|
America and Europe critique research
- to strengthen protections & reduce PFAS exposures
- to benefit public & environmental health Australia use research
- to manipulate & challenge credible science
- to deny the public valuable information |
|
PFAS research
New research February 2023
Consideration of pathways for immunotoxicity of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)
Became aware of this research as a counter to a report shocker from Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) response letter (9/3/2023).
Both EFSA and the US EPA’s HBGVs for PFAS are based on human epidemiology studies reporting a decreased response of the immune system to vaccination (i.e. decreased antibody production following vaccination).
Instead, FSANZ stood by their 2021 review of studies called - PFAS and Immunomodulation Review and Update which used limited studies while also discrediting them.
There was no author and appears not to be peer reviewed.
The point of my complaint letter was based on due diligence and duty of care so it was very foolish and arrogant of FSANZ in their reply to not provide new research why Australia should support EFSA and US EPA instead, providing me with a petty outdated Australia report.
Therefore, FSANZ continues to assert their TDIs are protective of public health without providing any evidence.
Now that is a shocker!
Consideration of pathways for immunotoxicity of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)
Became aware of this research as a counter to a report shocker from Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) response letter (9/3/2023).
- See PFAS Food Safety page here for background story and letters.
Both EFSA and the US EPA’s HBGVs for PFAS are based on human epidemiology studies reporting a decreased response of the immune system to vaccination (i.e. decreased antibody production following vaccination).
Instead, FSANZ stood by their 2021 review of studies called - PFAS and Immunomodulation Review and Update which used limited studies while also discrediting them.
There was no author and appears not to be peer reviewed.
The point of my complaint letter was based on due diligence and duty of care so it was very foolish and arrogant of FSANZ in their reply to not provide new research why Australia should support EFSA and US EPA instead, providing me with a petty outdated Australia report.
Therefore, FSANZ continues to assert their TDIs are protective of public health without providing any evidence.
Now that is a shocker!
pooled blood in the population
PFAS research is dependent on pooled blood testing of the general population, what were PFAS levels in the past, present and how PFAS blood levels will change in the future. A recent review, Study finds evidence of chemicals in Australians dating back to 1975..one of the oldest collections of human biological material for use in health and medical research in the world, has been successfully used and analysed to measure chemical levels in humans over a 20 year period...The levels increased more than sevenfold between 1975 and 1995...The increases observed in this study, followed by decreases in PFAS serum concentrations seen in Australia after 2002, demonstrate the major impact chemical regulations have had on the exposure towards legacy PFASs in the general population.
This is long chain PFAS reducing in the general population because of regulation which highlights political will can make a difference in reducing PFAS exposures in the general population.
However, heavily contaminated areas are still exposed to legacy long chain PFAS which is the complex issue of remediation and separating people and food producing areas from exposure risk.
This is long chain PFAS reducing in the general population because of regulation which highlights political will can make a difference in reducing PFAS exposures in the general population.
However, heavily contaminated areas are still exposed to legacy long chain PFAS which is the complex issue of remediation and separating people and food producing areas from exposure risk.
What is new international research saying
|
Facebook group North Carolina Stop Gen-X In Our Water (Nonprofit) posted the following news article -
Where did the PFAS in your blood come from? These computer models offer clues New research could help pinpoint “forever chemicals” exposure — giving communities a roadmap for cleanup and individuals direction on what to avoid. The research, while not yet perfect, marks the beginning of what could become a wide-scale method of determining where the PFAS in our blood came from—such as our food, drinking water or use of nonstick cookware—and how much of it came from each source. But its effectiveness hinges on the need to collect more comprehensive data on where PFAS occurs in people’s bodies, the environment and sources. If scientists can collect this data, then these methods would be able to draw a roadmap for people’s exposure, allowing us to pinpoint problem areas, avoid contamination and implement regulatory changes. |
My comment - To know and understand more about how PFAS interacts in the body needs to also include post mortem pathology for what PFAS chemicals are bioaccumulating in the organs and tissues not just the blood.
|
pfas levels of concern
Another article, Doctors should test levels of PFAS in people at high risk, notes -
...“The National Academies are asked to do studies that would be free of the effects of advocacy, special interests, and politics, and are looked at as a trusted neutral body,”
...People in “vulnerable life stages” – such as during fetal development in pregnancy, early childhood and old age – are at high risk, the report said. So are firefighters, workers in fluorochemical manufacturing plants and those who live near commercial airports, military bases, landfills, incinerators, wastewater treatment plants and farms where contaminated sewage sludge is used.
