CT firefighters are dying from cancer likely due to their gear. Lawmakers want to help
Studies have shown over the years that perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAs), a class of fluorinated chemicals known as 'forever chemicals' have been linked to cancer and other serious health effects, according to the International Association of Firefighters.
The IAFF found in studies that all three layers of firefighter turnout gear, the protective clothing and equipment firefighters wear, contain PFAs.
'We feel very strongly that PFAS is a significant factor in those increased cancer rates,' Brown said. 'We are hopeful that we will never have to put gear on that contains PFAs and that we will see a reduction in cancer rates in the next generation of firefighters.'
But though the state has been taking steps to eliminate PFAs from turnout gear and from the firefighting foam used to put out fires, the process is costly, deterring some departments and taking a toll on others who were eager to get potentially safer gear.
Sen. John Kissel, R-Enfield, wrote in his testimony in support of the bill that in 2021 the state 'took an important step by banning the use of firefighting foams containing PFAs.
'However, fire departments that acted early to comply with this law have faced financial burdens as previous reimbursement programs only covered removals completed after July 1, 2023,' Kissel wrote.
HB 7120 aims to address the epidemic of cancer among firefighters and also help departments shoulder the cost of replacing PFAs-containing firefighting gear. The bill would establish a pilot program to screen Connecticut firefighters for cancers common to firefighters and require municipalities to provide additional sets of turnout gear to firefighters who are diagnosed with cancer or are at an increased risk of developing cancer. It would also provide grants to departments that still need to replace PFAs-containing fire apparatus and provide reimbursement to those that replaced turnout gear prior to July 1, 2023.
Peter Brown, president of the Uniformed Professional Fire Fighters Association of Connecticut, said with firefighters getting cancer at a higher rate than the general population it is imperative to protect them.
John Carew, Connecticut State Firefighters Association legislative representative and past president of the Connecticut State Firefighters Association, also said the bill is integral.
But Carew also cited concerns with the bill. First, PFAs-free gear is hard to get because just one manufacturer currently is making it. Second, it's expensive. A set of PFAs-free gear costs roughly $4,000, he said.
There are concerns also about the durability of the gear. Conventional gear containing PFAs lasts approximately 10 years, Carew said, while PFAs-free gear may last only up to two years.
Last year legislators passed SB 292 which bans the manufacturing, selling or distributing of products containing PFAs beginning on Jan. 1, 2028, according to the bill's analysis.
The products include apparel, carpets or rugs, cleaning products, cookware, cosmetics, dental floss, fabric treatments, children's products, menstruation products, ski wax, textile furnishings, and upholstered furniture, according to an analysis of the bill.
There are concerns about the PFAs-free turnout gear, too. The National Fire Protection Association has found through testing of the PFAs-free gear that it is 'less breathable and offers less thermal protection, which could lead to higher heat stress among firefighters.'
Brown has also learned of those concerns, he said.
Waterbury Assistant Fire Chief Javier Lopez said his department decided not to move forward at this time with PFAs-free gear after testing the gear for three months. Lopez said they also cited concerns about heat-related issues related to the gear, which could include potential cardiac issues.
Brown said since the legislature passed a law providing firefighters with occupational cancer job protection, there have been 30-35 cancer claims. But he believes that number is higher at around 50. To protect the next generation, PFAs in turnout gear must be addressed.
'They don't have to put the agent back on their body that could have caused their initial claim,' he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
a day ago
- Washington Post
As EPA weakens rules on ‘forever chemicals,' states are moving forward
State water officials are worried about how to protect residents from drinking water contaminated with 'forever chemicals' — and how shifting federal regulations will affect their responsibilities. During a meeting this week with the Environmental Protection Agency on its plan to rescind and reconsider President Joe Biden's landmark drinking water standard on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), state officials and industry representatives complained that regulatory uncertainty was placing communities in a bind. Despite the lack of clarity on what the EPA will do with the standard, states are still on the hook for implementing it. That creates difficulties if the rule is weakened, said Steven Elmore, chair of the National Drinking Water Advisory Council. 'Certain states have state laws that say their drinking water standard can't be more stringent than the federal law,' Elmore said. More state laws are probably on the way. At least 250 bills have been introduced in about 36 states this year to address PFAS by banning the chemicals in products, setting maximum levels in drinking water and allocating funding to clean up contamination. Dozens of states have passed regulatory standards for at least one forever chemical in drinking water. The legislative push at the state level comes on the heels of the Trump administration's mixed messaging on regulations and research for PFAS. In May, the EPA announced plans to rescind and reconsider limits on four of the chemicals and to delay the rules for two others. In July, the administration slashed nearly $15 million in grant funding for research to reduce the effects of PFAS in sewage sludge and related contamination on farmlands. The agency said it has outlined ways to address water contamination, including the new PFAS OUT initiative in which it will share tools, funding, resources and technical assistance with public water utilities to limit at the source the contamination by PFAS. In March, the White House released the 'National Strategy to End the Use of Paper Straws,' detailing the dangers of PFAS, which some paper straws contain. 