Community Exposure to Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances ...€¦ · Community Exposure to Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs), an Emerging Public Health

NJ Department of Health

Community Exposure to Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs), an Emerging

Public Health IssueChang Ho Yu, Ph.D.Research Scientist

Environmental and Chemical Laboratory Services (ECLS), NJDOH-PHEL

June 14, 20172017 APHL Annual Meeting & Eleventh Government Environmental Laboratory Conference at

Rhode Island Convention Center, Providence, Rhode Island


Contents What are PFASs?

o Physicochemical propertieso Classifications and major typeso Manufacturing processeso Common useso Timeline for PFASs production, analysis, and regulation

Why PFASs are challenges to public health?o Proximity (sources)o Exposure pathwayso Persistence (biological behaviors) o Toxicityo Analytical perspectives

How to address PFASs issues?o CDC’s national biomonitoring programo Other states’ biomonitoring programs

NJDOH responses to emerging contaminants, PFASso Method development/optimizationo NJ biomonitoring (BM) projects

• Project I (general NJ residents)• Project II (local communities)• Project III (pregnant women)

o Challenges & future research directions


Part I: What are PFASs?

PFASs: Man-made chemicals by replacing fluorine (F) atom(s) into hydrogen (H) in organic compounds

Cn:F2n±1

o chemically/thermally stableo hydrophobic & lipophobico slippery propertieso persistent in environment

Applicationso non-sticking cook-wares, food containers,

consumer products; o water-proof clothing;o stain resistant coating;o fire-fighting foams; ando surfactant/emulsifier for industrial uses.

C8HF15O2

C8HF17O3S

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Called a “surfactant” because it reduces the surface tension of water, the slippery, stable compound was eventually used in hundreds of products, including Gore-Tex and other waterproof clothing; coatings for eye glasses and tennis rackets; stain-proof coatings for carpets and furniture; fire-fighting foam; fast food wrappers; microwave popcorn bags; bicycle lubricants; satellite components; ski wax; communications cables; and pizza boxes.


Perfluoroalkyl & Polyfluoroalkyl

Substances (PFASs)

Perfluoroalkyl Substances

Polyfluoroalkyl Substances

Perfluoroalkane Sulfonamides

(FASAs)

Perfluoroalkyl Acids (PFAAs)

Perfluoroalkane Sulfonamido Substances Perfluoroalkane

Sulfonamidoethanols (FASEs)

Fluorotelomer Substances

PerfluoroalkaneSulfonamidoacetic

Acids (FASAAs)

Fluorotelomer Alcohols (FTOHs)

Polyfluoroalkyl Phosphoric Acid

Esters (PAPs)

Perfluoroalkyl Carboxylic Acids

(PFCAs)

Perfluoroalkyl Sulfonic Acids (PFSAs)

PFASs: How Categorized and Named?

Fully Fluorinated

Partially Fluorinated

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Per: All hydrogens are replaced with fluorines Poly: At least one of hydrogens are replaced with fluorines


Group Target Compounds Chemical Formula

C4 Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBuS or PFBS) Perfluorobutanoic acid (PFBuA)

C4HF7O2C4HF9O3S

C5 Perfluoropentanoic acid (PFPeA) C5HF9O2

C6 Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS) Perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA)

C6HF13O3SC6HF11O2

C7 Perfluoroheptanoic acid (PFHpA) C7HF13O2

C8Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)Perfluorooctanesulfonamide (PFOSA)

C8HF17O3SC8HF15O2C8H2F17NO2S

C9 Perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA) C9HF17O2

C10 Perfluorodecanoic acid (PFDeA or PFDA) C10HF19O2

C11 Perfluoroundecanoic acid (PFUA or PFUnA) 2-(N-methyl-Perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetic acid (Me-PFOSA-AcOH or NMeFOSAA)

C11HF21O2C11H6F17NO4S

C12 Perfluorododecanoic acid (PFDoA) 2-(N-ethyl-Perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetic acid (Et-PFOSA-AcOH or NEtFOSAA)

C12HF23O2C12H8F17NO4S

C13 Perfluorotridecanoic acid (PFTrDA) C13HF25O2

C14 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid (PFTA) C14HF27O2

CDC/EPA

CDC

EPA

Long-chain(≥C8)

Short-chain(C4-C6)

