New research aimed at identifying foods that contain higher levels of PFAS found people who eat more white rice, coffee, eggs and seafood typically showed more of the toxic chemicals in their plasma and breast milk.

The study checked samples from 3,000 pregnant mothers, and is among the first research to suggest coffee and white rice may be contaminated at higher rates than other foods. It also identified an association between red meat consumption and levels of PFOS, one of the most common and dangerous PFAS compounds.

“The results definitely point toward the need for environmental stewardship, and keeping PFAS out of the environment and food chain,” said Megan Romano, a Dartmouth researcher and lead author. “Now we’re in a situation where they’re everywhere and are going to stick around even if we do aggressive remediation.”

  • huginn@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    ·
    5 months ago

    Coffee, eggs, white rice

    Selection bias much?

    If you don’t consume any of those 3 you’re probably ridiculously wealthy on some freaky diet.

    All this says to me is “The food of the masses is contaminated” which yeah - we already knew the rich pay a premium to get less contaminated food.

    • iopq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      5 months ago

      I went to Kazakhstan and people there don’t eat any of those things

      The traditional foodstuffs are flour and meat, with a lot of things made from milk

      • huginn@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        48
        ·
        5 months ago

        Call me crazy but I don’t think traditional Kazakh diets were part of the study of 3000 pregnant mothers in New Hampshire.

        • iopq@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          Of course not, I’m just saying your don’t need to eat those foods to survive

          • huginn@feddit.it
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            5 months ago

            Nobody was saying that you must eat eggs to survive - the point is to show the flaws in the hypothesis of the study when related to the sample group.

            If you are sampling 3000 mothers in New Hampshire and looking for those who eat less poor people food and more rich people food you should expect to see a correlation that can be equally described by socioeconomic status as it can by diet.