'Building on the historic actions to address PFAS during the first Trump Administration, EPA is tackling PFAS from all of our program offices, advancing research and testing, stopping PFAS from getting into drinking water systems, holding polluters accountable, and more,' EPA press secretary Brigit Hirsch said in a statement. But some officials said state legislation would serve as the last line of defense in protecting residents from contamination. In Maine, state Rep. Dan Shagoury (D) said he introduced the bill establishing a new maximum level for PFAS as a bookkeeping measure to ensure state law mirrored the federal standard. He now sees the measure as an important safeguard in the face of potential federal rollbacks. 'The thought after the election was, 'We really better make sure we do this because the feds may roll it back and those standards may not be there a year from now,'' Shagoury said. The law, which passed in June, requires local water utilities to reduce levels of PFOA, a known human carcinogen, and PFOS, a likely carcinogen, to four parts per trillion (ppt). The legislation sets a limit of 10 ppt for three other compounds — PFHxS, PFNA and GenX — and additional limits for mixtures of the compounds. Current federal regulation allows states to have stricter rules. 'It's going to be up to the states to set limits in the absence of federal standards,' Shagoury said. 'For the past few decades, we looked to the feds for our guidance on safe levels of things, and if they aren't going to do it, we will.' Lawmakers in Delaware started working on legislation on PFAS about a year ago in anticipation of rollbacks at the federal level, state Sen. Darius Brown (D) said. The state's new law, which goes into effect next year, will create a monitoring and reporting dashboard so residents can find out the concentrations of PFAS in their drinking water. The dashboard will be funded primarily by settlement money from litigation against chemical companies. The federal rule gives water utilities until 2027 to report the presence of the regulated chemicals but doesn't require compliance with maximum levels until 2029. 'We'll do the work here locally to protect residents in our state to make sure that we have the proper reporting and that residents are informed around forever chemicals,' Brown said. 'If that's something that is rolled back at the federal level, we will not be the only state, but we're happy to join other states in being leaders around this effort.' State regulatory actions could result in legal challenges down the line, Elmore said. States passing legislation to match the standard could expose themselves to litigation if the EPA changes it next year. And states that wait for a new standard could run into delays and compliance issues. States have historically moved faster on legislation on PFAS due to local contamination issues and have generally served as the 'testing ground and incubators for trying out policy,' said Jen Hensley, a state lobbying and advocacy director with the Sierra Club, an environmental advocacy group. States began passing such legislation before President Donald Trump's current term, and if the EPA rolls back the federal drinking water standard, additional states are likely to establish stricter rules, she said. 'We'll use this time under a hostile administration to regulate and move the ball wherever we can,' Hensley said. Water utilities and ratepayers will bear the brunt of the regulatory ambiguity, according to the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, a trade group that sued the EPA over the Biden rule. 'AMWA continues to advocate for sound federal regulation of contaminants that pose nationwide threats, but otherwise we believe states are well positioned to regulate contaminants that are of regional concern,' AMWA CEO Tom Dobbins said. The chemical industry warns against the creation of a patchwork system that will sow confusion about which standards to uphold. The American Chemistry Council, an industry trade group, said the group believes in a one-size-fits-all approach to regulating the class of chemicals. Without it, state regulations could conflict with each other, EPA policies and international standards. 'The consequences could be skyrocketing prices, products no longer available in certain states and business opportunities moving from one state to another or overseas,' said Erich Shea, ACC's director of product communications. Shagoury said a patchwork system is 'almost inevitable' in the absence of federal regulations. New Mexico state Rep. Christine Chandler (D) said there wouldn't be a patchwork system if the federal government created a national standard that states could rely on. 'Unfortunately, we're seeing a trend where the federal government is stepping away from that responsibility,' she said. 'Those of us who care about the environment and our residents are going to have to step up and do what we can to mitigate against these environmental threats,' Chandler added. New Mexico is embroiled in a lawsuit against the U.S. Air Force after firefighting foam from an air base caused a four-mile PFAS plume near Clovis, contaminating drinking water and crops and poisoning farm animals. Chandler said the state's new law classifying PFAS as hazardous waste will ensure that the state can seek remediation and protect the health of residents. 'It's really unfortunate and it's really sad that we have to pass laws to clarify that the federal government really needs to step up here and take responsibility,' Chandler said.