Carbon Groups


Electrochemical fluorination (ECF):o Mixture of branched (~30% in PFOS &

20% in PFOA) and linear (~70% & 80%, respectively) isomers and by-products

o Manufactured @3Mo “Historical” process and phased-out

since 2002 in US; but still used overseas and for PFBuS in US

Telomerization:o Synthetic process by adding free radicals

and resulting in isomerically pure linear products

o Started/Manufactured @DuPonto “Modern” process and still widely usedo Voluntarily switched to shorter chain

compounds (C4-C6)

Manufacturing Techniques

C8H17SO2F + 34HF →

C8F17SO2F + 17H2 →

C8F17SO3H or C8F17SO2X

F(CF2)2I → F(CF2)nI →

F(CF2)nCH2CH2I →

F(CF2)nCH2CH2OH

OSF

POSF

PFOS POSF derivatives

n:2 FTOH

n:2 FTI (Telomer B)

PFEI PFAI (Telomer A)

Presenter

Presentation Notes

OSF: Octane sulfonyl fluoride (raw material) POSF: Perfluorinated octyl sulfonyl fluoride PFEI: Pentafluoroethyl iodide TFE: Tetrafluoroethylene PFAI: Perfluoroalkyl iodide FTI: Fluorotelomer iodide


Everywhere, around you

Water-proof (Gore-Tex®)

Fast food wrapper

Pop corn bag

Pizza box Nail polish

Stain-proof (Scotchgard®)

Ski wax

Non-sticking cookware

Shampoo

Cleaning products


Aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) fire-fighting agents

Engineering coatings

Medical devicesTextile, upholstery, and carpet

Oil production

Packaging

Plastics and rubber

Industrial Uses


Milestone for PFASs – Production, Analysis, and RegulationTime What Happened

1950s 3M: Manufactured PFOSDuPont: Manufactured Teflon®

1969 DOD: AFFF patented as fire fighting foams and implemented throughout the military bases

1980-90s LC-MS/MS developed with detecting ppm to ppb levels

2002 EPA: Initiated voluntary phase-out of PFOS

2005 DuPont: $234 M class action lawsuit in the Ohio river

2000s LC-MS/MS improved to detecting ppt and ppq levels

2006 EPA: Announced PFOA Stewardship Program by reducing 95% in 2010 and 100% in 2015

2009 EPA: Published Method 537 for water

2011 EPA: Published Draft Method for sewage/sludge/biosolids

2012 EPA: UCMR3 signed

2016 EPA: Released health limits for combined PFOS and PFOA not exceeding 70 ppt (ng/L)

2016 NJ: Approved PFNA Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 13 ppt(ng/L) in drinking water

2017 NJ: Recommended PFOA MCL of 14 ppt (ng/L) in drinking water


Part II: Why Concerns for PFASs?

1. Persistence in the environment

2. Widespread exposure to humans

3. Observed toxicity in animals

4. Insufficient information to

assess human risks

PFASs are matters in terms of:


How PFASs Travel?

The PFASs release, transport, and exposure pathways to humans. (Oliaei et al., 2013)

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Oliaei et al., PFOS and PFC releases and associated pollution from a PFC production plant in Minnesota (USA), Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 20:1977-1992, 2013.


PFAS-contaminated Drinking Water Occurred across US


Data on PFC drinking water contamination are collected under the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR) for suspectedcontaminants for which the EPA has not established health-based standards under the Safe Drinking Water Act. The drinking water data in this map were taken from the October 2015 UCMR 3 data summary. In addition, the map shows 664 fire- or crash-training sites, identified by the Department of Defense, where a PFC-laced fire suppressant known as Aqueous Film-Forming Foam was used, often for decades. Not all of these sites have been tested for PFCs, but it is likely that all of them are contaminated. Data visualization: Moiz Syed. Sources: EPA and Department of Defense.https://theintercept.com/2015/12/16/toxic-firefighting-foam-has-contaminated-u-s-drinking-water-with-pfcs/

AFFFs Contaminate US Drinking Water

https://theintercept.com/2015/12/16/toxic-firefighting-foam-has-contaminated-u-s-drinking-water-with-pfcs/


Exposure Pathways

Drinking Water

Non-dietary from House Dust

Dietary from Food

Consumption

Migrated from Household Products

Dermal Contact

Air esp. from Occupational

Exposures

by Direct Exposures

from PFASs

by Indirect Exposure from

Precursors (e.g., FTOHs, PAPs, FASAs,

FASEs)

Ingestion

Inhalation

Absorption

Human Uptake


How Processed in the Body?

