|
|
|
|
|
|
by caditinpiscinam
911 days ago
|
|
|
As someone who lived in a place that's still dealing with pfoa contamination, your characterization of "anti-progress doomsayers" feels insensitive. If you tell people that they and their kids have toxic chemicals in their blood at 100x the normal concentration they're going to be concerned. Writing them off as outliers is dismissive and misses the point; it doesn't matter if things are safe in small doses if companies can't be trusted to avoid exposing people to unsafe doses. From a 2016 study in Vermont: > More than 400 wells tested positive for PFOA. More than 300 wells had
concentrations at levels greater than the state’s PFOA/PFOS drinking water
standard of 20 parts per trillion (ppt). The maximum level of PFOA detected in a
private drinking water well was 4,600 ppt. https://dec.vermont.gov/sites/dec/files/documents/PFAS%20Sam... |
|
|
Thanks for posting the (ppt) 20 ppt. It looks like all the animals have higher levels.
One example, with a Science(TM) paywall, cited on the wiki - Great tit near 3M, Port of Antwerp, Belgium 2007 liver 553–11,359[39]
Had a 553-11,359ppb from liver tests published in 2006.
Really happy we moved away from ppb to ppt.