'Forever Chemicals' Found in Popular US Beers, Above EPA Limits
Humans love beer: worldwide, we can go through more than 187.9 million kiloliters (49.6 billion gallons) of it in just one year.
But new research adds this beloved beverage to the long list of products found to contain PFAS (polyfluoroalkyl substances), aka 'forever chemicals'.
PFAS earned that nickname because they don't readily break down in the environment. It's estimated that there are around 12,000 different types of forever chemical, and while health effects are mostly unknown, two in particular – PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid) and PFOS (perfluorooctanesulfonic acid) – are linked to adverse health outcomes, including increased risks of cancer and birth defects.
A team of scientists from the US nonprofit Research Triangle Institute used methods employed by the Environmental Protection Agency to suss out how PFAS gets into beer, and at what levels.
"As an occasional beer drinker myself, I wondered whether PFAS in water supplies was making its way into our pints," says toxicologist Jennifer Hoponick Redmon.
It turns out, quite a lot. The team measured PFAS at levels above the maximum limit set by the EPA, which some argue is still not set high enough to protect people from these chemicals.
While breweries do usually have their own water filtration and treatment systems, these are not necessarily designed to remove PFAS. Up to seven liters of water can be used to make just one liter of beer, and whatever PFAS contaminants are in that water will probably still be there when you crack open your cold one.
The team bought 23 different kinds of beer, each represented by at least five cans, from a North Carolina liquor store in 2021.
At least one PFAS was found in almost every can they tested. Most contained some level of PFOS. Three beers tested in this study – two from the upper Cape Fear River Basin in North Carolina, and one from Michigan – exceeded the EPA's maximum limit for PFOA concentration, and one beer from the lower Cape Fear River Basin exceeded PFOS limits.
Those limits were developed by the EPA in 2023 for six different kinds of PFAS, and they're designed for drinking water, not beer. But since there's no existing framework for how much PFAS is acceptable in beer – and, like drinking water, beers are intended for direct consumption – Hoponick Redmon's team figured these drinking water standards could be repurposed.
"By adapting EPA Method 533 to analyze PFAS in beers sold in US retail stores, we found that PFAS in beer correlates with the types and concentration of PFAS present in municipal drinking water used in brewing," the team reports.
"North Carolina beers, particularly those within the Cape Fear River Basin, generally had detections of more PFAS species than Michigan or California beers, which reflects the variety of PFAS sources in North Carolina."
PFAS detections and concentrations were particularly elevated in beers brewed in North Carolina, California, and Michigan.
International beers (one from Holland and two from Mexico) were less likely to have detectable PFAS, which may suggest that the countries of origin do not face the same degree of contamination seen in the US.
"Our findings indicate a strong link between PFAS in drinking water and beer, with beers brewed in areas with higher PFAS in local drinking water translating to higher levels of PFAS in beer, showing that drinking water is a primary route of PFAS contamination in beer," the team concludes.
They hope the findings will offer breweries the chance to try to remove PFAS from the water that goes into their beers, and highlight the importance of policy to limit PFAS in general.
This research was published in Environmental Science & Technology.
NOAA Forecasts a Busy Hurricane Season For 2025. What's Fueling It?
