DuPont Teflon factory and Environmental Justice

Environmental justice, is a term that has morphed drastically over the past decade. This term is greatly involved in today’s society as it brings to light the disparities of what people around the world are living through today. Many people are having to deal with unfair treatment when it comes to access to environmental development (Corry 2022). Ironically, there is no access to environmental development provided to people, but environmental pollution is plentiful (Donez 2022). Due to the nature of economic status and racial or gender profiling, there has never been a way where less fortunate people had access to nutrient-rich foods and shielding from various pollution. There are many communities, especially African-American based, that are suffering from “food deserts” (Kavi et al. 2019). There are many instances where the lack of accessibility to healthy foods is related to health disparities, such as cardiovascular disease (CVD) (Ferdinand 2017).There was a study done that linked a community of 1421 volunteered African-American adults. Of the volunteers, 63.7% of participants were college graduates and 47.9% had incomes of >$75000, which is considered low income. It was also revealed that the mortality rate of CVD for that community was greater than other communities that did not suffer from food deserts by 30% (Ferdinand 2017). Furthermore, neighborhoods are being exposed to pollutants, and there is no resolution to the problem. Communities that live near manufacturing facilities are usually subject to the dumping of pollutants (Neuhauser 2018). Many factories such as the Dupont Teflon Factory had many allegations against them from various recounts of misuse of chemicals. Factories are by far one of the more prolific pollution contributors, as the Dupont branch had been found to release chemicals into the waterways of residents in Ohio and West Virginia. At the beginning of 2001, the Dupont Teflon factory was subject to a class-action lawsuit by the residents of Ohio (Nair 2017). This reason was that the factory had dumped toxic compounds called “Perfluorooctanoic acid” (PFOA) and “Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid” (PFOS) into the waters near the factory. Stemming from “Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl”(PFAS), PFOA and PFOS are mainstreamed. Due to the recklessness of the company itself, the drinking water for  70,000 people was contaminated (Blake 2022). In the end, the term environmental justice, not only highlights why and how the environment has become what it is, but who is to be held accountable as well. Environmental justice seeks equality for all people regardless of gender or nationality. Not only that, this movement urges people impacted to have a voice in solving adversity and to educate others who are unaware of inequality (Yale 2020). In many instances, pollution has grown and contaminated the general population, but no one knows where and when they come. The Dupont Teflon factory had damaged the communities nearby not only physically, but mentally as well. For this reason, people deserve to be brought to light about the Dupont factory and many other factories of illegal dumping of pollutants, how toxic illegal dumping could be, and the possibility of reverting damages.

Lawsuits against Dupont

          In the late 1980s, the Tennant family, raising their cattle since the early 1900s over the hills of western Virginia near the Ohio river, lost 280 Hereford cows. The Tennants found that it was the black odorous water in the creek that the cattle drank from that ultimately caused their death. The creek was close to a landfill where DuPont had disposed of non-hazardous waste. The waste contained C-8, an unregulated chemical and known animal carcinogen that had been used for 50 years in the production of Teflon, a popular product from DuPont. In 1999, the Tennant family sued Dupont over the loss of cattle. According to DuPont’s own testing, the chemical was discovered in the creek and the nearby soil in significant amounts (Cortese 2003). In 2001, this lawsuit was resolved for an undisclosed sum. Numerous legal actions were taken against DuPont by those who claimed to have been harmed by PFOA pollution, including those who worked in the factory, residents, and communities living downriver. They alleged in their lawsuit that DuPont knew the chemical had been there in the public water system since 1984 but failed to warn the community. DuPont contended that the amounts of C-8 were too low to pose a health risk and that the business complied with its reporting requirements (Cortese 2003). The PFOA information found in this lawsuit prompted the same lawyer to bring a class action lawsuit on behalf of 70,000 people in districts where PFOA had leaked into the water system in 2001. DuPont agreed to pay up to $235 million for healthcare monitoring for more than 70,000 people who resided in six water districts around the Parkersburg plant as part of the 2005 settlement of this class action (Dupont Lawsuits).

