A peer reviewed study released today found alarmingly high levels of forever chemicals known as PFAS in many locally caught wild fish, particularly high in species of trout and salmon in the Great Lakes region.
I read a similar article last year about PFAS.
The bad….It’s bad for you.
The good….PFAS levels are dropping.
Even though they are a “forever compound,” their use is being monitored more closely.
In a Hazwoper (Hazardous Waste Operations) Class I took a long time ago, the tongue in cheek saying was “Dilution is the Solution to Pollution”
PFAS are like many other chemicals commonly used with little discretion until a problem is seen. Add it to the list with things like DDT, CFCs, Lead, Asbestos, etc.
Hopefully none of us have eaten enough fish to cause testicular cancer (a side effect of PFAS) 
I dont think eating fish I catch once every other week will be my downfall. Maybe if I ate fish all the time?
Worked with PFAS for years. Still got my nuts.
The major company around here responsible for it is 3M. In 2018 they settled a whopping $850 million settlement with the state for releasing these forever chemicals into the environment at a manufacturing site in 2010. The primary product made at this site that requires the use of it is scotchguard.
The researchers from Duke University and the Environmental Working Group analyzed more than 500 samples of fish filets harvested from across the United States between 2013 and 2015 by the EPA during routine monitoring programs.
I’m not saying this is a good thing, but I find it odd that it’s taken 7 years to get this word out…and more so since 3M and other companies just started talking about discontinuing the “forever” chemicals. 
The article I read yesterday was titled (by Yahoo News) “Eating one wild fish same as month of drinking tainted water: study”.
Great, I thought it would be the smoking or drinking that would kill me. 
Great, I thought it would be the smoking or drinking that would kill me.
Every thing will kill us. Just enjoy it while we last
John Rasmussen wrote:
Great, I thought it would be the smoking or drinking that would kill me.
Not sex.
Like they said of news stories…”If it bleeds, it leads…” It seems that everyone out there has some sort of “report” citing this hazard or that. We’re rapidly becoming a society paralyzed by the fears of “What-ifs”. What if the sun goes out(it will on day)? What if an asteroid hits the earth? Globull warming, EMP-coronal ejections, overpopulation, ad naseum. They’re all going to happen. So the real question is “What are you going to do about it. And will it make any difference(it won’t). Personally, I refuse to let my life be dictated by the fears of what-ifs, especially since we have absolutely no control over them. The whole climate change debate is cloaked if establishing fear among the common folk. And since nothing motives the masses like fear, we’re all to willing to surrender all to anyone with a “plan” that will prevent the inevitable. A past spokeswoman of the IPCC was caught on a hot mic bragging about how this isn’t about climate change. It’s about de-industrialization of the west, and creating a hysteria that will allow them to usurp power from the people (AKA, the West, where the people hold more power than in most eastern or socialist nations).
Shut out the hysteria. Go fishing. Enjoy your families. Don’t let them rob you of your joy. If you do, they’ve already conquered you.
John Rasmussen wrote:
Great, I thought it would be the smoking or drinking that would kill me.Not sex.
that be a great way to go!!!!!!! 
Not sex.
Not enough of that going on lately to kill me 
Im sure we are all doomed with that stuff in the eastern metro. Thank you 3m.
Don’t forget the u of m and dumping mercury in the mighty miss. That coal plant was a nasty place as well
i shouldnt have to worry about any of this since i never catch any fish to eat 
Military bases are often big contributors of PFAS due to its large presence in fire retardants (foam and the like). The big explosion (lots of fire retarding foam) at the Superior Husky refinery probably hasn’t help things.
Shut out the hysteria. Go fishing. Enjoy your families. Don’t let them rob you of your joy. If you do, they’ve already conquered you.
I dont see it as doom and gloom or that ive been conquered. Don’t think this article suggests not fishing, just to maybe do a meal or two less if your concerned about the chemicals. I would think the people on this forum would be concerned with how we let big companies walk all over us and our natural resources. I for one am glad for articles that expose actions like this. I can adjust my spending, voting, and investing accordingly. The fact that the levels are going down means something is working at least.
I dont see it as doom and gloom or that ive been conquered. Don’t think this article suggests not fishing, just to maybe do a meal or two less if your concerned about the chemicals. I would think the people on this forum would be concerned with how we let big companies walk all over us and our natural resources. I for one am glad for articles that expose actions like this. I can adjust my spending, voting, and investing accordingly. The fact that the levels are going down means something is working at least.
Good post. I don’t mean this to start something polarizing, but I’m always amazed how many people in the “don’t ever trust government” crowd are willing to go along with whatever big business does. I know, I get it, we don’t want government regulation to overdo it. But without some form of responsible, reasonable regulation, big businesses will do things that only look out for themselves. I think it’s fair to not trust big government and big business.
I for one am glad for articles that expose actions like this.
The issue for me is that companies like DuPont and 3M knew this crap was being dumped into the environment, they knew it would be there for years, and they knew it caused health effects in both people and the food chain, yet they did nothing about it. Profit over all else.
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>FinickyFish wrote:</div>
I for one am glad for articles that expose actions like this.The issue for me is that companies like DuPont and 3M knew this crap was being dumped into the environment, they knew it would be there for years, and they knew it caused health effects in both people and the food chain, yet they did nothing about it. Profit over all else.
Welcome to the world we live in. Makes you wonder where the environmental contractors when this was happening. Was the epa paid off ? Or that blind. Hard to believe they didn’t know
Welcome to the world we live in. Makes you wonder where the environmental contractors when this was happening. Was the epa paid off ? Or that blind. Hard to believe they didn’t know
I hear ya. I can’t really comment on the regulatory portion of it and the EPA, as I am not informed on that part in any way. I believe initially, the standard for these chemicals in drinking/ground water was not set properly by the EPA or state pollution agencies. We now know that even parts per trillion can cause issues. Honestly I would not be surprised if most of us have traces of PFAS in our bodies already.
