logo
'Forever chemical' found in dozens of UK rivers, study finds

'Forever chemical' found in dozens of UK rivers, study finds

Yahoo16-06-2025
A "forever chemical" that scientists worry might have an impact on reproduction has been found in all but one of 32 rivers tested across the UK, according to a study.
Researchers say trifluoroacetic acid (TFA), which can take hundreds of years to break down, was detected at 98% of the 54 sites they investigated.
According to the study, one sample - taken from the River Kelvin in Glasgow - contained the second-highest value of TFA ever recorded in surface water globally.
The researchers say the average concentrations of TFA in the UK are at the "higher end" of the global scale compared with the results obtained from other studies - and that the chemical has been found in 31 of the 32 rivers analysed.
The research - funded by environmental charity Fidra and carried out by the University of York - looked at how much TFA was present in surface water.
It marks the first time such a project has been carried out in the UK.
TFA is a type of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS) - also known as "forever chemicals" - found in pesticides, pharmaceuticals and fluorinated gases (F-gases).
But there is "growing concern" about the general impact on human health and its potential risks to drinking water supplies.
According to Fidra, TFA is thought to have "low to moderate" toxicity; however, because levels are rapidly rising in the environment, there are concerns about future impacts​.
Studies have linked TFA exposure to birth defects in rabbits, while similar short-chained PFAS have been shown to have toxic effects on freshwater organisms.
The German Federal Environment Agency (UBA) has applied to the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) for TFA to be classified as toxic for reproduction.
However, its impacts are still being researched.
'Increasingly concerned'
Experts say the results of the latest study provide "compelling evidence of the presence of TFA and PFAS in UK waterways".
The researchers added: "These data should be further analysed to try and establish the drivers of TFA contamination in UK surface waters and routes for source control should be prioritised.
"The scientific communities are becoming increasingly concerned about the potentially harmful properties of TFA and increasing levels in the environment, particularly in water sources.
"There are currently no practical or economically viable ways to remove TFA from water supplies.
"TFA was found in 31 of the 32 rivers examined."
Read more from Sky News:
Samples were taken from sites across northern England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland.
Scientists say TFA has the potential to cause reproductive and liver issues in mammals and is harmful to aquatic life.
It also accumulates in crops and fields and "builds up" in drinking water.
The research comes as a committee of MPs said the UK's water sector is in need of "root-and-branch reform".
The cross-party Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) committee said the industry is "failing" - and trust and accountability in the sector was "very low".
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

4 Reasons Why ‘Self-Blame' Is Your Default State, By A Psychologist
4 Reasons Why ‘Self-Blame' Is Your Default State, By A Psychologist

