HOME WHO WE ARE NEWS / EVENTS PUBLICATIONS GALLERY RESOURCES CONTACT




INSIDE LINKS


What you need to know

What are your
    greatest risks

Where to get your
    water tested


RECOMMENDED LINKS

10/14 Press Release

7/15 Press Release

3/10 Press Release

PFAS in Maryland panel discussion

Bay Journal article 8/8/20

PBS Newshour on PFAS

CDC = PFAS & COVID Vaccine

MilitaryPoisons.org

OUTSIDE LINKS

DOD 2018 Report

Environmental Working Group

EWG's interactive map

PFAS in Pet Food and Pet Products

Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility

PEER Fact Sheet

US Environmental Protection Agency

Maryland Department of the Environment

MDE on the St. Mary's River

St. Mary's Health Dept.

European Environment Agency

LAB REPORTS

PFAS in crab, oyster, and Rockfish

PFAS in water & oysters

MDE's PFAS Report

SMRWA 2020 Scientific Report

SMRWA 2020 Report Addemdum


MSU and Texas A&M 2002 Study: PFAS in Oysters

SPECIFIC PRODUCTS

TFF = Take-Out Food Pacaging

CR = Take-Out Food Packaging

PFAS in St. Mary's County

  • WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW
  • WHAT ARE YOUR GREATEST RISKS
  • WHERE TO GET YOUR WATER TESTED

      Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl substances, know as "PFAS," pose a health risk to humans and other animals all around the world. The emerging science on the potential health crisis from these environmentally persistent, manmade chemical compounds is alarming. Yet our federal government has done little to limit our exposure. This site explores facts about PFAS here in St. Mary's County and, especially, for the St. Mary's River. Also included are links to additional resources.

      The health implications from exposure and consumption is an emerging science and folks should learn more about PFAS and avoid exposure as much as possible.

Would you rather watch to a panel discussion than read? Maryland PIRG—PFAS in the Chesapeake

The content below is taken from our white paper, PFAS in St. Mary's, which cites the sources for this information.


What are PFAS?

      Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances, or PFAS, is an umbrella term for over 8,000 man-made chemicals characterized by multiple fluorine atoms attached to an alkyl chain. Being fully fluorinated makes these chemicals extremely hard to break down. Such strong chemical bonds give it commercial value for products requiring resistance to heat, stains, water, and grease. PFAS manufacturing began in the 1940s and was found to be so useful that these chemicals can be found in almost all household items considered non-stick, non-stain, oil-resistant, or water-resistant. The Center for Disease Control has stated on their website that nearly everyone residing in the US has PFAS in their body. Dubbed by many as "forever chemicals" since they do not readily break down, PFAS accumulate in the environment, especially in soils, surface waters, and animals.

      Commercial manufacturing of PFAS began in the 1940s, and industry has expanded production ever since. Since 2010, many PFAS chemicals have been voluntarily phased out by eight US chemical companies, but PFAS are still widely found due to its legacy of use and persistence in the environment. New "short-chain" and Gen-X fluorinated compounds have replaced, or are replacing, the older ones.

 


What are the health concerns?

      Dr. Linda Birnbaum, former director of the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences, argues that even minute amounts of PFAS are health concerns and that newer compounds act very similarly on lab rats. Therefore the whole class of PFAS should be regulated as one. (Watch the Maryland Public Interest Research Group's November 16, 2020 panel discussion on PFAS in Maryland.

      “If you look at the data, pancreatic tumors are present at very, very low concentrations from PFOA [in rats],” Birnbaum told the audience at the conference. “If you use the pancreatic tumors in the rats in the [National Institute for Environmental Health Science National Toxicology Program] study to calculate what would really be a virtually safe dose, you’re getting down at about 0.1 ppt. [parts per trillion] Well, that’s really low. And that’s only for one PFAS.”

      Dr. Birnbaum was speaking about many, if not all, of the PFAS family of chemicals. Studies in lab rats found similar health responses to the newer "short chain" and GenX chemicals at extremely low doses as they had with PFOA and PFOS. It's important to understand that these chemicals accumulate in our bodies and the health impact is likely the sum total of all of them.

      PFAS are associated with suppressed immune function, thyroid disease, testicular and kidney disease, cancers, and liver damage. Newer short chain and GenX compounds have been studied little but scientists studying them currently are finding that they have similar toxicology to long chain PFAS.

      Other recent studies have associated PFOS and PFOA with hepatotoxicity, neurotoxicity, reproductive toxicity, immunotoxicity, thyroid disruption, cardiovascular toxicity, pulmonary toxicity, and renal toxicity in laboratory animals and suggest these conditions may affect in-vitro human systems.


PFAS effect on human health published by the European Environment Agency. Retrieved from: https://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/human/chemicals/emerging-chemical-risks-in-europe


What's in St. Mary's River?

      The St. Mary's River Watershed Association (SMRWA), the Maryland Department of the Environment, and the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility have all tested the waters of the St. Mary's River for PFAS. All three also tested oysters; PEER also tested a blue crab and a Rockfish caught nearby in Cornfield Harbor. All three studies had similar findings for the waters of the St. Mary's River—minute quantities of PFAS were in most locations tested. Several compounds were found in some areas. Total PFAS ranged from 1.1 ppt to 13.7 ppt. The focus of all three groups' testing was the Navy's Webster Outlying Field as a potential source or hotspot. But testing done further upriver, at the mouth of the Patuxent, and near Maryland's eastern shore (Fishing Bay was 6.79 ppt to 12.47 ppt) also detected PFAS.