Hamilton Spectator
a day ago
- Hamilton Spectator
‘Forever chemicals' like PFAS found in eco-friendly branded menstrual products: new study
The results of a new study are disappointing for those choosing to be eco-friendly when it comes to their menstrual products. The study found 'forever chemicals,' also known as perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), were observed in some reusable menstrual pads and panties. According to researchers with Paul H. O'Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs and the University of Notre Dame, 59 reusable personal hygiene products from North America, South America and Europe were tested. It included pads, liners, underwear and incontinence underwear from North American companies like Knix, Jockey, Diva Cup, Aisle, Bambody, Cariona, MeLuna, Thinx, Uniqlo and more. Nearly 30 per cent of the samples were positive for PFAS, researchers found. 'Since reusable products are on the rise due to their increased sustainability compared to single-use products, it's important to ensure that these products are safe,' associate professor Marta Venier said in a press release . 'This is crucial, especially for adolescents and young women, who are more vulnerable to potential negative health effects. 'Feminine hygiene products stay in contact with the skin for extended periods of time, and the risks from the dermal absorption of PFAS, especially neutral PFAS, are not well understood.' As part of the study, 22 one-time use products were also included from various countries, with pads, panty liners and incontinence products tested from brand names like The Honest Company, Always, Kotex, O.B., Equate, Depend, TENA and Stayfree. In some cases, the products advertise they are 'natural,' 'organic,' 'non-toxic,' 'sustainable' or made using 'no harmful chemicals.' The authors chose not to identify PFAS concentrations by brand, but said more research is needed. This isn't the first time menstrual products have been under the PFAS microscope. A 2023 study has already shared PFAS chemicals are in some one-time use products like tampons, along with reuseable period underwear. 'Most surprising to the researchers was the presence of total fluorine in the wrappers for numerous pads and some tampons, as well as the outer layers of some of the period underwear,' the 2023 study noted. Researchers speculated PFAS was used in wrappers to keep the tampons dry prior to use, and they were in the outer layer of the period underwear to prevent leaks. 'Of course, you're concerned for the wearer, but we're also concerned about the ecological impact because PFAS are 'forever chemicals,'' principal investigator Dr. Graham Peaslee said in a press release . 'Once these products are thrown away, they go to landfills and decay, releasing PFAS into groundwater. And we, or later generations, could end up inadvertently ingesting them.' PFAS are made up of over 12,000 compounds that have stick, stain and water-resistant properties, the American Chemical Society said in the 2023 study. These forever chemicals are often found in many household products, including some food and food packaging and containers, non-stick pans, household cleaning products, some cosmetics and shampoo, and in fire extinguisher foam and carpets. PFAS are linked to serious health risks, Venier said. But not every product tested had the 'forever chemicals.' 'While further studies are needed to define the risk of PFAS exposure to human skin, the study's finding that at least one sample per category showed no intentional presence of these chemicals suggests that safer and healthier alternatives can be manufactured without them,' Vernier added. More people experiencing periods today are choosing eco-friendly products 'to combat the environmental impact of disposable products,' this study has found. Yet eventually, even reusable products will likely end up in landfills. 'Consumers should know that not everything that is in a product is listed on the package,' Venier said. 'Increased transparency from manufacturers would help consumers make informed decisions about what they're purchasing for themselves and their families.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Newsweek
2 days ago
- Newsweek
Study Finds Increased Miscarriage Risk After Exposure to This Chemical
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. A new study has found that exposure to certain frequently used chemicals that are classified as human carcinogens may increase the risk of recurring miscarriage. The researchers found that exposure to four different types of PFAS chemicals, also known as "forever chemicals," were associated with higher risks of "unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortion"—meaning recurrent miscarriage where the cause is unknown. PFAS chemicals, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, have been classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as a Group 1 carcinogen—with studies since finding the chemicals can cause a wide range of effects on public health. In the U.S., recurrent miscarriages are not common, with five in 100 women estimated to have two miscarriages in a row, according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. However, for more than half of the women experiencing recurrent miscarriages, no certain cause is found for the pregnancy loss, the organization reported. File photo: A doctor examining a pregnant patient with an ultrasound machine in a clinic. File photo: A doctor examining a pregnant patient with an ultrasound machine in a clinic. stockbusters/Getty Images What the Study Found There are thousands of variations of PFAS chemicals, and the researchers found that exposure to PFBA, PFDoDA, PFHpS and PFHxS specifically increased the risk of recurrent miscarriage. PFAS chemicals can be found across various industries and have been used in consumer products for many years—such as in nonstick cookware, waterproof clothing, stain-resistant furniture and even in smartwatch wristbands. As the researchers said in the study, the lack of "specific clinical manifestations complicates both diagnosis and treatment" in unexplained recurrent miscarriage. They added that the lack of understanding posed "significant challenges to clinical management and contributes to heightened psychological burden among patients." The cohort of the study, a group in China, was monitored between 2018 and 2020 and organized at the Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, which is