Oral/Dermal/Pulmonary Absorption

Blood (serum

albumin)

LiverKidney

Urine &

Feces

lost

excreted

IN > OUT Bioaccumulation

metabolized

transported

Presenter

Presentation Notes

PFAS half-life varies by species and between genders in animal studies, due to differences in renal clearance rates. Human data show much larger inter-individual variability, due to differences in renal transport by OATs, personal exposure levels, and other unknown factors.


Takes Long Time to be Eliminated in Human Body

Study Population/Method Half-life (year)PFOS PFOA PFHxS PFNA

Retired workers/Serum measurements (Olsen et al., 2007)

5.4 [2.4-21.7] 3.8 [1.5-9.1] 8.5 [2.2-27.0] No data

Community residents/Serum measurements

*3.8 (MDH, 2013)

2.3 (Bartell et al., 2010)3.3 (Brede et al., 2010)2.9-10.1 (Seals et al., 2011)*4.8 (MDH, 2013)

*5.6 (MDH, 2013) No data

General population/Urinary excretion (**Zhang et al., 2013)

6.2 (YF)27 (M+OF)

2.1 (YF)2.6 (M+OF)

7.7 (YF)35 (M+OF)

2.5 (YF)4.3 (M+OF)

*Estimated from Minnesota Dept. of Health PFC pilot study results (2008-2010; N=193)**Differences are from loss via menstrual bleeding, pregnancy, and lactation in pre-menopausal women.

Half-lives are varied by PFASs, Study Population or Method


Health Outcomes

Not easily biodegradableo persistent in environments and

bioaccumulative in biota Highly toxic in animal studies

o disrupting normal endocrine activityo reducing immune functiono causing adverse effects on organs (liver,

pancreas, etc.)o causing developmental problems in

rodent offspring exposed in the womb Limited toxicity in human studies

o suggested similar effects on human health; while failed to find conclusive links

PFASs

Obesity

Cancer

High cholesterol

Immuno-deficiency

Hormone disruption

C8 Science Panel• Mid-Ohio valley communities• PFOA (C8)• Large-scale epidemiological study

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Called a “surfactant” because it reduces the surface tension of water, the slippery, stable compound was eventually used in hundreds of products, including Gore-Tex and other waterproof clothing; coatings for eye glasses and tennis rackets; stain-proof coatings for carpets and furniture; fire-fighting foam; fast food wrappers; microwave popcorn bags; bicycle lubricants; satellite components; ski wax; communications cables; and pizza boxes.


Matrixo Biological

• Blood (serum), milk, semen, etc.o Environmental

• Drinking water (DW), house dust, etc.o Foodo Consumer products

Extractiono Solid phase extraction (SPE)

• Off-line (cartridge or 96-well plate)• On-line (automated unit)

o Solvent extraction in sonicator/microwave oveno Direct injection (for DW)

Analysiso LC-MS : Preferred choice

• Separated by reverse phase silica column with polarity• Ionized in (-)ESI and determined by Quadrupole MS(/MS),

Ion Trap MS(/MS), or Time-of-Flight (ToF) HRMS• Corrected by internal standards

o GC-MS• Derivatized and separated by a capillary column• Ionized in EI, CI, or NCI modes and determined by MS

o 19F Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) Spectroscopy• Structure/purity of organofluorine compounds• Need a pre-concentration/cleanup

AB Sciex QTRAP 6500

Agilent 6545 Q-TOF

Analytical Perspectives


Part III: CDC’s National Biomonitoring Program

National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES)• Since 1999, PFASs in human sera

have been measured and reported • Period: 1999-ongoing• Subjects: ~2000 kids (12-19) + adults

(>20) across US• Detected >99% of PFOS, PFOA,

PFHxS, and PFNA in general US population

• Decreasing trends of PFASs due to phase-out of PFOS and PFOA.

https://www.cdc.gov/biomonitoring/

https://www.cdc.gov/biomonitoring/


Other States’ Biomonitoring Programs in California

Asian/Pacific Islander Community Exposures (ACE) Project• Period: 2016-present• Subjects: 100 Chinese adults in SF bay area

Biomonitoring Exposures Study (BEST)• Period: 2011-present• Subjects: 453 adults in Central ValleyCalifornia Teachers Study (CTS)• Period: 2011-present• Subjects: 2,869 female school teachers in CA

