Re: PFAS - The Facts
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 7:13 am
Sorry to hear that Rob.
There's a lot of conflicting info out there. On one hand there are very tight official tolerable intake and safety trigger limits, with the fish tested showing well over the limits, which clearly suggests "don't eat them".
But the Defence line is "there is no consistent evidence of harm to humans".
On the one hand they don't want to worry those exposed, or trigger compensation claims, on the other they must warn people to avoid exposure because animal studies have shown toxic effects.
The people who have been exposed are possibly ones who should avoid further exposure.
PFAS are slow to leave flesh, and some of those Katherine/Tindal fish such as barra will have spread through the Daly/Katherine. What's the ratio of contaminated to uncontaminated fish in the system? Have they tested any meteries? Fish up the Katherine tested would likely be small. Might be bioaccumulation in big barra, especially given that the mullet tested were highly contaminated.
When deciding whether to eat fish you have to decide first yes or no, if yes how much you are willing to eat, whether you have had previous exposure to PFAS, and even then it's all rubbery.
Research is continuing, hopefully there will be some reassuring answers.
There's a lot of conflicting info out there. On one hand there are very tight official tolerable intake and safety trigger limits, with the fish tested showing well over the limits, which clearly suggests "don't eat them".
But the Defence line is "there is no consistent evidence of harm to humans".
On the one hand they don't want to worry those exposed, or trigger compensation claims, on the other they must warn people to avoid exposure because animal studies have shown toxic effects.
The people who have been exposed are possibly ones who should avoid further exposure.
PFAS are slow to leave flesh, and some of those Katherine/Tindal fish such as barra will have spread through the Daly/Katherine. What's the ratio of contaminated to uncontaminated fish in the system? Have they tested any meteries? Fish up the Katherine tested would likely be small. Might be bioaccumulation in big barra, especially given that the mullet tested were highly contaminated.
When deciding whether to eat fish you have to decide first yes or no, if yes how much you are willing to eat, whether you have had previous exposure to PFAS, and even then it's all rubbery.
Research is continuing, hopefully there will be some reassuring answers.