Just one meal of caught fish per year is a significant dose of PFAS
Grace van Deelen for the Environmental Health News
An analysis of U.S. government data derived from more than 500
fish samples revealed that the majority of fish living in streams, rivers and
lakes across the country are contaminated with per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances
(PFAS) at levels almost 300 times higher than found in fish from other sources,
including ocean and farmed fish, according to the paper published recently in
the journal Environmental Research.
Importantly, perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), a type of PFAS
known to be particularly harmful, was the largest contributor to total PFAS
levels found in freshwater fish samples, averaging 74% of the total, according
to the study.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers PFOS specifically
to be a hazardous substance that “may present a substantial danger to human
health” due to its links to cancer and effects on reproductive, developmental,
and cardiovascular health, and warns that the chemical “may present a
substantial danger to human health.” Other PFAS have also been linked to
cancer, immune deficiencies, thyroid disease, and other health problems.
Freshwater fish represent an important U.S. food source, especially for people living on a low income. About 660,000 people in the U.S. eat fish they catch themselves three or more times per week.
“Consuming a single freshwater fish could measurably increase PFAS levels in your body,” said David Andrews, a senior scientist at the Environmental Working Group (EWG) and one of the authors of the paper. “These fish are incredibly contaminated.”
Many studies have shown that PFAS chemicals are pervasive in the
environment and the new analysis underscores the growing understanding that
humans and animals have little avenue for escaping contamination. The research
paper found that fish from all 48 continental U.S. states showed PFAS
contamination, and only one of the samples did not contain any detectable PFAS.
The study also found higher levels of PFAS among fish from the
Great Lakes as compared to water bodies elsewhere, indicating that the Great
Lakes are particularly vulnerable to contamination. According to Andrews, this
could be because the water in the Great Lakes empties into the ocean much more
slowly than other water bodies, aiding the accumulation of PFAS.
Heidi Pickard, a PhD candidate at Harvard University who studies
PFAS in aquatic ecosystems and was not involved in the new study, said the
results are likely an underestimate of the actual contamination present in
fish, given the lack of ability to test for all of the thousands of PFAS
chemicals and PFAS precursors — chemicals that break down to form PFAS once
they enter the environment.
“We’re only starting to be able to measure and quantify [other
PFAS compounds],” she said.
A
ubiquitous pollutant
PFAS are also often referred to as “forever chemicals” because they do not break down in the environment and bioaccumulate, persisting in the bodies of humans and animals. There are more than 4,000 man-made PFAS compounds used by a variety of industries for such things as electronics manufacturing, oil recovery, paints, fire-fighting foams, cleaning products and non-stick cookware.
According to one nationwide study,
97% of Americans have detectable levels of PFAS in their blood, and the
chemical is a ubiquitous pollutant in water and soil across the country.
The Biden Administration is implementing a series of steps to
try to restrict PFAS from contaminating water, air, land, and food as well as
to clean up PFAS pollution and speed up research on other PFAS issues.
Related: PFAS on our shelves and in our bodies
The findings are “very concerning” to communities that
frequently consume fish from local waterways, said Andrews. The general U.S.
population varies greatly in their frequency of fish consumption; anglers,
individuals living near water bodies, and immigrant communities coming from
cultures with high fish consumption are usually considered the highest
consumers.
These people are at higher risk of PFAS contamination; for
example, a 2017 study found
that higher consumption of fish and shellfish was associated with elevated
levels of some PFAS. A 2022 study of
Burmese immigrant anglers in New York State found elevated levels of PFOS in
the anglers compared to the general population. Some people, said Pickard, rely
on freshwater fish for subsistence and may not be able to afford substituting
store-bought fish for locally caught fish.
Catching and eating fish is also a sovereign right for
Indigenous tribal nations.
Regulation
lacking
While the EPA recognizes that eating U.S. freshwater fish exposes fishers to PFOS, there are currently no federal fish consumption regulations to protect fishers from these or other PFAS chemicals. Only 14 of 50 states have implemented PFAS-specific fish consumption advisories, which does not reflect the full extent of the contamination problem, according to the research paper.
For example, many states in the Great Lakes region use
guidelines set by the Great Lakes Consortium for Fish Consumption Advisories to
determine regulations. Those guidelines are based on the Environmental
Protection Agency’s 2016 drinking water standards.
Related: What are PFAS?
In 2022, the EPA substantially lowered the drinking water
standards — by about three orders of magnitude — with new interim guidelines.
If fish advisories across the country were updated to reflect the EPA’s interim
guidelines, nearly all fish from rivers, lakes and streams could be considered
unsafe, according to the research paper.
Sean Strom, an environmental toxicologist at the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources, said a lack of funding and scientific capacity
among state agencies is likely hindering the creation of new consumption
advisories. States that have been monitoring PFAS for longer are more able to
enact public health measures in response to changing science, according to
Strom.
There is growing evidence that PFAS are affecting other wildlife across
the country. The results for freshwater fish, said Andrews, is “just scratching
the surface” of the likely contamination by industrial chemicals happening in
ecosystems worldwide.
Pickard agreed and said more research is needed to show how PFAS
are impacting the lives and health of wildlife.
“We have a significant challenge in being able to assess
ecological risk for all these PFAS and what that’s going to mean for species,”
she said. “What are the biological effects going to be for them?”
Cleaning up the country’s water bodies is unlikely, according to
Ranier Lohmann, a professor of marine chemistry who studies PFAS at the
University of Rhode Island.
“There’s not an easy solution to widespread, low-level
contamination,” he said.
Editor's note: This story was produced in collaboration with The New Lede.
From
Your Site Articles
A Long Road To Recovery For Lake
Superior Fish ›
IN-DEPTH: What We Know About PFAS
In Our Food ›
Related
Articles Around The Web
PFAS Are Contaminating Our Fish –
What This Means And What We ... ›
High Levels Of PFAS 'Forever
Chemicals' Found In Fish | Civil Eats ›