Forbes

time2 minutes ago

  • Forbes

4 Reasons Why ‘Self-Blame' Is Your Default State, By A Psychologist

The habit of staying up at night and replaying all the embarrassing moments of your life while stewing in self-blame isn't just a personality quirk. For most people, this recurring phenomenon, often beyond their control, can start feeling like a mental trap where you keep turning thoughts like 'you should have known better' over and over again in your head. This can also disrupt your sleep cycle. A 2022 study published in the British Journal of Clinical Psychology found that people most often ruminate or worry about past mistakes, negative experiences and social interactions, with nighttime being a high-risk period for such overthinking. The reason you stay stuck in this cycle has to do with your mind's tendency to disguise rumination as 'problem-solving.' You might be under the impression that you're figuring out what went wrong or making sure you will not repeat the mistake. However, in reality, you're just reinforcing the guilt and trapping yourself even further in the same emotional cycle. Over time, this habit can end up chipping away at your confidence, relationships and most importantly, your sense of self. A 2025 study published in Self and Identity explored why forgiving yourself is so difficult for some people and why they can be stuck in self-condemnation. Out of 80 participants, researchers found that 41 of them said they couldn't forgive themselves after a perceived failure. For 39 of them, self-forgiveness came easier. Researchers also identified key patterns that keep people trapped in such self-blame. Here are four reasons you're stuck in a mindset of self-blame, based on the 2025 study: 1. Your 'Time Focus' Keeps You Stuck One of the patterns researchers uncovered through the study was a difference in time focus. People unable to forgive themselves tended to experience the past as if it were still the present. This showed up in many ways. They replayed mistakes in vivid detail and reimagined what they 'should have done.' Essentially, they emotionally relived the moment repeatedly, and painstakingly. The researchers described this as a 'past-as-present' mindset. 'It is a raw feeling. Just like it happened yesterday, but I moved my daughter 4 years ago,' one participant explains, remembering how she struggled to forgive herself when she found out her daughter was being bullied in school. In sharp contrast, the group that could more easily forgive themselves showed a 'future-focused' perspective. They acknowledged their mistake and redirected their attention toward growth, how they could change and what the next steps could be, rather than staying shackled to what had already happened. 'I needed to forgive myself so I could stop blaming myself and stop looking toward the past when I needed to be looking toward the future,' another participant explains, highlighting the power of a future-focus in finding self-forgiveness. These findings suggest that when your dominant focus is on the past, it becomes hard to even see the possibility of a different future. When you find yourself ruminating on the past, you may start to feel like this is an unchangeable part of who you are. But it helps to remember that you are not frozen in that moment. Being in the present moment gives you the power to decide what comes next and take actions that can bring about real change. 2. You Doubt Your Own Agency Moving on from your mistakes isn't just about where your attention is. An important factor we often ignore is our belief in our own ability to make things different. The 2025 study found that people who struggled to forgive themselves frequently questioned whether they even had the ability to change the situation or prevent it from happening again. This 'low-agency' mindset left them feeling powerless. Participants who found themselves stuck in self-condemnation harped on their lack of control over their behavior or circumstances. This led to a deepening of their guilt. On the other hand, those who forgave themselves believed they still had agency. They believed in their capacity to make choices and influence life outcomes. This belief allowed them to move forward. If you lack a sense of agency, it's quite possible your mind lingers on your mistakes, negative events and the past as a prediction of your future. Rebuilding self-trust, therefore, is the first order of business. And you're allowed to start small, such as keeping a promise to yourself, showing up on time to a commitment you've made or making one healthier choice than the day before. 3. You See Your Mistakes As A Reflection Of Your Entire Character Often, the heaviest part of self-blame isn't the action itself. It's what you believe that action says about you that can determine how you see yourself. The researchers of the 2025 study found that people trapped in self-condemnation often saw their mistakes as a reflection of their social-moral identity, or their sense of being a 'good' or 'bad' person in their own eyes and the eyes of others. So, instead of viewing their wrongdoing as a single or isolated event, they saw it as proof that they were fundamentally flawed or unworthy. 'I have a particularly bad habit that has developed over many years. I have tried many times to break the habit without success. This is something I should be able to choose not to do, yet I keep doing it. I cannot forgive myself for developing the habit, and I cannot forgive myself for failing to break the habit. It's demoralizing, frustrating, and has ruined my self-esteem,' one participant shares. However, people who managed to forgive themselves were more likely to separate what they did from who they are. They acknowledged the harm but didn't let it define their whole identity. Moving forward can feel like a moral battle when your self-image feels tied to every misstep. 4. You Cope By Avoiding Instead Of Processing When you're drowning in deep guilt or regret, a natural instinct to quiet the discomfort might kick-in. This can happen in different ways for everyone, say binge-watching something, scrolling endlessly, overworking or distracting yourself in other ways. Indulging in these distractions can numb the emotions for a while, but that might not always be a solution for the long term. Researchers found correlations between self-condemnation and this 'emotion-reduction' style of coping. The defining characteristic of this style was pushing away uncomfortable feelings and a steadfast avoidance of processing and working through them. While this silences short-term pain, it leaves the root cause untouched, with guilt floating just beneath the surface. On the other hand, making sense of a certain event or feeling helps give it a proper ending in your mind. You reflect on what you've learned, have a compassionate conversation with yourself or reframe the event as part of your growth. For instance, one participant mentioned, 'In order to be the best parent I could be, I had to forgive myself and focus on my daughter. I just had to make myself understand that there were many factors that contributed to my daughter's depression, and I was not solely to blame.' Keep in mind that while you cannot change the past, you certainly can change the role it plays in your story and determine how it impacts you and your life. Mistakes Are Proof That You Tried To truly break free from self-blame, you need to make a shift in the relationship you have with that moment frozen in time. Your mistakes do not vanish, no matter how much you try. The good news is, they don't have to. When you learn to approach them from a growth perspective, you can see them as separate from yourself and they become catalysts for insight and resilience. An easy way to shift your perspective is using a narrative reframing technique for your past. Instead of just trying to push guilt away or analyze your mistake, you can go back to the memory and forage for moments of growth and perseverance. Done enough times, you'll likely notice that the emotions you associate with the mistake have taken a 180 degree turn for the positive. Do you keep replaying your mistakes in your mind? Take the science-backed Mistake Rumination Scale to learn more about this habit.