Honestly I would not be surprised if most of us have traces of PFAS in our bodies already.
[/quote]
You ever cooked with a scratched up Teflon pan? Luckily there I hear you just ‘pass’ the teflon flakes intact haha!
It’s a long one, but it made me inspect what we were using in our kitchen.
Believe it or not, fluorochemicals still have hugely important uses that have no current known replacement technologies … example semiconductor manufacturing. If PFAS were eliminated today … so are semiconductors (aka chips).
Companies do not create materials to create pollution. They create solutions that sometimes result in problems down the road that may not have been perceived when invented or problems that were even detectable by monitoring equipment at the time.
Firefighting foam is an exceptionally effective fire suppression tool, helping to minimize the impact of some of the worst possible fires, including flammable liquid fires. Unfortunately, the most effective of these firefighting foams, aqueous film-forming foam or AFFF contains PFAS, which the EPA has stated to be dangerous.
Much (not all) of the PFAS detected in the water supply across the USA is the result of firefighting foams used to extinguish fires and during training exercises. Military and airports were especially heavy users of these types of firefighting chemicals.
Companies do not create materials to create pollution. They create solutions that sometimes result in problems down the road that may not have been perceived when invented or problems that were even detectable by monitoring equipment at the time.
Definitely not the case with DuPont or 3M. They knew about it, but disposing of these chemicals was an expensive and arduous task, one that would affect their profit margin. Its perfectly fine to use them, you just need to dispose of them properly. Not introduce them into the water supply or the environment where they will remain for years.
Oh man, lots of people who purport to know a lot about PFAS and about 3M in this thread.
Allow me to provide my opinion on a few things, I have some rather unique experience with this topic that the rest of you are lacking. All comments below are solely my opinion and do not represent any company’s official stance on any topic.
1) 3M toxicologists discovered C8 fluorochemistry (PFOS and PFOA) was persistent around the year 2000 and 3M promptly released that data publicly and discontinued the manufacture of C8 FC.
2) PFAS is an awfully broad term that has been redefined a few times throughout the 2000’s. There are many many many other PFAS chemistries that continue to be manufactured by many companies and are also persistent in the environment. Your gore Tex boots and rain coats are PFAS, your Teflon coated cookware is PFAS. Your fluorocarbon fishing line is PFAS, your carpet is PFAS coated like anything that claims to be stain resistant.
3) AFFF is a major source of the pollution you’re referring to. Used WIDELY by the military and all airports. Brittman seems to be the only one in the know and I’m guessing he may be the only other person who understands this topic on the website.
4) 3M settled for approximatelt 500 million because the state of MN continually tried re opening lawsuits that were dismissed thrice based on an extreme lack of scientific data demonstrating any link between Pfas and health effects. It was a dumb flowering idea to settle because, although the state AGREED that there was no harm and zero evidence of health effects, now there’s 49 other states who want a juicy payday. Read the settlement terms and see what the state of MN admitted, it’s rather interesting. Remember it’s a settlement not a judgement, the only people who lost were the 10k+ employees that were laid off to compensate for it.
5) the reason these chemistries are persistent is because they are inert- they don’t react with anything at all in nature. Nothing breaks them down. What does this mean? Well for starters they aren’t at all likely to react with your DNA to cause cancer. Search literature as you see fit, there’s no reliable data supporting any health effects related to these chemistries. The studies cited by the state of MN were funded and conducted by a career lawyer, friend of the MN DA, with no access to a laboratory and no academic or career history in any field of science or laboratory work.big LOL on that one. I’m sure his data was top notch and not biased in any way.
6) persistent is not inherently a good thing or bad thing. It’s simply persistent. We’ve seen persistent chemistries with legitimately bad effects, and we’ve seen some with no effect whatsoever. Keep in mind the meaning of words used.
Anyway, I no longer have a stake in 3M. They have a lot of problems and are overall poorly managed. This is reflected in the abysmal stock performance and just how misinformed the public is about things like Pfas.
Definitely not the case with DuPont or 3M. They knew about it, but disposing of these chemicals was an expensive and arduous task, one that would affect their profit margin. Its perfectly fine to use them, you just need to dispose of them properly. Not introduce them into the water supply or the environment where they will remain for years.
The notion that dumping something in a river or lake would somehow be cheaper over the long term than disposing of properly is completely absurd. Do you think that these companies, or any for that matter, produce product and just dump it? They sell it. Downstream users are responsible for disposal of whatever they buy and use or don’t use. Do you return spoiled milk to the grocery store and expect them to deal with it? Come on man use some logic. Some incredible mental gymnastics must be happening to arrive at this conclusion.
When govt says “yes you may dispose of here” and then years later decide “no you should not have done that” that’s when some folks end up with lots of interesting regulatory and legal work to tackle.
KPE has done his homework on this topic. He is spot on in his comments. I’m pretty familiar with this topic also and wouldn’t disagree with anything he has posted.
On another forum it was suggested that one of the groups behind this study is the RAS industry. RAS is the inland Recirculating Aquatic Systems which is the cleanest way to farm raise salmon. It’s filtered, pure water and the waste byproduct is used to grow lettuce. There are no parasites (sea lice) that is found in ocean pen raised salmon. Currently there are systems in Florida and Maine. It is the future of fish farming.
As many as you have said, I’m just going to live my life and carry on.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
