番茄社区app

The FDA quelled anxieties about chemicals contaminating the food supply following a recent analysis of nearly 100 foods.

In an today, only one out of 94 food samples showed detectable levels of two types of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) -- a class of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) -- which included perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA).

The were collected from the ongoing , an FDA-run program that began back in 1961, with the aim of monitoring radioactive contamination of foods. Currently, the program works to monitor a slew of contaminants in the U.S. food supply, including exposure to toxic and nutritional elements, pesticides, industrial chemicals, and radionuclides.

According to the most recent food sampling conducted in 2020 and this year, the FDA drew upon 94 samples of food commonly found in the American diet. Broken down by food category, the samples were divvied up according to the following: fruits and vegetables, meats and cheeses, dairy, and breads and grains.

These food samples were then assessed for 16 types of PFAS chemicals: PFOA, PFOS, PFBA, PFHpS, PFPeA, PFHxA, PFHxS, PFHpA, PFBS, PFPeS, NaDONA, HFPO-DA, PFDA, PFNA, 11Cl-PF3OUdS, and 9Cl-PF3ONs.

While are used in a wide variety of ways, they're most commonly used in non-stick cookware and for coating grease-proof food packaging. But as for PFAS in foods, the chemicals cannot be removed via washing, nor by cooking.

While specific health-related outcomes associated with PFAS exposure are still a hot topic in research today, to possible increased risk for kidney and testicular cancer, lower birth weight, increased risk of hypertension and preeclampsia, liver enzyme changes, increased cholesterol, and lower vaccine response in kids.

Of the 94 samples tested, only cod had "detectable" levels of PFOS measured in parts per trillion -- at 98 ng/kg -- and PFNA at 233 ng/kg.

All other samples were cleared with 99% confidence that the analyte concentration was undetectable.

While the FDA said these findings are generally consistent with previous years' data, seafood appears to be a bit of a sticking point when it comes to PFAS presence, as the agency noted previous testing implicated tilapia samples and one ground turkey sample.

"To better understand occurrence of PFAS in seafood, we are conducting a targeted survey of the most commonly consumed seafood in the U.S., including both cod and tilapia," the agency said. "The results from this survey will be used to determine if additional sampling, with greater numbers of samples of seafood, is needed."

Regardless, they added that the PFOS levels detected in these samples were so small that they dismissed them as "a human health concern."

While there wasn't any specific information as to where the food samples were collected, the agency noted they "were not specifically collected from areas of known environmental PFAS contamination."

"The FDA's work in this space is critically important to advance science and fill knowledge gaps about these chemicals and their occurrence in food. We're committed to using all tools available to help ensure the food we consume is safe and doesn't risk anyone's health," said HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra in a press statement.

Acting FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock, MD, added: "The U.S. food supply is among the safest in the world, and the available scientific evidence does not support avoiding particular foods because of concerns regarding PFAS exposure."

"Since we began testing foods from the general food supply for PFAS in 2019, only four samples out of the nearly 300 tested have had detectable levels of PFAS and none have been determined to be at levels of concern for human health," she noted. "The FDA remains committed to sharing further updates as our work in this important space progresses."

Comment