Trending
To the Editor,
I write to express my concern about the ongoing issue of PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) exposure and contamination in drinking water across the United States. Despite the documented dangers associated with PFAS exposure, current standards for PFAS study and regulation by U.S. government entities remain inadequate.
A recent study by Ducatman, LaPier, Fuoco et al. (2022) reveals that official health communications from government agencies like the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) downplay the potential risks to affected communities, causing distrust and frustration among patients and clinicians. Studies have linked PFAS exposure to various health outcomes including cancers, liver disease, thyroid disease, immune system suppression, among others
The approach taken by ATSDR contributes to the growing belief that science-based concerns are not being addressed. This approach, which emphasizes the difficulties of post hoc causation assignments and dismisses patients without providing actionable information on clinical prevention, is not reassuring to those affected by PFAS contamination. On the other hand, there are leadership examples from state agencies, professional groups, and non-profit organizations that provide a better model for communicating the risks of PFAS exposure. These examples show the significance of accurate and useful health communications that consider the needs of communities with high exposures to PFAS and the larger group of people with some exposure to PFAS.
We urge trusted agencies, entities, and organizations to acknowledge the importance of accurate health outcome evidence and avoid dismissive statements that undermine the concerns of affected communities. Official health communications should also promote shared decision-making in patient-clinician interactions and community-level actions in contaminated areas.
It is imperative that immediate action be taken to improve official health communications regarding PFAS exposure and address inadequate health standards and regulations. By promoting accurate and useful health communications, we can help build trust and promote healing in PFAS-affected communities.
In addition, WV S.B.485 can help address PFAS contamination in drinking water by requiring facilities to report their use of PFAS chemicals, requiring DEP to identify and address sources of PFAS in raw water sources, and requiring DEP to propose rules to adopt water quality criteria for certain PFAS chemicals.
Frank Rocchio
Follansbee