Firefighter Occupational Exposures (FOX) Project• Period: 2010-present• Subjects: 101 firefighters in CAMaternal and Infant Environmental Exposure Project (MIEEP)• Period: 2010-present• Subjects: 92 pregnant women-infant in SF

http://biomonitoring.ca.gov/chemicals/perfluorochemicals-pfcs

More Lab Collaboration Studies for Archived Samplese.g., 3Gs, MAMAS,…etc.

http://biomonitoring.ca.gov/chemicals/perfluorochemicals-pfcs


Other States’ Biomonitoring Program in Minnesota

Community Exposure to PFCs in East Metro, MN• Background: public and private

drinking water contaminated with PFCs in 2000s

• Period: 2008-2014• Subjects: 300 East Metro Residents in

MN• Reduced PFCs in drinking water to

below health-based limits. • Observed declining trends of PFCs in

subjects over time.

http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/hpcd/tracking/biomonitoring/projects/emetro-landing.html

http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/hpcd/tracking/biomonitoring/projects/emetro-landing.html


Other States’ Biomonitoring Program in New York

PFOA in Drinking Water in the Village of Hoosick Falls and Petersburg, NY• Background: public and private drinking water contaminated with PFOA in 2014/2015• Subjects: 2,081 participants in Hoosick Falls & ~1,000 from Petersburg• Period: 2016-ongoing• Hoosick Falls results (GM [Mdn]): 23.5 [28.3] ng/mL; n=2,081. • Preliminary results from Petersburg: 11.7 [10.7] ng/mL; n=55.

https://www.health.ny.gov/environmental/investigations/hoosick/

https://www.health.ny.gov/environmental/investigations/hoosick/


Other States’ Biomonitoring Program in New Hampshire

PFCs Blood Testing Program in NH• Background: In 2014, elevated PFCs

were found in public wells at Pease Tradeport community in Portsmouth, NH, former Pease Air Force Base. Also, elevated PFOA was detected in private wells, in Southern NH.

• Period: 2015-ongoing• Subjects: 1,578 from Pease

communities & 173 from S. NH (to date)

• Pease data shows serum PFCs were higher than general US and lower than other environmentally exposed communities.

https://www.dhhs.nh.gov/dphs/pfcs/blood-testing.htm

https://www.dhhs.nh.gov/dphs/pfcs/blood-testing.htm


Part IV: NJDOH Responses to an Emerging Contaminant, PFASs

Statement:1. NJ has an ongoing contamination

issue in Paulsboro (detected PFASs in public water).

2. Biomonitoring including PFASs greatly helps to preventing potential health outcomes.

The PFASs measured in NJ public water system in 2010-2013. (Source: Post et al., 2013)

NJ BM Project

General Population

Community Residents

Pregnant Women


NJDOH Method

Analysis Column Agilent XDB-C83.0 x 100 mm, 3.5-micron

Aqueous Solution(Mobile Phase A)

10mM Ammonium Acetate in Water (pH=4.3)

Organic Acid (Mobile Phase B)

50% Methanol + 50% Acetonitrile

Gradient Program

1:30 (B:65%) -7:30 (B:80%) @ 0.7mL/min

Running Time 10 min

Cleaning Procedures

Extensive cleaning of cartridge/column/system with ACN-IPA-Methanol

Instrument AB Sciex QTRAP 6500

To improve the separation, reduce the background, and maintain the method

robust/productive

Method Development/Optimization: 1. Development of A New Sensitive Measurement Method for PFASs in Serum (NJDOH Method)

NJDOH Method (2016)All 12 analytes are baseline-separated and resolved (>0.3 min)

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2016.11.063

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2016.11.063


Method Development/Optimization: 2. A Validation Study for PFASs in Drinking Water @NJDOH

Based on EPA Method 537 ver. 1.1 (2009), specifically • To achieve practical quantitation levels (PQLs) for PFNA (<5 ng/L) and PFOA (<6

ng/L);• To demonstrate the ECLS has ability and capacity; and• To assist current NJDOH BM projects

Target Analytes: 14 PFASsLinear Range: 5-200 ng/LAccuracy/Precision: Recovery of 70-130% & <20% in RSDLimit of Detection/Quantitation: LOD<1 ng/L & LOQ<5 ng/LStability: testing up to 14 (prior to extraction) and 28 days (after extraction) in a refrigerator (7±3 °C)

Aims:

Objectives:


1.040.80

0.67 0.77

1.34

3.21

0.89

4.99

1.90

0.87

0.50

1.79

1.45 1.35

0.57 0.55

0.10

0.63 0.71

3.83

0.48

4.62

2.79

4.71

0.190.44

0.600.79

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

PFAA

Con

cent

ratio

n (n

g/L)

LOD/LOQ /MRL BY EPA METHOD 537 AT NJDOH-ECLS

LODLOQMRL

LOD=2.82*SD of 10 replicates spiked at 2 ng/L (note: 2.82 obtained from t-distribution of 9 DF at 99%); LOQ=5*LOD*MRL is determined by calculating either 3*AVG or 3*SD of 12 de-ionized water samples, whichever is greater.

