this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2024
179 points (98.9% liked)

News

23301 readers
3511 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
rjc@lemmy.world
Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
dezmd@lemmy.world
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
JonsJava@lemmy.world
gedaliyah@lemmy.world
Blackbeard@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
jeffw@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
179
PFAS may be contaminating drinking water for up to 27% of Americans – study (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
29 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Summary

A US Geological Survey study estimates PFAS chemicals may contaminate drinking water for up to 70% of the 140 million Americans using aquifers, affecting around 95 million people.

Some groundwater readings were up to 37,000 times the EPA’s new limits. Private wells and small public wells, which serve 13% of the population, lack strict EPA PFAS regulations, making them especially vulnerable.

Contamination is most severe near military bases, airports, and industrial sites, with high exposure in Michigan, Florida, and California.

The USGS also produced an interactive map that shows where there may be trouble.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io -5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Agreed, they are more expensive. Are they the most expensive? No. Do you have a better short term alternative? One option would be to use distillation. It would be lovely to remove PFAS entirely from the planet, but that isn't happening in the short term, unless you are aware of something I'm not. Please share? I'm just trying to find ways to reduce the toxic load for myself and others. Thanks!

Here is EWG's article on the topic, which gives similar recommendations: https://www.ewg.org/research/getting-forever-chemicals-out-drinking-water-ewgs-guide-pfas-water-filters

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 10 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Oh, I’m not discounting their need or efficacy.

I think is absolutely criminal that we are paying to filter out the chemicals and not 3M and DuPont.

[–] Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

No argument there. This crap should not be in our environment at all. How do we get 3M, DuPont, etc to pay for our filters?

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

We don’t. Not with the incoming Republican government. They don’t believe in regulating businesses.

[–] Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Cool, well I could just give up, but that's not my style. So point of use filtration for now, and keep working on solving the larger problems piece by piece.

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago

Sure, if you can afford it. It’s more important to avoid premade foods wrapped in water-resistant paper or plastics until all companies have removed PFAs from their packaging. There’s a far higher chance of ingesting PFAs from package leeching.

https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-industry-actions-end-sales-pfas-used-us-food-packaging