Alarming Sea Level Rise Expected Even With 1.5°C Warming Limit
Interactive Map Reveals Ocean Pathways Vital For 109 Species
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
This Popular U.S. Destination Has the First Confirmed Zika Virus Case in 6 Years—What Travelers Should Know
A case of travel-related Zika virus has been detected on the Hawaiian island of Oahu. The virus didn't originate in Hawaii, but was brought there by an infected traveler. However, Zika could spread if that person is bitten by a mosquito that continues biting others. Two additional suspected exposures to Zika are being monitored by Oahu health you're headed to Oahu this summer, be aware that a mosquito-borne menace is back on the island. For the first time since 2019, Zika virus has been detected on Oahu, with the Hawaii Department of Health confirming one case. There are also two other suspected exposures to the Zika virus. The one case of Zika was imported into Hawaii by a traveler and did not originate on the island. It is not endemic in Hawaii. However, the virus is capable of spreading from an infected person, to a mosquito, and on to another person. Hawaii does have the type of mosquitos that can spread Zika, but the virus is not established in the state. 'The DOH asks for support in reducing the potential for the spread of Zika virus, which is carried by mosquitoes. Vector control teams are responding and will continue operations in areas where the individuals spent time, including neighborhoods in Waialua/Haleʻiwa area on Oʻahu,' the Hawaii Department of Heath said in a statement obtained by Travel + Leisure. 'DOH will continue to monitor mosquito activity in the affected areas and implement further control measures as needed.' Symptoms of Zika virus can include fever, rash, headache, joint pain, and pink eye. However, about 80 percent of Zika cases are asymptomatic, according to the Hawaii Department of Health. The virus is particularly dangerous for pregnant women, as it can be passed to their fetus and cause serious birth defects and pregnancy complications. Zika is mostly spread by mosquitos who have already bitten someone infected with Zika. It can also be spread through sexual contact. Other less common but possible means of transmission are infected blood transfusions, infected organ transplants, breastfeeding, or occupational exposure in healthcare settings. The Department of Health is encouraging both visitors and residents to take measures to prevent the spread of Zika by applying EPA-approved insect repellent on exposed skin, keeping mosquitos out of buildings by making sure doors close properly, wearing loose-fitting clothing, and removing standing water around buildings that can become a breeding ground for mosquitos. 'Travelers should take precautions to avoid mosquito bites during their trips, and for three weeks after returning,' the statement from the DOH states. 'Travelers returning from an area with risk of Zika should take steps to prevent mosquito bites for three weeks after their return. Anyone experiencing symptoms within two weeks after visiting an area with risk of Zika should consult a health care provider and inform them of possible exposure in a Zika-affected area. Testing is not routinely recommended for travelers who do not have symptoms.' Oahu is the third largest of Hawaii's islands, and contains the capital of Honolulu. It's world-famous for its pristine beaches (including Waikiki Beach), luxury hotels, and excellent surfing opportunities. Read the original article on Travel & Leisure
New York Times
3 hours ago
- New York Times
After Years of Research as Wirecutter's Water-Quality Expert, I Decided I Don't Need to Filter My Water
Like Jan, reader Graeme got his water tested after I suggested doing that before buying a different, clog-resistant filter. He later sent a quick update: 'It came back completely clear. You've saved me tons of time and money. NYC water continues to astound …' It does. New York's water is justifiably famous for its purity, and the city has gone to extraordinary lengths to keep it that way. But it isn't the only city that can boast such a thing. Consult your utility's Consumer Confidence Report. Here's New York City's latest. Here's Los Angeles's report. Here are Chicago's, Houston's, and Philadelphia's. You can usually find your CCR on your utility's website; the EPA can help you find your utility if you're unsure. (CCRs for the prior year are released as late as July 1, so you may find that yours is from two calendar years ago.) A few terms to know: MCLG is the Maximum Contaminant Level Goal. It isn't a requirement, but a level that the EPA or a state agency hopes to eventually achieve. MCL is the Maximum Contaminant Level that's allowed by federal or state law. (And that brings up an important side point: under the Safe Drinking Water Act, states can set water-quality standards that are stricter than the federal ones. Several states were ahead of the EPA on PFAS limits before the Biden administration tightened the federal standards in 2024, for example. That's worth remembering now that the Trump administration has rescinded or relaxed several of the standards and enforcement deadlines.) THMs are trihalomethanes, and are mainly the by-product of disinfectants that are used to reduce bacteria and other pathogens in the water supply. Almost everybody's CCR shows their presence at some level. How much is allowed is defined by the MRDL, the Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level; how much is aimed for is the MRDLG, the Goal. Most other listings are fairly self-explanatory: lead, mercury, and so on. To know even more, use a home water test kit. It will tell you exactly what's in your water, right where it comes out of your faucet. We recommend several Tap Score kits from SimpleLab, both for their ease of use — they come with prepaid and labeled packaging to help you ship your samples to the lab quickly — and for their clarity. The company explains the test