         An investigation into the C-8 health impacts on a nationwide level was started by the US Environmental Protection Agency as the consequences could be felt far beyond West Virginia. The EPA reported “potential systemic toxicity and carcinogenicity” in a preliminary evaluation. Based on the blood samples from blood banks across the country, the EPA also investigated how a significant portion of the nation’s population came into contact with C-8, and whether DuPont broke the law by failing to notify the EPA of probable causes of concern years ago. According to internal records in the lawsuit, DuPont was aware of potential issues with C-8 in animals since 1981. However, authorities from DuPont acknowledged that C-8 is a known animal carcinogen but claimed that there is no risk to human health. Critics were also concerned about the way a collaborative inquiry by DuPont and the West Virginia Department of Protection was carried out. DuPont formally expressed its support for public hearings and research into C-8, but critics claimed that these efforts had been hampered by missing samples, damaged records, and information withholding (Cortese 2003).

            In 2014, there were more individual claims filed against DuPont for PFOA-related illnesses. By the year 2015, residents who claimed PFOA-contaminated water made them sick filed 3,500 lawsuits against DuPont (Dupont lawsuits). According to the New Jersey lawsuit, DuPont recognized the danger of the most prevalent PFAS chemical in the 1960s but failed to inform the state or local populations of the issue (Morgenson 2020). DuPont refuted claims that it hid PFAS risks. According to DuPont officials, the company had given the EPA a wealth of information over the years concerning potential harm associated with the chemicals. In addition, the New Jersey lawsuit alleged that DuPont concealed the findings of a blood sampling study conducted on pregnant employees exposed to the toxins in 1981, which revealed that 25% of the infants had birth abnormalities (Morgenson 2020). In the first case of the 3500 lawsuits, a jury ordered DuPont to pay $1.6 million in compensatory damages after finding that the company was to blame for the plaintiff’s kidney cancer. In the second case, a jury determined that DuPont had acted unethically and imposed a $5.6 million punitive and compensatory damage penalty on the company. Three additional cases were resolved between 2014 and 2016 for undisclosed sums, and the plaintiff withdrew the fourth from the test case pool. While denying any wrongdoing, DuPont settled more than 3,550 PFOA cases for $671 million in February 2017 (Dupont Lawsuits).

Teflon as a pollutant

To create Teflon, a class of chemical compounds called Per- and Perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) were used by the Dupont Teflon factory. PFAS are persistent environmental contaminants (Tsuda 2016). They are often referred to as “forever chemicals”. Due to the long carbon chain and strong carbon-fluorine bonds (Figure 1), PFAS have both lipophilic and hydrophilic properties which makes them chemically and thermally stable, allowing them to persist in the environment (Mueller and Yingling 2020). There are many types of PFAS however the two most researched, most used, and understood PFAS are Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). PFAS were originally created to act as surfactants and surface protectors due to their chemical and thermal stability (Johnson et al 2020). These include nonstick coatings on cookware, cosmetics, fabric protectors, waxes, paints, and firefighting foams (Johnson et al. 2020).

Figure 1. An image of the chemical structure of Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS). The two most understood are Perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The carbon chain backbone and strong Fluorine-carbon bonds make these compounds very stable. (Created by Matthew Fisher)

Current Understand of PFAS Toxicity in Humans

The mass production and use of PFAS have revealed many negative side effects. It has been found that there is a link between exposure to PFAS and increased levels of cholesterol, increased chances for kidney cancer, bladder cancer, liver cancer, leukemia, prostate cancer, testicular cancer, inflammatory bowel disease, thyroid disease, and pregnancy-induced hypertension (Figure 2)(C8 Science Panel 2020). These effects were not solely local and were observed in other regions such as the U.S., Europe, and China (Blake and Fenton 2020). In the US alone more than 90% of the population have detectable levels of PFAS in their blood  (Figure 3)(Kato et al. 2011).  Communities near water sources and farmers that work with livestock seem to be the most affected, but due to the mass use of PFAS Teflon most people in the US, China, and Europe have varying levels of PFAS. PFAS can be polymers and non-polymers, polymers are less harmful. However, polymers can degrade or react to make non-polymers, thus the presence of any PFAS poses a potential threat to human and ecological health (Mueller and Yingling 2020).  