Oximetry Weak for Predicting OSA in Kids With Down Syndrome
Oximetry Weak for Predicting OSA in Kids With Down Syndrome

Medscape

time31 minutes ago

  • Medscape

Oximetry Weak for Predicting OSA in Kids With Down Syndrome

TOPLINE: Nocturnal pulse oximetry (NPO) indices, such as the 3% and 4% Oxygen Desaturation Indices (ODI3 and ODI4, respectively), demonstrated moderate sensitivity and specificity for detecting moderate and severe obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) in children with Down syndrome but showed low sensitivity for detecting mild OSA. METHODOLOGY: Researchers conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the ability of two NPO indices (ODI3 and ODI4) for predicting OSA in children with Down syndrome. They compared cardiorespiratory polygraphy (CRP) and NPO recordings in 387 children aged 2-16 years with Down syndrome (median age, 6.1 years; 46.7% girls) who were referred for the evaluation of OSA at two tertiary sleep centres in the UK between May 2016 and May 2024. OSA was defined as having an Obstructive Apnoea-Hypopnoea Index (OAHI) of one or more events per hour and classified according to severity as mild (one or more to less than five events per hour), moderate (five or more to less than 10 events per hour), or severe (10 or more events per hour). Two-by-two tables were used to determine the sensitivity and specificity of various cutoff values of NPO parameters for predicting OSA: oxygen saturation (SpO2), ODI3, ODI4, minimum SpO2, the Delta 12-second index, and the percentage of analysis time with SpO2 < 94%, < 92%, and < 90%. TAKEAWAY: Of 387 children, 265 (68.5%) had OSA, with 164 (42.4%) having mild OSA, 51 (13.2%) having moderate OSA, and 50 (12.9%) having severe OSA. An ODI3 threshold of 19 or more events per hour provided the highest combined sensitivity and specificity for predicting OSA (59.2% and 74.6%, respectively); increasing the threshold to 23 or more events per hour provided the highest combined sensitivity and specificity for an OAHI of five or more events per hour (70.3% and 79.7%, respectively) and 10 or more events per hour (82.0% and 73.9%, respectively). An ODI4 threshold of 10 or more events per hour yielded moderate sensitivity (76.2%) and specificity (75.2%) for predicting OSA; a threshold of 13 or more events per hour provided moderate sensitivity (72.0%) and high specificity (80.7%) for an OAHI of 10 or more events per hour. For predicting an OAHI of one or more events per hour, an ODI3 threshold of 19 or more events per hour yielded a positive predictive value of 83.5% and a negative predictive value of 45.7%, and an ODI4 of eight or more events per hour yielded a positive predictive value of 82.8% and a negative predictive value of 47.5%. IN PRACTICE: "Oximetry alone does not provide a reliable diagnostic tool for evaluating OSA in children with DS [Down syndrome]; therefore, we recommend CRP/PSG [polysomnography] should be performed," the authors wrote. SOURCE: This study was led by Hannah Vennard, Paediatric Respiratory and Sleep Medicine, Royal Hospital for Children, Glasgow in Glasgow, Scotland. It was published online on August 11, 2025, in Archives of Disease in Childhood. LIMITATIONS: Using CRP instead of polysomnography meant that total sleep time was estimated, which could have potentially led to the underestimation of the OAHI due to underscoring of hypopnoeas not associated with desaturation when arousals from sleep could not be detected. The total recording time of stand-alone oximetry does not match the total sleep time measured using CRP, which may have affected the accuracy of oximetry indices in predicting the OAHI. The high prevalence of central apnoeic events may have affected the accuracy of ODI thresholds for predicting OSA. DISCLOSURES: This study did not receive any funding from any source. The authors declared no conflicts of interest. This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication

UK Clinicians Want Clearer AI Guidance and Oversight
UK Clinicians Want Clearer AI Guidance and Oversight

Medscape

timean hour ago

  • Medscape

UK Clinicians Want Clearer AI Guidance and Oversight

Artificial intelligence (AI) is playing a growing role in healthcare worldwide, but UK clinicians remain cautious, citing practical and ethical concerns, research has revealed. Alongside rising global adoption, regulators are moving to address safety and trust. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has joined as a founding member of the new Health AI Global Regulatory Network, positioning the UK at the forefront of international oversight. Global Uptake Rising, UK Lags Behind Elsevier's Clinician of the Future 2025 report, published last month, surveyed 2206 clinicians (1781 doctors and 425 nurses) in 109 countries. The responses included answers from 78 UK doctors or physician associates and 31 nurses. Nearly half of respondents globally (48%) reported using AI at work, almost double the 2024 figure of 26%. In the UK, uptake was lower. Only 34% of UK clinicians reported using AI at work, with just 21% of doctors doing so. Common uses included identifying drug interactions (20%), writing clinical notes (18%), second opinions (18%), patient letters (16%), analysing medical images (15%), medication summaries (12%), and multidisciplinary reviews of complex cases (8%). Despite high patient volumes — 60% of UK clinicians said they lacked time to deliver good care, compared with 74% globally — many felt digital diagnostic tools remained inadequate. Scepticism and Distrust UK clinicians were more sceptical than average about AI's potential benefits and were less likely to use it for clinical decision-making, with 53% indicating they would not, and 45% saying they would not rely on AI tools for second opinions. Thirty-three percent described AI as unreliable, compared with 23% who considered it trustworthy. Dr Rahul Goyal, clinical executive at Elsevier and a practising GP, told Medscape News UK that caution reflects the NHS's structure. He cited strict regulatory oversight, national guidelines, evidence-based practice, and accountability as factors. 'While these priorities help safeguard patient care, they can also make clinicians more cautious about adopting new technologies like AI,' he said. He also pointed to 'tech debt' within NHS systems, with many still paper-based and lacking routine clinical decision support. 'As a result, clinicians are understandably more sceptical about using new technologies,' Goyal said. Confidentiality and Trust Most Key When asked what would increase their confidence in AI, 81% of UK clinicians highlighted data confidentiality. The same proportion wanted AI tools trained for factual accuracy, morality, and safety — well above the 63% global average. Trust in international governance was low. Just 27% of UK respondents said they trusted their organisation's AI oversight. Globally, 74% said clearer guidance on AI use would boost trust. The findings align with concerns expressed in Medscape's September 2024 UK Doctors and AI Report. It found that while more than half of clinicians were enthusiastic about the future of AI in healthcare, 1 in 3 of the 745 respondents lacked confidence that it could ensure confidentiality. The vast majority (83%) agreed there was a need for oversight of AI in healthcare settings. Push for Regulation A General Medical Council report earlier this year echoed these concerns, with doctors warning that NHS IT systems must improve before wider adoption. Respondents highlighted concerns about confidentiality risks, over-reliance, de-skilling, errors, and lack of independent evaluation. Many called for regulators to provide more guidance. The lower adoption rate of AI in the UK 'underscores the prevailing caution, and reinforces the need for greater integration, clear guidance, and reassurance as AI becomes more prominent in UK healthcare,' Goyal said. He expressed support for the MHRA's leading role in the new Health AI Global Regulatory Network, describing it as 'a proactive step toward addressing clinicians' concerns.' AI and digital tools are reshaping healthcare, he said, but 'their success depends on building systems that empower clinicians to use them confidently and responsibly.' Looking Ahead While concerns persist, many clinicians see potential benefits. Nearly half (46%) of UK respondents said AI could improve consultation quality, and 62% expected it to improve patient outcomes within 3 years. Goyal said that success depends on integration into NHS systems, clinician training, and patient acceptance. 'If AI is used as a tool to improve access, enhance communication, and empower patients with information, then it is a win,' he said. 'However, if it is poorly implemented or perceived as impersonal, it could widen the gap between GPs and patients.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store