Staggering amounts of toxic “forever chemicals” have been found in freshwater fish, but there is no federal guidance on what is a safe amount to eat

Bill Eisenman has always fished.

“Growing up, we ate whatever we caught — catfish, carp, freshwater drum,” he said. “That was the only real source of fish in our diet as a family, and we ate a lot of it.”

Today, a branch of the Rouge River runs through Eisenman’s property in a suburb north of Detroit. But in recent years, he has been wary about a group of chemicals known as PFAS, also referred to as “forever chemicals,” which don’t break down quickly in the environment and accumulate in soil, water, fish, and our bodies.

The chemicals have spewed from manufacturing plants and landfills into local ecosystems, polluting surface water and groundwater, and the wildlife living there. And hundreds of military bases have been pinpointed as sources of PFAS chemicals leaching into nearby communities.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    121 year ago

    Friendly reminder to donate blood or plasma regularly. We do need to deal with PFAS, but at least you can reduce the accumulation in your body.

    • Flying Squid
      link
      81 year ago

      You should do that anyway, but as far as PFAS, the study unfortunately only showed a 30% decrease. I doubt that is enough to avoid the long-term effects.

      • @kautau
        link
        41 year ago

        Does the PFAS get filtered before going into someone else’s bloodstream? This seems weirdly like “give someone else your chemicals,” a reverse Peter thiel situation

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          I haven’t read anything about it, but I’m pretty damn sure there’s no easy way to remove it without destroying the blood or plasma. Given the alternative, though (dying of blood loss), some PFAS are probably the least of a patients concerns that day. x3

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          someone that needs blood has probably lost blood already so it’s probably better to not die.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        i would not infer that 30% was the limit, that’s just the reduction after 1 year of donating every 6 weeks.