Residents demand answers after alarming revelation about their drinking water: 'Who is responsible?'
In Pennsylvania, a community is grappling with the toxic consequences of sewage sludge that was spread on nearby fields in the 1980s.
In April 2024, Pennsylvania's Department of Environmental Protection discovered dangerously high levels of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, also known as forever chemicals, in groundwater and wells at a mobile home park in Columbia County. The contamination was likely a result of sewage sludge that was spread on agricultural fields in the 1980s.
Residents told WVIA Radio that they did not hear the news until six months later, and many expressed concern during a public hearing.
"My six-year-old daughter asked me yesterday, 'Mommy, who put bad chemicals in our water?' … So, on behalf of my six-year-old … who is responsible," asked Janine Hall, whose water tested well above safe drinking standards, according to the news outlet.
The broader categorization of "PFAS" describes a group of thousands of human-made chemicals that are used in products like non-stick cookware, water-resistant clothing, and firefighting foams. Nicknamed "forever chemicals" because of their resistance to breaking down, they have infiltrated water supplies across the country.
For instance, testing of private wells in Cadillac, Michigan, found PFAS in the water supply, concerning local residents. And for good reason. PFAS have been linked to a range of health concerns, including cancer, poor immunity, and reproductive disorders. One study even estimated that more than 20% of Americans may be exposed to PFAS-laced tap water.
Back in Pennsylvania, Hall's husband Peter had his blood tested by a local doctor, and found it contained levels of PFAS at 280 parts per trillion. WVIA reported that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency considers some types of PFAS to be unsafe at levels above four parts per trillion.
Other residents said they are worried that some of their health issues — problems like osteoarthritis, anemia, miscarriage, and cancer — may have been caused or exacerbated by PFAS contamination, according to WVIA.
Pennsylvania's DEP plans to install filtration systems in at least 22 homes in Columbia County, per WVIA. They will also be doing soil sampling to determine possible sources. Pennsylvania started regulating PFAS in 2023, according to the news outlet.
Meanwhile, other states have enacted legislation that takes aim at PFAS. For instance, New Hampshire lawmakers recently banned ski, board, and boat waxes containing these chemicals.
How often do you worry about the quality of your drinking water?
Never
Sometimes
Often
Always
Click your choice to see results and speak your mind.
The general thinking goes that if using such chemicals would never have been approved in the first place with the knowledge we have now of the dangers, they should not continue to be approved moving forward either.
Scientists are also working on ways to break these chemicals down before they have a chance to harm humans or the environment. For instance, researchers at the University of Illinois found a way to remove the full spectrum of PFAS from water in a single process, and scientists at the University of Rochester are doing similar work.
Join our free newsletter for easy tips to save more and waste less, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Medicaid churn: How working Americans could mistakenly lose coverage under Trump tax bill
Medicaid churn: How working Americans could mistakenly lose coverage under Trump tax bill Show Caption Hide Caption President Trump gives his thoughts on Elon Musk amid clash on bill President Donald Trump responded to Elon Musk's criticism of his "big, beautiful bill" with disappointment as Musk responded on X. A centerpiece of Donald Trump's tax bill would make millions of Medicaid recipients work, volunteer or study to maintain their publicly-financed health insurance. Republicans say the work requirement is vital to protect taxpayers while motivating nondisabled Medicaid recipients to take charge of their physical and fiscal health. Dr. Mehmet Oz challenged this population to "prove that you matter." But health advocacy groups and analysts say most recipients already work in jobs that don't provide affordable health insurance or pay enough for people to afford their own insurance. They say mandating a Medicaid work requirement − combined with more frequent eligibility checks − would create an administrative nightmare that drops coverage for many who qualify for the public health insurance program for low-income and disabled residents. What is Medicaid churn? Medicaid rolls vary from month to month as people lose eligibility due to a new job, a raise or other income source that disqualifies them for coverage. A job loss or change in life circumstances could make someone newly eligible. The constant change of Medicaid rolls is what health policy experts call churn. A person who temporarily loses coverage due to a paperwork issue or mistake then must again sign up. "Churn is what happens when these eligibility systems become difficult to navigate," said Jennifer Tolbert, deputy director of the program on Medicaid and the uninsured for KFF, a health policy nonprofit. The federal government requires state Medicaid programs to check enrollees eligibility once a year. The Trump tax cut legislation would mandate states double eligibility checks