results in plain language, flags anything of concern, and has support staff available to answer any questions you have. Michael Murtaugh/NYT Wirecutter This send-away kit delivers lab-tested measurements of more than 100 contaminants, and it explains what they mean and what to do if there's a problem. I spoke with SimpleLab founder and CEO Johnny H. Pujol to understand what he has learned from a decade of water testing. He also shared a detailed summary of the data the company has collected. A lot of people ask about PFAS and microplastics, Pujol said, 'but the likelihood is that you're going to spend a ton of money [on a test kit], and you may not find something that useful or interesting to your home.' (Testing for PFAS and microplastics requires two Tap Score kits in addition to the Advanced City kit that's our top pick; they cost between $300 and $795.) No PFAS chemicals are among the 10 most common contaminants that SimpleLab finds in either public ('city') or private well water, according to the data Pujol shared. Two trihalomethanes — specifically chloroform and bromodichloromethane, both by-products of disinfection at the treatment plant — are among the top 10 in public water. Substances that come from the earth itself — zinc, barium, strontium, and sulfates — are in the top 10 in both city and well water. So is copper, leached from pipes in the home. Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup and many other trademarked herbicides, shows up so rarely that when it does, Pujol said, 'our data science team sends a message out — hey, we found a detection.' And no PFAS are among the top 10 exceedances — instances where the level detected exceeded the company's in-house health-guidance levels, which are based on EPA and other health-agency benchmarks. Chloroform, bromodichloromethane, and dibromochloromethane, all disinfection by-products, are the top three exceedances in public water supplies. Lead and arsenic are numbers four and five. For private wells, they are numbers one and two. In terms of overall public health, Pujol worries that forever chemicals are drawing people's focus away from where it is needed more urgently. 'Here you've got a concentration that is almost comically low that gets widespread fear and interest — that's PFAS,' he said. "Whereas the classics — arsenic, radon, lead, nitrate — they don't seem to get the attention they deserve, and they're much more significant.' I didn't know all of this before I got my water tested, but I knew enough about the US water system, and about my utility's Consumer Confidence Reports, that I was confident the results would be fine. Still, I got that little fist of nerves. Having been president of my co-op in Queens, I was well aware that lead was likely to be present in the plumbing solder. And in New Jersey, there's a chrome-plating shop — almost certainly a source of hexavalent chromium and other nasty stuff — a block and a half away from my house. Sure, it's downhill, and sure, my water comes from a reservoir several miles in the other direction, and sure, the CCR showed nothing of concern. But. So it was reassuring to get the results I expected.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Scientists uncover exciting new method to remove dangerous chemicals from the body: 'Feasible, accessible and economical'
In a hopeful breakthrough for public health, researchers found that dietary fiber may help reduce PFAS — toxic "forever chemicals" — from the human body. As reported by The Guardian, the pilot study showed that increased fiber intake can lower levels of two of the most widespread and harmful PFAS: PFOA and PFOS. These pollutants are commonly found in water, food packaging, and household products, and they have been linked to serious health issues, including cancer, birth defects, and kidney disease. PFAS, short for perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are called forever chemicals because they don't naturally break down and can remain in the body for decades. The study's authors believe dietary fiber forms a gel in the digestive system that blocks PFAS from being absorbed, allowing them to exit when you go to the bathroom — similar to how fiber helps remove bile acids. Importantly, the study found that both soluble and insoluble fibers were needed, and oat beta-glucan, a common supplement, was mentioned as a helpful source. Timing is also important, as fiber works best when taken with meals, when bile production is highest. While fiber didn't work as well for "short-chain" PFAS (which are excreted more easily through urine), it was highly effective at reducing levels of long-chain types such as PFOA and PFOS — the types most commonly found in people's blood. This method also appears to be a gentler alternative to treatments such as cholestyramine, a cholesterol drug sometimes used to treat PFAS exposure but known to cause uncomfortable digestive issues. By contrast, fiber has a wide range of health benefits and is easy to integrate into your daily routine. This promising discovery joins other innovative solutions such as an LED method used to break down PFAS and ultraviolet purification used to break down PFAS in water. "The key is that this is feasible, accessible and economical," said Boston University's Jennifer Schlezinger, a co-author of the study. She added that early results are "very promising," and a larger study is underway. People online were impressed with the findings. "Wild how something as simple as fiber could help flush out toxic forever chemicals," one person said on Instagram. "The link between fiber intake and reducing 'forever chemicals' is such an important topic. More research like this could shape our understanding of diet and health. Thanks for sharing!" added another. Do you worry about having toxic forever chemicals in your home? Majorly Sometimes Not really I don't know enough about them Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. 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.
