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.
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.
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
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
someone that needs blood has probably lost blood already so it’s probably better to not die.
i would not infer that 30% was the limit, that’s just the reduction after 1 year of donating every 6 weeks.