...The chemicals remain in the body until “exposure ceases,” and while blood levels may drop over time, levels of PFAS “continue to persist even after exposure ends,” the report said. That’s because PFAS can be stored for years in different organs in the body, said academies committee member Jane Hoppin, an environmental epidemiologist and deputy director of the Center for Human Health and the Environment at North Carolina State University in Raleigh.
...“The National Academies are asked to do studies that would be free of the effects of advocacy, special interests, and politics, and are looked at as a trusted neutral body,”
...People in “vulnerable life stages” – such as during fetal development in pregnancy, early childhood and old age – are at high risk, the report said. So are firefighters, workers in fluorochemical manufacturing plants and those who live near commercial airports, military bases, landfills, incinerators, wastewater treatment plants and farms where contaminated sewage sludge is used.
...The chemicals remain in the body until “exposure ceases,” and while blood levels may drop over time, levels of PFAS “continue to persist even after exposure ends,” the report said. That’s because PFAS can be stored for years in different organs in the body, said academies committee member Jane Hoppin, an environmental epidemiologist and deputy director of the Center for Human Health and the Environment at North Carolina State University in Raleigh.
Understanding pfas blood levels
The report from the above news link recommended blood tests look for seven PFAS that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention currently monitors: MeFOSAA, PFHxS, PFOA, PFDA, PFUnDA, PFOS and PFNA. Australia only monitor PFOA, PFOS & PFHxS.
The following is a summary and consider a nanogram is equivalent to one billionth of a gram.
Again, on my investigation and siting the evidence, occupational exposure in Australian people to the sum of PFAS shows blood serum levels are regularly over 0.20ng/ml.
From what I have observed, cattle are also sold with levels between 100ng/ml up to 1550ng/ml. Anecdotally, we have heard of higher levels. Calves are born with existing high levels of 80-100ng/ml passing from the embryo > placenta > milk all being on-sold for human consumption. But that is just meat and not the many other products that contain PFAS from produce contaminated, additives for pesticides or those manufactured that breakdown into dust in your home which you ingest. Even town water has PFAS levels.
The following is a summary and consider a nanogram is equivalent to one billionth of a gram.
- Greater than 20 nanograms per milliliter of blood (0.20ng/ml): If the sum of PFAS found in blood serum or plasma is 20 nanograms per milliliter or higher, the patient is at the greatest risk of adverse health effects. Clinicians should “encourage reduction of PFAS exposure for these patients,” look for signs of testicular cancer and ulcerative colitis and test thyroid and kidney function at all wellness visits, the report said. In addition, doctors should prioritize screening for cholesterol, breast cancer and hypertension during pregnancy.
- Between 2 and 20 nanograms per milliliter: If the sum of the seven PFAS is between 2 and 20 nanograms per milliliter, there is a concern for adverse effects. Patients should reduce PFAS exposure and be screened for high cholesterol, breast cancer and hypertension during pregnancy.
- Below 2 nanograms per milliliter: If blood concentration levels fall below 2 nanograms per milliliter, people “are not expected to have adverse health effects,” the committee said.
Again, on my investigation and siting the evidence, occupational exposure in Australian people to the sum of PFAS shows blood serum levels are regularly over 0.20ng/ml.
From what I have observed, cattle are also sold with levels between 100ng/ml up to 1550ng/ml. Anecdotally, we have heard of higher levels. Calves are born with existing high levels of 80-100ng/ml passing from the embryo > placenta > milk all being on-sold for human consumption. But that is just meat and not the many other products that contain PFAS from produce contaminated, additives for pesticides or those manufactured that breakdown into dust in your home which you ingest. Even town water has PFAS levels.
|
Page last updated 30 April 2023
|