to twice a year. And states would have the added duty of verifying a person's employment or exemption status. The legislation, which passed the House and awaits Senate approval, mandates Medicaid recipients who are "able-bodied" adults without children work 80 hours per month or qualify for an exemption such as being a student, caregiver or having a disability. The bill defines able-bodied as people who are not medically certified as physically or unfit for employment. The legislation also would strip coverage from undocumented immigrants who get Medicaid through state-funded programs. Health policy experts say more frequent eligibility checks and red tape will add administrative costs and cut off people who qualify but fall through the cracks due to administrative miscues. "People are going to have to document work status or exemption status multiple times a year, and at each point there's a risk that someone who is eligible could lose coverage," Tolbert said. Thousands lost coverage under Arkansas work requirement During the first Trump administration, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services gave states the option of implementing a work requirement for nondisabled adults on Medicaid. Arkansas' work requirement cut more than 18,000 residents from Medicaid within the first seven months of the program. People were removed often because people were unaware of paperwork requirements to keep their coverage, research shows and analysts said. In April, a study by researchers from the Urban Institute and Loyola University Chicago found the Arkansas uninsured rate jumped 7.4 percentage points among low-income adults age 30 to 49 after the state's work requirement began. The policy's impact on employment among that age group was "negative, small and statistically insignificant," the study said. Arkansas adults who didn't have access to the internet at home were disproportionately harmed by the policy, a sign adults might've had trouble accessing the state's online portal to report work histories or exemptions, the Urban Institute said. If the work requirement for Medicaid recipients is adopted nationwide, health experts say millions of working poor Americans will inevitably lose coverage. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated 10.9 million Americans would lose health insurance coverage through 2034 under the legislation. Most would lose coverage due to the Medicaid work requirement and the twice-a-year eligibility checks, but about 3.1 million would become uninsured from tweaks to Affordable Care Act enrollment, according to a KFF analysis. The ranks of the uninsured could grow larger if Congress doesn't extend the COVID-19 pandemic-era tax credits that have made ACA plans more affordable for consumers. If the tax credits expire and Congress passes the current version of the Trump tax bill, as many as 16 million Americans would lose coverage , according to CBO. "Coverage loss from work requirements should actually be very small," said Kathy Hempstead, a senior policy officer at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. "But we anticipate it will be very large, because people will not be able to comply with the requirements and will lose their coverage." Dr. Oz: Medicaid spending is 'crippling the system' The Trump administration's top Medicaid official has defended the House legislation as a necessary step to slow spending for the federal health program that covers nearly 80 million low-income and disabled Americans. In a June 4 interview with Fox Business, Dr. Oz challenged Medicaid recipients who would face work requirements should "prove that you matter." Oz, the Trump-appointed administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, said the work requirement asks "able-bodied individuals who are able to go back to work at least try to get a job or volunteer or take care of a loved one who needs help or go back into school. Do something to show you have agency over your future." In a Fox News interview posted on the social media site X, Oz said Medicaid spending has surged 50% since 2019, a pace that is "crippling the system." However, some Republicans have pushed back on the proposed cuts. In a May opinion piece in the New York Times, Sen. Josh Hawley, R- Missouri, said "slashing health insurance for the working poor" is "morally wrong and politically suicidal." Survey: Americans worried about Medicaid cuts The public is paying attention to the proposed Medicaid cuts. Slightly more than half of adults said they're worried significant cuts in Medicaid spending would negatively affect their family's ability to obtain and afford health care, according to a KFF health tracking poll released June 6. The survey this survey of 2,539 U.S. adults was conducted online and by telephone over three weeks in May. The survey said nearly 6 in 10 adults said the Trump administration's policies would weaken Medicaid, but there is a stark divide based on party affiliation. Nine in 10 Democrats but just 2 in 10 Republicans expect the administration's policies would weaken Medicaid. Republicans also were far more likely than Democrats to say that the Trump's policies would strengthen Medicaid. Still, while the survey suggests people are tracking the news, many likely wouldn't know whether their coverage has changed until they try to get medical care. "People don't often know that they've lost coverage until they try and fill a prescription or see a doctor," Tolbert said.