Analyte LOD(ng/L)

LOQ(ng/L)

MRL (ng/L)

NEtFOSAA 0.21 1.04 0.57NMeFOSAA 0.16 0.80 0.55PFBS 0.13 0.67 0.10PFDA 0.15 0.77 0.63PFDoA 0.27 1.34 0.71PFHpA 0.64 3.21 3.83PFHxA 0.18 0.89 0.48PFHxS 1.00 4.99 4.62PFNA 0.38 1.90 2.79PFOA 0.17 0.87 4.71PFOS 0.10 0.50 0.19PFTA 0.36 1.79 0.44PFTrDA 0.29 1.45 0.60PFUnA 0.27 1.35 0.79

LOD (Limit of Detection)LOQ (Limit of Quantitation) MRL (Minimum Reporting Level)*NJDEP’s practical quantitation levels (PQLs) for PFNA and PFOA in DW are 5 and 6 ng/L, respectively.

2. A Validation Study for PFASs in Drinking Water @NJDOH: Determination of LODs/LOQs/MRLs for EPA Method 537

*NJDEP’s PQLs for PFNA and PFOA in DW are 5 and 6 ng/L, respectively.


NJDOH BM Project 1: Environmental Contaminant Levels in Blood and Urine Specimens from New

Jersey Clinical Laboratories and Blood Banks

Objectives Determine environmental contaminant levels among NJ

residents (20-74 years old) using remnant clinical laboratory and blood bank specimens.

Establish the state-wide biomonitoring database to screen for disparities.

Compare the NJ levels to national average (e.g., NHANES). Demonstrate laboratory capability/capacity to conduct

biomonitoring studies.


NJDOH BM Project 1 – Study Plan

Sample Size for PFAS Analysis• Target: PFASs in 500 serum specimens• Collected: 376 (as of 5/19/2017)

Serum Collection o NJ-based clinical laboratories and blood banks (Bioreference,

Trenton Community Blood Center, Bergen Community Blood Services)

o Demographic information• Age• Gender• Geographic identifier• Race/Ethnicity (if available)


NJDOH BM Project 1 – Subjects by Demographics

Male51%

Female49%

GENDER

20-3931%

40-5944%

60-7425%

AGE GROUP

White77%

Hispanic7%

Black5%

Others7%

N/A4%

RACE


NJDOH BM Project 1 – Subjects by Residence County

To date, over-sampled from North. More specimens obtaining from Central/South.Later normalized by population size in reporting means (e.g., proc surveymeans in SAS)


aPFASs (ng/mL)Project 1 - NJ Biomonitoring Project (2016) (N=161) 2016 eLatest NHANES (2013-2014)

bRL cGM 50% 75% 90% 95% dGM GM 50% 75% 90% 95%

Et-PFOSA-AcOH 0.028 N/A <RL <RL <RL 0.03 - <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.11

Me-PFOSA-AcOH 0.027 0.07 0.06 0.12 0.24 0.39 - <LOD 0.20 0.40 0.60

PFBuS 0.043 N/A <RL <RL 0.06 0.07 - <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD

PFDeA 0.096 0.21 0.19 0.29 0.68 1.40 0.14 0.19 0.20 0.30 0.50 0.70

PFDoA 0.066 N/A <RL <RL 0.12 0.31 - <LOD <LOD 0.10 0.20

PFHpA 0.055 N/A <RL 0.08 0.17 0.26 - <LOD <LOD 0.10 0.20

PFHxS 0.096 1.17 1.20 2.18 3.38 4.10 1.22 1.35 1.40 2.40 4.10 5.60

PFNA 0.039 0.77 0.76 1.01 1.33 1.68 0.52 0.68 0.70 1.00 1.60 2.00

PFOA 0.072 2.05 2.04 2.92 4.20 5.39 1.70 1.94 2.07 3.07 4.27 5.57

PFOS 0.071 3.28 3.61 5.05 6.40 7.68 3.55 4.99 5.20 8.70 13.9 18.5

PFOSA 0.018 N/A <RL <RL 0.03 0.05 - <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD

PFUnA 0.028 0.08 0.08 0.15 0.25 0.34 - <LOD 0.20 0.30 0.50

NJDOH BM Project 1 – Comparison with the latest NHANES data

a<RL data are substituted with RL/√2.bRL is defined as 5*LOD for each analyte.cGMs are provided if >RL measurements are 60% or more.dEstimated GMs for US population in 2016 from NHANES data (1999-2014).eEt-PFOSA-AcOH and PFOSA are no longer measured at CDC after 2012; Thus, the NHANES data provided here is from the last survey period (2011-2012).


NJDOH BM Project 2: Assessing PFNA Body Burdens Following Drinking Water InterventionBackground In 2012-2014, elevated PFNA was detected in public drinking

water in Paulsboro and West Deptford, NJ Discharges from local industrial facilities are potential sources

of PFNA contamination Interventions were implemented for the communities at

different times across past 2 years However, no study is being conducted to systematically

determine: The people were significantly exposed to?What temporal trends over years? How effective the implemented interventions?


NJDOH BM Project 2 – PFNA-contaminated DW in Paulsboro/West Deptford, NJ


NJDOH BM Project 2 – Where are Communities & Sources?


NJDOH BM Project 2 – Study Objectives & PlanSubject Recruitment Lived in affected areas >2 years Consumed drinking water with

PFNA >10 ng/L Healthy adults, aged 20-74 Subjects #: 101-180, depending on

funds

Sample Collection 2-3 blood draws (~10 mL each)

from each participant One drinking water sample from

each home Questionnaires (for demographic

information and PFAS exposures)

Primary Objectives Determine if the residents have

higher PFNA serum levels than the general population.

Evaluate the effectiveness of interventions by monitoring PFNA serum concentrations over time.

Determine other 11 PFASs.

Exploratory work Estimate the half-life of PFNA in

the body.

Estimate serum:drinking water ratios for PFNA.


Challenges• Matrix Effect: direct injection

of serum → column clogging & peak broadening

• Pre-filtering of the prepared sample

• A guard column (XDB-C8, 4.6x12.5, 3.5-µm)

• Stronger acetic/formic acid solutions (~1%)

• PFASs are mix of branched & linear forms

• Modify existing methods with new branched+linear standards.

• Apply more mass accurate instrument (e.g., QToF-MS/MS).

Future Research Directions


References1. Buck et al., 2011. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, Vol. 7, No. 4, 513-541.2. Martin et al., 2010. Journal of Environmental Monitoring, Vol. 12, 1979-2004.3. Benskin et al., 2010. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, Vol. 208, 111-160.4. Olsen et al., 2007. Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 115, No. 9, 1298-1305. 5. Post et al., 2012. Environmental Research Vol. 116, 93-117. 6. Oliaei, et al., 2013. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, Vol. 20, 1977-1992.7. Jahnke and Berger, 2009. Journal of Chromatography A, Vol. 1216, 410-421.8. Prevedouros et al., 2006. Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 40, No. 1, 32-44.9. Bartell et al., 2010. Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 118, No. 2, 222-228.10. Seals et al., 2011. Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 119, No. 1, 119-124.11. Brede et al., 2010. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, Vol. 213, 217-223.12. Zhang et al., 2013. Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 47, 10619-10627.13. MDH, 2013. East Metro PFC Community Updates- Community Meeting, Environmental Public

Health Tracking and Biomonitoring, Minnesota Department of Health, May 15, 2013.14. Yu et al., 2017. Journal of Chromatography A, Vol. 1480, 1-10.


Acknowledgements

NJDOH-PHEL, Onesia Bishop

ECLS, Bahman Parsa,(PI)CT Lab: Zhihua (Tina) Fan, Marilou Palencia, Chris Hargrave,Bhupendra Patel, Mounir SaadInorganic lab: Eric Bind, Douglas Haltmeier, Jhindan Mukherjee, Organic lab: C. David Riker, Norman Patterson, Songyan DuSample Receiving: Susan Muscato

--Support from other DOH divisions

CDC Biomonitoring Grant:U88EH001151


Documents

Community Exposure to Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances ...€¦ · Community Exposure to Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs), an Emerging Public Health