affiliated with Capital Medical University. In the sample, 110 had experienced explained recurrent miscarriage, while 91 were control subjects, and there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of age, body mass index, occupation or income. Overall, those who had experienced unexplained recurrent miscarriage had higher concentrations of PFAS in their blood samples than those in the control sample. While the chemical PFOA measured at the highest concentration in the blood samples, it was the four chemicals—PFBA, PFDoDA, PFHpS and PFHxS—that the researchers believed had positive associations with unexplained recurrent miscarriage. "We already know that PFAS are associated with preterm birth, low birth weight, reproductive toxicity, preeclampsia, decreased fertility, and single occurrence of miscarriage," Phil Brown, a professor of sociology and health sciences and the director of the Social Science Environmental Health Research Institute at Northeastern University, told Newsweek. He said PFAS were also "associated with gestational diabetes, which in turn leads to a number of harmful outcomes such as preeclampsia and preterm birth." The findings of the study therefore "fit into a larger body of research on PFAS and adverse reproductive outcomes," he said. Brown said the findings that some short chain PFAS chemicals were associated with recurrent miscarriage were important, as "there is far less research on the short chain PFAS that are increasingly used as replacement chemicals." However, he said the study was "limited in being a case-control study and more research is necessary in large prospective cohort studies and randomized controlled trials." "Hopefully, existing cohort studies will take up this call," Brown added. Jennifer L. Freeman, a professor of toxicology at Purdue University, Indiana, also told Newsweek that the study added to "those similarly reporting increased risk of adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes with PFAS exposures," but that more research was needed to learn about "this potential association." However, Graham Peaslee, a professor of physics at University of Notre Dame, Indiana, told Newsweek that he had "a couple concerns about the statistics" of the study and that "a bigger study should be performed with better statistical analysis before we can identify which PFAS are most likely responsible for miscarriages." He said he thought the findings would not be "reproducible on a larger cohort" and that while there may "indeed be a trend visible with all PFAS that could become statistically significant with a larger number of participants, this isn't irrefutable proof yet, just suggestive of a trend." What Does This Mean for Miscarriage Care and Treatment? While it is not yet clear exactly how PFAS chemicals may be contributing to unexplained recurrent miscarriage, Peaslee said, "PFAS have been shown to be endocrine disrupting chemicals in previous published work." He added, "If a chemical interferes with reproductive organ functions, the endocrine system, then spontaneous miscarriages are one of the unfortunate results." There are ongoing studies "investigating multiple mechanisms to determine how a PFAS exposure may contribute to molecular, endocrine, and other alterations that could lead to these outcomes," Freeman said. Even though more research is needed to determine how PFAS exposure is potentially contributing to adverse pregnancy outcomes, the findings of the study could "shape care for pregnant women going forward," Brown said—particularly in relation to blood testing. "Blood testing is recommended for people with a history of elevated exposure to PFAS," he said, citing the PFAS committee of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). "That could be from local industry, contaminated food and water, personal care products, household products, and workplace exposure," he added. Brown said that NASEM recommends clinical follow-up for people with more than 2 nanograms per milliliter of PFAS, "with extra focus on pregnant women." "For women with two to 20 nanograms per milliliter of PFAS, doctors should specifically follow up for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy," he said. He added that there also needed to be "more education of health care professionals." Freeman said pregnant women and those considering pregnancy should seek advice from their medical care team regarding their specific situation of PFAS exposure risks "similar to how it's recommended for other environmental exposures of concern, for example methylmercury and other reproductive and developmental toxicants." Advice for Pregnant Women—Experts There are a number of things pregnant women can do in light of these findings, one being "pressing their health providers to learn about PFAS," Brown said. They can also order PFAS blood tests and push for mandated health insurance coverage of blood tests, which are now only required in New Hampshire and likely to soon be covered in Maine, he added. Addressing PFAS exposure through drinking water is also important, Brown said, so pregnant women can "push their local water utilities to ensure they are keeping PFAS in drinking water to the lowest possible levels, using state and federal guidelines." Installing water filters that remove PFAS chemicals is also advisable, he said, adding that they could also be aware of their own personal consumption habits—trying to avoid products with PFAS chemicals where possible. Freeman also said that being aware of PFAS exposure in food products was also important and that it was "recommended to consider choosing consumer and food products with fewer PFAS to minimize exposure." "Given the myriad adverse health effects that PFAS have been shown to cause, I would recommend everybody find ways to reduce their exposure to PFAS—especially when pregnant or considering getting pregnant," Peaslee said. However, while pregnant women can do things to help reduce their own exposure, Brown said, "upstream source reduction is always the best path forward, since people shouldn't be held responsible for harmful exposures that can be prevented." Reference Qianxi Cheng, Chunxian Lv, Yawei Li, Haocan Song, Shuyao Li, Dandan Li, Yingying Han, Feng Zhao, Qiang Lin (2025). Association between per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances and unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortion: A case-control study in China, Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, Vol 301.