Figure 2. Diagram of different outcomes of PFAS’s effect on the health of an unborn child, female and male human.The type of line (Solid or dashed) indicating high or lower certainty respectively, of the associated disease or condition to manifest after PFAS exposure. (EEA 2019). (Open source) https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/emerging-chemical-risks-in-europe/emerging-chemical-risks-in-europe

Due to the stability and the long-half lives of PFAS persistence has been seen in many living organisms including humans, PFOS is the most persistent PFAS with an estimated half-life of 15.3 years (Cai et al. 2020). Carcinogenicity in humans is not well understood since researchers have only begun to scratch the surface of PFAS. However, in rat models, it was discovered that PFOA activates the PPARα pathway (acts as an agonist). Activating this pathway increases the transcription of mitochondrial peroxisomal lipid metabolism (Tsuda 2016). This means that there will be a ramp-up in peroxisomes synthesis resulting in more lipid metabolism to create more energy which promotes uncontrolled growth in the liver (Kim 2020). Uncontrolled growth is a staple of cancer. However, this pathway does not induce peroxisomal synthesis in humans and thus does not have relevance to humans in terms of PFAS carcinogenicity (Tsuda 2016). PFAS creates liver tumors in rats through the PPARα pathway but in humans, this mechanism PPARα has different functions that do not promote cancer growth. There’s a receptor that PPARα binds to called PXR which is responsible for drug transport proteins and drug metabolic enzymes (Pondugula et al 2016). However, the PXR in humans has a different Amino acid composition so the interaction can’t occur (Tsuda 2016). This highlights the challenge that PFAS effects on one species may not translate to other species. Translating animal studies to humans is not always straightforward and presents another challenge to understanding these compounds. More research is needed to understand the biochemical pathways that are affected by PFAS and their role as carcinogens.

Figure 3. Visual representation of the average percentage of individuals with detectable levels of PFAS in the US alone. Approximately 90% or nine in ten people in the US have some level in their blood. (Made by Matthew Fisher).

Effects on Human Development

The neurotoxicity of PFOS and PFOA have been questioned. There was a positive association between exposure to either PFOS or PFOA and being diagnosed with ADHD (Tsuda 2016). An experiment was done using rats and a water maze, they found that rats exposed to PFOS and PFOA in utero (Pregnancy) and through breast milk took more time to navigate through the maze and made more mistakes than rats that were not exposed (Long et al 2013). During development in the womb, PFOS and PFOA have strong effects on cardiomyocyte (contractile cells for the heart) differentiation. This is usually accompanied by low birth weight and birth defects (Davidsen et al. 2021). This was seen in both rat models and humans that were surveyed by the Danish National Birth Cohort (Meng et al. 2018). 

Figure 4. Diagram showing the pathway of PFAS exposure in different stages that can eventually lead to metabolic syndrome that manifests later in life in a Developing fetus. First, the PFAS from the environment has the ability to cross the placental barrier, which disrupts the development of the unborn child. PFAS disruptions then can lead to metabolic syndromes such as obesity, high blood pressure, and impaired glucose tolerance (prediabetes) later in the individual’s life. (Created by Matthew Fisher)

Conditions such as metabolic syndrome which has been observed in fish have been observed across many species including humans (Blake and Fenton 2020). Metabolic syndrome is a group of disorders such as obesity, high blood pressure, and impaired glucose tolerance (Prediabetes). This is because lifelong metabolic health is influenced by placental health during critical periods in utero (pregnancy) (Ervin 2009). PFAS have the ability to cross the placental barrier. This means that the developmental effects that PFAS have during pregnancy are not short-term but also manifest into issues later in life that can significantly change a person’s living conditions (Figure 4)(Cai et al. 2020).

Ecological impacts of PFAS

Now that we established that PFAS are indeed toxic to human health and animal health we should discuss their impact on the environment. PFAS can be found in most environmental media (surface water, soil, sediment, and food sources)(Johnson et al. 2020). By looking at the historical production and use of PFAS, environmental occurrences and persistence, bioaccumulation potential, bioactivity, and unique chemical/physical properties, scientist hope that they can develop an approach that will allow them to examine the ecological damage and the effects that PFAS have caused by dietary exposure (Johnson et al. 2020). According to a study conducted in the St. Lawrence River, some PFAS such as PFOS saw a bioaccumulation factor (BAF) of 5000 across all fish species (Munoz et al. 2022). Bioaccumulation is calculated by having the concentration of the PFAS in fish divided by the concentration of the environment. This essentially tells us PFOS is more likely to be found in fish than the water or sediment at a rate of 5000 times. They also discovered the biomagnification factor (BMF) was greater than one for PFOS (Munoz et al. 2022). BMF was measured by measuring the concentration of PFOS in the predator and dividing it by the concentration of PFOS in the prey. BMF tells us what the ratio of the pollutant is in the predators vs prey. In other words, a BMF>1 tells us that the pollutant is being transferred to higher trophic levels (prey to predators) faster than its being metabolized or excreted which means the pollutant is persistent in organisms and is accumulating more in predators through their diet  (Figure 5).