      Oysters tested by SMRWA and PEER and the one crab had detectible total PFAS of similar range. The highest oyster was 2070 ppt of five PFAS compounds and the crab had 6,650 ppt of eight PFAS compounds. By far the 23-inch Rockfish, which is believed to have been three years old, had the highest concentration of PFAS compounds at 23,100 ppt. The lab that MDE used for analysis was unable to detect any PFAS in oysters; their detection level was 1000 times higher than the other labs that SMRWA and PEER contracted.

      Studies elsewhere, such as New Jersey, New Hampshire, and North Carolina, have had similar results comparing fish and oysters. Generally, it appears that fish have about ten or more times as much PFAS as oysters.





Suspected release and flow of PFAS contamination on the Patuxent Navy Base that was presented at a public meeting hosted by the US Navy on March 3, 2020 at the Lexington Park Library. SMRWA file photo of a US Navy poster.


Where are PFAS found?

      PFAS chemicals can be found in almost all household items considered non-stick, non-stain, oil-resistant, fire-resistant, and water-resistant. It can be found in cosmetics, hand sanitizers, lotions, sun screens, dental floss, furniture, drapes, and carpets—items we use every day. Paints, pesticides, photography, and food containers may contain PFAS.

      Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) used to put out fuel fires were first developed in the mid-1960s by the Navy and have been refined since. AFFF products of this era up until 2015 contain PFOA and/or PFOS - two of the most studied and deemed harmful PFAS chemicals. (Most of the 8000-plus compounds have never been tested by independent science.) In training drills at airports, jet fuel is ignited, then trainees use the AFFF to put it out. Early on, spent AFFF was sent on to the local wastewater treatment plant or left to disperse in storm water drainage ditches, and leaching into the soil and ground water. Wastewater treatment plants were and mostly remain unable to process AFFF and the PFAS chemicals pass through their systems and are sent on to the discharge area—such as the Chesapeake Bay.

      Estimates of Americans currently exposed to PFAS in their drinking water range from 10 million to over 200 million. Many foods are also a leading source of PFAS either from the containers used for cooking, transport, and storage of food or from the food itself. Food from polluted waters or grown on polluted land can contain PFAS.


What are my greatest risks?

      Scientist believe that seafood and drinking water are responsible for much of the PFAS found in human blood. Other significant sources might include a personal product, such as hair spray and eyeliner, or the ongoing use of Teflon®-coated cook ware or certain carryout containers including burger boxes, wrappers, disposable bowls, and bags for french fries, sides, and desserts.

      PFAS was not detected in most of the drinking water deep wells tested in St. Mary's county that we are aware of. METCOM has tested its larger wells, but it is not known if these tests have become recurring as is necessary since PFAS flow through the underground aquifer. Additionally, the best labs in the world can detect just four dozen or so of the 8,000-plus compounds known.

      Some surfactants and surface treatments contain PFAS. Some high end oils and greases have PFAS (look for "PTFE" on the label). Artificial turf is likely to contain PFAS.

      Emerging science on PFAS is looking at absorption through the skin, once believed not possible. Check your hand sanitizer list of ingredients for anything containing fluoride, flouro, or any acronym beginning with "P."


Who to believe?

      The EPA has this statement on it's website:
To provide Americans, including the most sensitive populations, with a margin of protection from a lifetime of exposure to PFOA and PFOS from drinking water, EPA has established the health advisory levels at 70 parts per trillion. The EPA does not regulate other compounds. [Click here to read EPA's statement]

      Sweden has set a slightly higher regulatory limit of total PFAS detected in drinking water at 90 ppt. The European Union's regulatory limit is 200 ppt total for 20 specific compounds.

      These regulatory limits are not even close to what Dr. Birnbaum and others suggest. Birnbaum, along with the Environmental Working Group, Toxic-Free Future, and other health advocacy groups, are pushing for the safe drinking water limit to be 0.1 ppt total for all PFAS compounds detected.

      Visit our many links to read more opinions and studies, and our governments' statements and publications. We highly recommend you watch the panel discussion PFAS in the Chesapeake that aired on Facebook November 16, 2020. Then you should decide for yourself and your family how you will or won't reduce PFAS in your life.


Where Can I Get My Water Tested?

      Lab testing of drinking water for PFAS is expensive. Only a few labs in the US are EPA-certified to test for PFAS. Some others will perform these tests and they do charge less—as low as $200. Very important in choosing a lab is understanding their threshold of detection. A high threshold is less expensive. (Remember above we mentioned that MDE tested oyster at a high threshold—therefore, they found no PFAS. We expect that PFAS was in those oysters as other lab tests confirmed PFAS in oysters nearby.)

      Certified labs test for certain PFAS compounds and generally group them together. You can choose to have them test for 14 compounds, 28 compounds, 32 compounds, or more. Of those labs that are EPA-certified, RTI Labs in Michigan charged SMRWA $295 to test for 28 compounds. Their threshold of detection is also quite low at 4.5 ppt. Eurofins lab in Pennsylvania charged SMRWA $356 to test for 32 compounds with the lowest threshold we've found, 0.44 ppt. Eurofins requires a "field blank" as well, which actually doubles the cost to $712. A field blank is a sample taken at the sampling site using PFAS-free water. It is used to confirm that the samples are not contaminated. (It is easy to contaminate a sample since PFAS can be on our clothes, on our hands, or ambient in the air. Remember, we are talking in parts per trillion).

      Of these three labs, only Eurofins can test animal flesh or blood with a low threshold.

 

Top of Page

 



<

HOME    |     WHO WE ARE    |     NEWS / EVENTS    |     PUBLICATIONS    |     GALLERY    |     RESOURCES    |     CONTACT US

St. Mary's River Watershed Association, Inc.
Post Office Box 94
St. Mary's City, MD 20686

©  Copyright 2005 - 2007  St. Mary's River Watershed Association, Inc.