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Americans Are Suffering From 'Time Poverty'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. With labor market uncertainty, jobs rewarding employees for "going the extra mile" and competing responsibilities inside and outside the workplace, a growing number of Americans are suffering from what experts refer to as "time poverty." The term has been increasingly adopted by psychologists to denote the chronic imbalance between the time a person requires and that which their work life allows them. A new survey by wellness firm Wondr Health revealed the extent of the issue, finding that the majority (62 percent) of U.S. workers do not take their allotted time off because of the internalized pressures of work and let about one-third of their annual vacation days go unspent. "No one is harder on most of us than ourselves and it leads to time poverty, a condition where we simply do not have enough time for a meaningful work-life balance," said Dr. Tim Church, chief medical officer at Wondr Health. "This is a wakeup call for employees and their employers. It's time to rethink workplace culture." A growing number of Americans are suffering from what experts refer to as "time poverty." A growing number of Americans are suffering from what experts refer to as "time poverty." Annie Ng/AP Illustration David Ballard, vice president of One Mind at Work, a company focused on mental health solutions for the workplace, said: "Some work cultures actually discourage taking time off, reward overworking, and position stress and being on 24/7 as a badge of honor. "In this type of environment, employees may avoid taking time off because they would feel guilty or worry they would be seen unfavorably or be penalized if they did." Ron Goetzel, senior scientist at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and an expert in employee well-being, told Newsweek that the issue of time poverty "takes a toll on individuals, businesses and the larger society." "Although all of us are given 24 hours in a day, people feel they need to cram in as much activity into that time as possible—without sitting back and asking whether the activity enhances their quality of life, happiness and a sense of accomplishment, or not." The mental health implications have already become clear. According to a 2020 study, time poverty is linked to lower mental well-being, productivity and even physical health. Researchers also found that "subjective feelings of time poverty had a stronger negative effect on well-being than being unemployed." Despite this, they noted that the issue was one that had long gone underappreciated by either policymakers or employers. This is in spite of the potential deleterious impacts, not just on individuals, but on the businesses themselves. As workplace wellness experts and psychologists told Newsweek, time poverty among workers can mean lower productivity, higher rates of absenteeism or presenteeism—employees being at work but not fully functional—and increased employee turnover. "Employees that don't take time off are at risk for burnout, which is detrimental to both the employee and the business," said Dr. Chloe Carmichael, a clinical psychologist known for her work on anxiety and stress management. "The employees can also become resentful of the employer and less productive." Church added: "It's costly, plain and simple. When employees are burnt out or stressed, productivity and creativity drop. That's lost potential right there." This is indicative of the wider struggles of stress in the workplace, which several studies have linked to employees looking for opportunities elsewhere. "Burnout is a complex, multi-factorial problem, but we know for sure that chronic exposure to work-related stress, without the ability to recover, leads inevitably to mental and emotional exhaustion, detachment and decreased productivity and effectiveness," wellness expert Dr. Susan Biali Haas told Newsweek. Yasemin Besen-Cassino, a sociologist at Montclair State University, said the current climate in the U.S. labor had added to this troubling status quo, which she described as "overwork culture," with mass layoffs and broader economic uncertainty weighing on employees' minds. In addition, she told Newsweek that new technologies permitting workers to be ever-present made many feel they must contribute to work via emails or zoom calls even during off days. She added that many workers choose to use their paid time off to provide child care because of lack of affordable alternatives. "Therefore many workers are not recharging on these days, but rather performing caregiving," she told Newsweek. However, experts pointed to potential remedies—some easy, others not—that could limit the exposure to workplace stress to the benefit of employees and employers. Carmichael suggested that businesses consider mandatory time off, which would "remove the potential for internalized pressure." Author and stress researcher Rebecca Heiss said that taking vacations was far from a panacea for workplace-related stress, as despite a yoga retreat or week away employees will "ultimately will have to return to work and when we do all of those emails and projects are waiting for us and have compounded." Some pointed to the need for allotted "mental health days," as well as the willingness of businesses to invest in employee wellness programs and foster open communication with their workforces. Others advocated a wider cultural shift that would need to take place. "It's important to create a culture where taking a vacation is normalized and encouraged so that workers can fully recharge," Besen-Cassino said. "Shifting workplace culture can ensure workers can take vacations and are healthier and more productive in the long run." While employers might be reticent, Church said it is in their interest to consider the stress on their workers. "Maybe most importantly, businesses risk losing their best people," he said. "If the culture doesn't support rest and wellness, employees look for other places where their well-being is valued. "Addressing burnout and time poverty isn't just about being better employers, it's smart business."