Figure 5. A simple example of the transfer of PFAS to higher trophic levels through predation. Due to the persistent nature of PFAS in organisms, predators (fish or human) eating organisms in lower trophic levels  (crawfish or Fish) with PFAS, we can see predators with higher concentrations of PFAS. This increase in PFAS concentration in higher trophic organisms is what we call Biomagnification which is observed in PFOS (BMF>1). (created by Matthew Fisher)

In drinking water varying levels of PFAS have been measured, in Toyama, Japan 0.62 ng/L, Shanghai China 130 ng/L and in Oakdale USA levels measured at around 2000 ng/L (Post et al 2009). These values seem troublesome because of the protective lifetime exposure of 0.04 g/L (Post et al 2009). Protective lifetime exposure describes the exposure to a compound that we should stay below in order to not experience health issues. In 5 pumping wells in Norwegian Firefighter training facilities, PFOS concentration was measured at 22 ug/L and PFAS, in general, was measured at 31.9 ug/L (Filipovic et al 2015), similar results were reported near a Swedish airport, PFOS was measured at 42 ug/L in groundwater and in a US military base PFOS measured at 78 ug/L in groundwater (Backe et al 2013). The transition from measuring by ng/L to ug/L implies that these sites had about 1000 times more PFOS.

There is much more that needs to be investigated in the family of PFAS. This is a relatively new branch of study which is why not much is known about them and their specific effects on humans, animals, or the environment. Due to evolving naming standards and characterization data on these compounds, early research may have different names or definitions of what PFAS are, making it difficult to understand early research (Johnson et al. 2020). Animal research does not always translate to humans very well which presents as we can see with the PPARα pathway. However it is clear by looking at PFAS levels in the differences between sites where we know PFAS were used (Fire fighting facilities, military bases, and airports), we know that we do have a significant impact on the existence of PFAS in the environment and the negative effects they have on health is significant (Figure 2). It is important to understand the impact PFAS may have, in order to warn individuals or reduce the harm that may come as a result to those that live near these sites (Fire fighting facilities, military bases, and airports) or in other heavily polluted areas.

Reducing Harm

As we know PFAs and PFOAs are present within the environment and within many things we consume and use on a daily basis. People are exposed to PFAs and PFOAs through contaminated drinking water and have a higher probability of exposure if they work within industries that work with PFAs/PFOAs (Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) Factsheet | National Biomonitoring Program | CDC.). Since the main source of exposure is contaminated drinking water, it is best to use filters that specifically filter out PFAs. These filters are available to the general public and are accessible online. Another way to reduce exposure to PFAs is to avoid using certain products that have non-stick surfaces, to-go containers, and consuming seafood that was raised within contaminated waters (January 07, Ginty 2020 MM.). 

According to the Environmental Protection Agency, they have put PFOAs and PFAs as hazardous substances within CERCLA as of August 22, 2022 (Environmental Protection Agency.) Efforts are currently being made through Bipartisan laws and putting in billions of dollars in order to have water clean-ups for communities that are affected by PFA contamination (Environmental Protection Agency). Industries can reduce their share of pollution by having well-thought-out waste management/ waste minimization, recycling water using treatments to ensure that the water is cleaned, as well as reducing or not using harmful material at all (Connecta’t. (2022, April 19). Laws have been placed within the past few years to start banning the use of PFAs within materials in order to benefit the lives of many as well as the environment (Environmental Protection Agency). 

A  recent study by Liu, G. et al. have shown that there have been efforts to try and find ways to degrade PFAs using bimetallic compounds. This is a groundbreaking discovery because they are not relying on using more chemicals that could be harmful to the environment. By using bimetallic compounds that are supported by carbon, they have found through their studies that 98% of the PFOAs were degraded (Liu, G. et al.). This can be added to future studies, and if applicable be able to be used within affected areas and can be used for future cleaning up and restoration, and remediation efforts. In order to overall reduce the exposure of these forever chemicals is to reduce the number of products that are used, ensure companies are doing their best to contain and dispose of waste properly, and pass laws that are strictly enforced to protect our people and environment. 

Works Cited:

• Blake EB, Fenton SE. 2020. Early life exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and latent health outcomes: A review including the placenta as a target tissue and possible driver of peri- and postnatal effects. Toxicology. 443(1). DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tox.2020.152565
• Blake M. Dupont lawsuits (re PFOA pollution in USA). Business & Human Rights Resource Centre. [accessed 2022 Nov 14]. https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/dupont-lawsuits-re-pfoa-pollution-in-usa/
• Cai D, Li QQ, Chu C, Wang GH, Tang YT, Appleton AA, Qiu RL, yang BY, Hu LW, Dong GH, et al. 2020. High trans-placental transfer of perfluoroalkyl substances alternatives in the matched maternal-cord blood serum: Evidence from a birth cohort study. Science of The Total Environment. 705(1). DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135885
• Connecta’t. (2022, April 19). How industries can reduce water pollution more effectively. home.es – Keiken Engineering. Retrieved October 31, 2022, from https://keiken-engineering.com/news/how-industries-can-reduce-water-pollution-more-effectively 
• Cortese A. 2003. DuPont’s Teflon dilemma. Chief Executive.(193):22–.
• Corry J. What is environmental justice? ClientEarth. [accessed 2022 Nov 14]. https://www.clientearth.org/latest/latest-updates/stories/what-is-environmental-justice/ 
• Davidsen N, Rosenmai KA, Lauschke K, Svingen T, Vinggaard MA. 2021. Developmental effects of PFOS, PFOA and GenX in a 3D human induced pluripotent stem cell differentiation model. Chemosphere. 279 (1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.130624
• Donez F. Fair Treatment, Environmental Justice. EPA. [accessed 2022 Nov 14]. https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/learn-about-environmental-justice#:~:text=Environmental%20justice%20(EJ)%20is%20the,environmental%20laws%2C%20regulations%20and%20policies. 
• Environmental Protection Agency. (n.d.). Drinking Water Health Advisories for PFOA and PFOS. EPA. Retrieved October 31, 2022, from https://www.epa.gov/sdwa/drinking-water-health-advisories-pfoa-and-pfos 
• Ferdinand KC, Mahata I. Food deserts. Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes. 2017;10(9). doi:10.1161/circoutcomes.117.004131 
• Morgenson G. 2020 Mar 1. How DuPont may avoid paying to clean up a toxic “forever chemical.” NBC News. https://www.nbcnews.com/health/cancer/how-dupont-may-avoid-paying-clean-toxic-forever-chemical-n1138766.
• Nair AS. Dupont settles lawsuits over leak of chemical used to make teflon. Reuters. 2017 Feb 13 [accessed 2022 Nov 14]. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-du-pont-lawsuit-west-virginia/dupont-settles-lawsuits-over-leak-of-chemical-used-to-make-teflon-idUSKBN15S18U 
• Neuhauser A. Minority communities near industrial sites get pollution, not jobs. 2018 Oct 1 [accessed 2022 Nov 15]. https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2018-10-01/minority-communities-near-industrial-sites-get-pollution-not-jobs 
• [EEA] European Environment Agency. 2019. Emerging chemical risks in Europe — ‘PFAS. European Environment Agency (EEA) [Accessed 2022 Oct 31st]. https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/emerging-chemical-risks-in-europe/emerging-chemical-risks-in-europe
• Is it too late to prevent climate change? – climate change: Vital signs of the planet. NASA. [accessed 2022 Oct 31]. https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/16/is-it-too-late-to-prevent-climate-change/#:~:text=Without%20major%20action%20to%20reduce,according%20to%20the%20latest%20estimates. 
• Johnson SM, Buck CR, Cousins TI, Weis PC, Fenton ES. 2020. Estimating Environmental Hazard and Risks from Exposure to Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs): Outcome of a SETAC Focused Topic Meeting. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 40(3):543-549. DOI:https://doi-org.offcampus.lib.washington.edu/10.1002/etc.4784
• Kavi L, Sinisterra J, Bodenreider C, Bellay M, Ayub K, Ravichandran V, Archer J-M, Wilson S. Environmental justice and the food environment in Prince George’s County, Maryland: Assessment of Three Communities. Frontiers. 1AD Jan 1 [accessed 2022 Nov 14]. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fbuil.2019.00121/full 
• Liu, G. et al. (2021) Direct and efficient reduction of perfluorooctanoic acid using bimetallic catalyst supported on carbon, Journal of Hazardous Materials. Elsevier. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304389421001874?via%3Dihub (Accessed: October 31, 2022). 
• Tsuda S. 2016. Differential toxicity between perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). The Journal of Toxicological Sciences. 41(1): 27-36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2131/jts.41.SP27
• Kato K, Wong L, Lily T, Kuklenyik JZ, Calafat AM. 2011. Trends in Exposure to Polyfluoroalkyl Chemicals in the U.S. Population: 1999−2008†. Environmental Science & Technology. 45(11):8037-8045.
• Mueller R, Yingling V. 2017. Naming convention and physical and chemical properties of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Interstate Technology Regulatory Council.
• Meng Q, Inoue K, Ritz B, Olsen J, Liew Z. 2018.Prenatal Exposure to Perfluoroalkyl Substances and Birth Outcomes; An Updated Analysis from the Danish National Birth Cohort. Environment Research and Public Health. 15(9). DOI:https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15091832
• Ervin RB. 2009. Prevalence of Metabolic Syndrome Among Adults 20 Years of Age and Over, by Sex, Age, Race and Ethnicity, and Body Mass Index: United States, 2003–2006. National Health Statistics Report. 13(1):1-8. 
• Yale. How to support environmental justice everyday. Yale Sustainability. 2020 Nov 13 [accessed 2022 Nov 14]. https://sustainability.yale.edu/blog/how-support-environmental-justice-everyday 
• C8 Science Panel. 2020. C8 Science Panel. [accessed 2022 Nov 10] URL:http://www.c8sciencepanel.org/
• Filipovic M, Woldegiorgis, Norstrom K, Bibi M, Lindberg M, Osteras A. 2015. Historical usage of aqueous film forming foam: A case study of the widespread distribution of perfluoroalkyl acids from a military airport to groundwater, lakes, soils and fish. Chemosphere. 129: 39-45. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2014.09.005
• Backe WJ, Day TC, Field JA. 2013. Zwitterionic, Cationic, and Anionic Fluorinated Chemicals in Aqueous Film Forming Foam Formulations and Groundwater from U.S. Military Bases by Nonaqueous Large-Volume Injection HPLC-MS/MS. Environmental Science & Technology. 47(10): 5226-5234. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1021/es3034999
• Hoisaeter A, Pfaff A, Breedveld GD. 2019. Leaching and transport of PFAS from aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) in the unsaturated soil at a firefighting training facility under cold climatic conditions. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology. 222: 112-122. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2019.02.010
• Aninada Z, Alazaiza MYD, Bashir MJK. 2020. An Overview of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in the Environment: Source, Fate, Risk and Regulations. Water. 12(12):3590. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/w12123590
• Kim J. 2020. Peroxisome Metabolism in Cancer. Cells. 9(7): 1692. DOI:10.3390/cells9071692
• Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) Factsheet | National Biomonitoring Program | CDC. 2021 Sep 2. wwwcdcgov. [accessed 2022 Nov 15]. https://www.cdc.gov/biomonitoring/PFOA_FactSheet.html#:~:text=People%20are%20most%20likely%20exposed%20to%20PFOA%20by.
• ‌Pondugula SR, Pavek P, Mani S. 2016. Pregnane X Receptor and Cancer: Context-Specificity is Key. Nucl receptor Res. DOI: 10.11131/2016/101198
• January 07, Ginty 2020 MM. “Forever Chemicals” Called PFAS Show Up in Your Food, Clothes, and Home. NRDC. https://www.nrdc.org/stories/forever-chemicals-called-pfas-show-your-food-clothes-and-home.
• Munoz G, Mercier L, Duy SV, Liu J, Sauve S, Houde M. 2022. Bioaccumulation and trophic magnification of emerging and legacy per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in a St. Lawrence River food web. Environmental Pollution. 309. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2022.119739