Live data from Hacker News

Toxic fluorinated compounds found in drinking water of 33 states

news.harvard.edu

11–20 of 119 posts

Re: Toxic fluorinated compounds found in drinking water of 33 states

#11
post #2

The article refers to compounds found in, for example, firefighting foam and not to the fluoride added for preventing tooth decay.

That won't stop the conspiracy theorists from having a field day on this one.

I would too, if I theorized that there were toxic compounds in my water, and then found a study that proves that to be correct.

Re: Toxic fluorinated compounds found in drinking water of 33 states

#13

Luckily this will all be fixed by Scott Pruitt, by getting rid of silly safety limits (read: business killing regulations) all together!

And by cutting 2/3 of the EPA workforce

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/01/30/...

And by removing two regulations for every new regulation :(

Re: Toxic fluorinated compounds found in drinking water of 33 states

#14
post #7

I work with one of the authors of the Hu et al. paper that this article is based on. I'm happy to relay any questions people have to her.

I'm not in any way advocating for toxins in the water supply, but do you worry that news like this will embolden anti-flouride people?

Re: Toxic fluorinated compounds found in drinking water of 33 states

#15
post #4

While drinking water is generally extremely safe in the US, especially compared to many other countries of the world. I still install three stage, under the counter filtration systems for any kitchen tap water. Minimal costs, and at the very least prevents the water from tasting like a pool.

Exactly! Everyone's always so worried about fluoride in drinking water, with little justification and without giving a thought to all the chlorine which is often present in far greater concentrations and, in certain conditions, can react with other organic and inorganic compounds to form all sorts of nasties.

Get a good filter for your drinking water and most of these concerns vanish. Plus you'll save a fortune on bottled water.

Re: Toxic fluorinated compounds found in drinking water of 33 states

#16
post #14
post #7

I work with one of the authors of the Hu et al. paper that this article is based on. I'm happy to relay any questions people have to her.

I'm not in any way advocating for toxins in the water supply, but do you worry that news like this will embolden anti-flouride people?

Heaven forbid accurate reporting embolden undesirable elements.

Re: Toxic fluorinated compounds found in drinking water of 33 states

#17
post #3
post #2

The article refers to compounds found in, for example, firefighting foam and not to the fluoride added for preventing tooth decay.

Nevertheless, this study will be added to the arsenal of those seeking to end municipal fluoridation.

no... no....... say it ain't so.

Re: Toxic fluorinated compounds found in drinking water of 33 states

#18
This article is about heavily fluorinated organic compounds -- molecules with a carbon skeleton and all or most of the hydrogen atoms replaced by fluorine. These are not the ionic fluorine compounds that protect teeth against decay (and that cause acute toxicity in case of over-consumption).

Why are these compounds hazardous?

- Harmful biological effects in the human body, like hormone-mimic activity.

- Low molecular polarity leads to bio-magnification in fats and oils up through the food chain, and persistence in human fat.

- The high strength of the carbon-fluorine bonds greatly reduces the rate at which typical environmental degradation mechanisms (hydrolysis, photolysis, atmospheric oxidation, enzymatic breakdown in cells...) act on these compounds, compared to their hydrocarbon counterparts.

Why are these compounds used?

The same properties that make them hazards once dispersed -- strong carbon-fluorine bonds that resist breakdown, low polarity -- make them desirable in applications where people want water-repellant surfaces or materials that resist high temperatures and/or chemical attack.

Why weren't the risks better known before?

It's a lot easier to test for acute hazards than for chronic ones. By acute toxicity metrics, like feeding a bunch of rats these compounds until the dose is high enough to kill half, these materials are generally less toxic than substances like potassium fluoride. It turns out that for low level chronic exposure, perfluorinated compounds are more hazardous than simple ionic fluorides due to persistence and accumulation.

The link between stability and persistence makes up a recurring theme in environmental toxicology: materials with lower acute hazards are often worse hazards in the long term. The very lack of reactivity that makes molecules less acutely hazardous in case of e.g. a fire or a worker accidentally splashing some on skin makes them more likely to be long term problems, because the same basic properties impair how quickly environmental sinks can break them down. Pure methanol ignites more easily than diesel fuel and has worse acute toxicity risks if a worker gets drenched in a spill. But diesel contamination from a leaking storage tank is more persistent.

Post reply on HN