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Nah, we changed our minds: EPA restores $1.6M UMaine PFAS grant
Jun. 11—The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has reinstated a $1.6 million grant to the University of Maine to research and reduce the effect of forever chemicals on farms one month after canceling it for being inconsistent with EPA funding priorities. In May, EPA spokesman Mike Bastasch justified the grant withdrawal like this: "Maybe the Biden-Harris administration shouldn't have forced their radical agenda of wasteful DEI programs and 'environmental justice' preferencing on the EPA." UMaine filed an appeal for wrongful grant termination on June 5. A day later, the EPA informed UMaine that it had reversed its position, and insisted that agency leaders had made that decision on June 4, the day before UMaine's appeal. The EPA gave no reason for its reversal. But a week before it canceled the grant, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin told Maine Rep. Chellie Pingree, D-1st District, during a committee hearing that these PFAS grants were important and implied they would continue after the agency reorganized under the Trump administration. The EPA did not respond to questions about the grant reinstatement or the status of two other grants worth more than $3 million for other forever chemical research in Maine, ranging from developing rapid field testing to testing forever chemical levels in Wabanaki tribal waters and fish. Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, are manmade chemicals found in a broad range of common household products, like nonstick pans and makeup, that pose a public health risk to humans through prolonged exposure. Even trace amounts of some PFAS can be dangerous to humans, with exposure to high levels of certain PFAS linked to serious health problems such as increased high blood pressure in pregnant women, developmental delays in children and increased risk of some cancers. Researchers involved in Mi'kmaq Nation and Passamaquoddy grants were happy to hear UMaine's grant had been restored and were hopeful their appeals would lead to reinstatement of their awards, too. As of Wednesday, however, their grants remained canceled. There is $1.45 million remaining on the restored award for UMaine to deliver "practical, science-based solutions" to reduce forever chemical contamination in livestock to produce safer food, a stronger farm economy and a healthier nation, according to a university statement. The grant also funds hands-on research learning for at least 10 students as part of UMaine's mission to produce the next generation of agricultural problem solvers and take a lead role in the new field of researching and reducing the effects of forever chemicals on agriculture. The EPA award will complement UMaine's new $500,000 state grant to research how forever chemicals move from soil into plants and livestock and eventually into the people who consume milk and dairy products. Both projects are led by UMaine professor Ellen Mallory. As of Monday, the University of Maine System has had 16 awards restored that the federal government had previously terminated, mostly at UMaine, according to a university spokeswoman. The current balance remaining on those reversed awards is $3.5 million. Over the last decade, Maine has spent more than $100 million as it became a national leader in the fight against harmful forever chemicals left behind by the state-permitted spreading of tainted sewage sludge on farm fields as a fertilizer. State inspectors have identified 82 Maine farms and 500 residential properties contaminated by the harmful forever chemicals in the sludge during a $28.8 million investigation of 1,100 sites. The state projects that it will install 660 water filtration systems at private wells near sludge-spread fields. So far, 20% of wells tested during the sludge investigation have exceeded Maine's drinking water standard. The Biden administration announced a stricter federal standard last year, but the Trump administration recently announced it planned to relax those standards and delay enactment. Copy the Story Link
