cancers in those animals, but it is not clear if these results have any implications for human health.

No existing studies have found a causal link between exposures to PFOS and PFOA and cancer in humans. Occupational studies of workers involved in the manufacture or use of PFOS and PFOA have looked at whether PFOS and PFOA are linked with prostate, bladder, and liver cancer, with no consistent findings. However, additional health studies are ongoing to assess whether evidence for a causal link between PFASs exposure and cancer may exist. Hence the International Agency for Cancer Research (IARC) has classified PFOA as possible carcinogen (Class 2B), but PFOS has not been classified as yet.

Comment from Marktwain:

The point is, we can detect these chemicals at extremely tiny amounts, and there is no direct evidence of harm to humans at those amounts.

If there is a toxic effect, it is so tiny as to be extremely difficult to detect.

14 posted on 01/21/2023 1:51:25 PM PST by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

Tell that to all the dozens of Burmese and Yemeni immigrants I see daily fishing down at the shoreline on Lake Erie.


15 posted on 01/21/2023 1:53:16 PM PST by PGR88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TalBlack

It might be scary.

But most of this is pr firms working for law firms who are looking for the next payout.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/thinx-to-pay-millions-to-settle-class-action-lawsuit-alleging-its-period-underwear-contained-potentially-harmful-chemicals/ar-AA16BqQh

I personally am concerned because I have followed this for 40 years and read all the transgender frog studies


16 posted on 01/21/2023 1:59:05 PM PST by algore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

I get the American Chemical Society’s Chemical and Engineering News and every single issue has at least a small communication about these chemicals.

And the past few years a lot about microplastics.

Companies should really do long-term environmental testing on their products.

One of my professors in Packaging Engineering was into biodegradable packaging polymers for this very reason.


17 posted on 01/21/2023 2:03:38 PM PST by packagingguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

2.8 ppt....

1,000,000,000

Or. .0000000028 of a percent? One would have to wonder how much fish we’d have to eat again?


18 posted on 01/21/2023 2:06:26 PM PST by teeman8r (Armageddon won't be pretty, but it's not like it's the end of the world or something )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

From the same people who wants us all to eat bugs.


19 posted on 01/21/2023 2:09:55 PM PST by Joe 6-pack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

They’re more confined and the Great Lakes have been dumps for people like Kodak and RG&E


20 posted on 01/21/2023 2:11:41 PM PST by Sacajaweau ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson