Podcasts about pfos

What if the water coming out of your kitchen faucet contains chemicals specifically engineered not to break down, and the protections designed to remove them are now being rolled back? In this Fatal Conveniences episode, Darin dives into PFAS, the so-called "forever chemicals" used for decades in nonstick cookware, waterproof clothing, food packaging, firefighting foam, and countless everyday products. Their incredibly strong carbon-fluorine bonds make them extraordinarily useful, but also allow them to persist in the environment and human body for years. Darin breaks down the regulatory battle surrounding America's first legally enforceable federal drinking-water standards for several PFAS chemicals. He walks through the original 2024 EPA rule, subsequent efforts to delay or rescind portions of those protections, the court battle surrounding those changes, and why he believes the story represents something much larger than bureaucratic policy. He then traces the history back decades, discussing internal industry documents, early toxicology findings, allegations that companies withheld troubling information, and a 2018 controversy involving a federal PFAS health assessment. For Darin, it's another example of a familiar pattern: dangerous information emerging slowly while the public continues to be exposed. But this episode isn't about becoming afraid of your faucet. It's about understanding the problem so you can take action. Darin's message is simple: don't wait for corporations, regulators, or politicians to protect your health. Understand your exposure, learn what the science says, and take practical steps to protect yourself and your family. What You'll Learn What PFAS "forever chemicals" are and why they persist for so long How PFAS became embedded in everyday products and the environment Why the carbon-fluorine bond makes these chemicals so difficult to break down How PFAS can accumulate in the human body over time What the EPA's original 2024 drinking-water standards attempted to regulate Why parts of those federal PFAS protections became the subject of a regulatory and legal battle How proposed changes could delay compliance and eliminate several PFAS limits What historical internal documents revealed about early industry knowledge of PFAS toxicity Why Darin sees today's regulatory battle as part of a decades-long pattern Why understanding your own exposure and taking action matters regardless of what happens in Washington Chapters 00:00:03 – Welcome to SuperLife 00:00:34 – Sponsor: Bite 00:02:49 – Forever chemicals may already be in your blood 00:03:13 – The federal PFAS drinking-water rule and what happened next 00:03:44 – Why this episode isn't about being afraid of your faucet 00:04:07 – Stop waiting for someone else to protect your health 00:04:30 – PFAS as the ultimate Fatal Convenience 00:05:22 – The nearly unbreakable chemistry behind forever chemicals 00:05:57 – How PFAS entered everyday life 00:06:27 – Why your body struggles to eliminate these chemicals 00:06:57 – How long PFAS can remain in the body 00:07:20 – We built a civilization around a molecule with no exit plan 00:07:46 – PFAS contamination in America's drinking water 00:08:15 – The EPA's historic 2024 drinking-water standards 00:08:48 – How little PFAS it takes to trigger regulatory concern 00:09:56 – The original deadline for water utilities to comply 00:10:54 – Sponsor: Manna Vitality 00:12:49 – The PFAS rollback and what happened behind the scenes 00:13:16 – The attempt to erase standards through the courts 00:13:42 – The Safe Drinking Water Act's anti-backsliding protection 00:14:18 – The court refuses the EPA's request 00:14:49 – The 2026 proposed PFAS rule changes 00:15:33 – Why delaying compliance could affect millions of Americans 00:15:59 – The bigger story behind the PFAS rollback 00:16:35 – What internal DuPont documents revealed 00:17:12 – Toxicity findings, birth defects, and what the public was told 00:17:49 – The historic EPA penalty against DuPont 00:18:24 – The 2018 federal PFAS report controversy 00:19:03 – Why Darin believes the same pattern continues today 00:19:53 – The 60-year history of PFAS exposure 00:20:18 – What are forever chemicals actually doing to your body? 00:20:26 – Cancer risk, immune suppression, and the science coming next 00:20:36 – Can PFAS exposure happen through your shower? 00:20:44 – How to filter your home and protect your family 00:20:50 – Why Darin says we can't wait for government action 00:20:58 – Continue the full PFAS investigation on Patreon 00:21:19 – Take back control of your health Thank You to Our Sponsors Bite Toothpaste: Go to trybite.com/DARIN20 or use code DARIN20 for 20% off your first order Manna Vitality: Go to mannavitality.com/ and use code DARIN12 for 12% off your order. Join the SuperLife Patreon: This is where Darin now shares the deeper work: - weekly voice notes - ingredient trackers - wellness challenges - extended conversations - community accountability - sovereignty practices Join now for only $7.49/month at https://patreon.com/darinolien Find More from Darin Olien: Website: darinolien.com Instagram: @darinolien Book: Fatal Conveniences Platform & Products: superlife.com New Show: Roadmap to Happiness Key Takeaway "We built an entire civilization around chemicals designed to never break down, and now they're in our water, our environment, and our bodies. But the answer isn't fear. It's awareness followed by action. We cannot control what a chemical company knew decades ago, what regulators decide tomorrow, or how quickly government moves. We can control what we bring into our homes, what we put into our bodies, how we filter our water, and how seriously we take our own health. Don't wait for someone else to save you. Learn what's happening, find the solutions available to you, and take your health back into your own hands." Bibliography/Sources: The 2024 Rule and the Rollback E&E News / POLITICO. (2026, May). EPA to roll back PFAS limits for drinking water . https://www.eenews.net/articles/epa-to-roll-back-pfas-limits-for-drinking-water/ Harvard Law School Environmental & Energy Law Program. (n.d.). EPA issued first national drinking water standard to protect against PFAS exposure . https://eelp.law.harvard.edu/tracker/epa-issued-first-national-drinking-water-standard-to-protect-against-pfas-exposure/ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2024, April 10). Biden-Harris administration finalizes first-ever national drinking water standard to protect 100M people from PFAS pollution [Press release] . https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/biden-harris-administration-finalizes-first-ever-national-drinking-water-standard U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2025, May 14). EPA announces it will keep maximum contaminant levels for PFOA, PFOS [Press release] . https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-announces-it-will-keep-maximum-contaminant-levels-pfoa-pfos U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2026, May). Proposed PFAS rescission rule . https://www.epa.gov/sdwa/proposed-pfas-rescission-rule U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2026, May). Proposed PFOA and PFOS compliance extension rule . https://www.epa.gov/sdwa/proposed-pfoa-and-pfos-compliance-extension-rule U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2026, May 11). Pre-publication Federal Register notice, PFAS rescission NPRM . https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2026-05/for-prepub-web-12843-01-ow_pfas-rescission_nprm_frn_20260511_admin.pdf The Court Fight Association of State Drinking Water Administrators. (2026, January 22). DC court denies EPA's motion to vacate hazard index PFAS from drinking water rule . https://www.asdwa.org/2026/01/22/dc-court-denies-epas-motion-to-vacate-hazard-index-pfas-from-drinking-water-rule/ Fox Rothschild. (2026, March). Court denies EPA's motion to sever and stay challenges to MCLs for four index PFAS. Fox Rothschild PFAS Blog . https://pfas.foxrothschild.com/2026/03/court-denies-epas-motion-to-sever-and-stay-challenges-to-mcls-for-four-index-pfas/ National Law Review. (2026). PFAS drinking water rule case lingers in DC circuit for 18 months . https://natlawreview.com/article/pfas-drinking-water-rule-not-vacated-yet Natural Resources Defense Council. (n.d.). American Water Works Association et al. v. EPA ('Forever Chemicals' in tap water) . https://www.nrdc.org/court-battles/american-water-works-association-et-v-epa-forever-chemicals-tap-water Natural Resources Defense Council. (n.d.). What to expect in key EPA cases on PFAS and lead in drinking water . https://www.nrdc.org/media/what-expect-key-epa-cases-pfas-and-lead-drinking-water Opposition, Exposure Estimates, and Process Criticism Arizona Attorney General. (2026). Attorney General Mayes opposes EPA's rollback of PFAS limits in drinking water . https://www.azag.gov/press-release/attorney-general-mayes-opposes-epas-rollback-pfas-limits-drinking-water Earthjustice. (2025). EPA seeks to eliminate critical PFAS drinking water protections . https://earthjustice.org/press/2025/epa-seeks-to-roll-back-pfas-drinking-water-rules-keeping-millions-exposed-to-toxic-forever-chemicals-in-tap-water Environmental Protection Network. (2025, December). EPA moves to roll back PFAS drinking water protections . https://www.environmentalprotectionnetwork.org/20251209_pfas-rollback/ Environmental Protection Network. (2026, May 18). EPA's PFAS promises undermined by safeguard delays & rollbacks, along with weakened scientific capacity . https://www.environmentalprotectionnetwork.org/20260518_epa-pfas-announcement_release/ Environmental Working Group. (2026, March). New data shows 176M exposed to 'forever chemicals' as Trump EPA rolls back drinking water limits . https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news-release/2026/03/new-data-shows-176m-exposed-forever-chemicals-trump-epa-rolls Environmental Working Group. (2026, May). Trump EPA guts landmark PFAS tap water protections, leaving millions at risk of harm . https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news-release/2026/05/trump-epa-guts-landmark-pfas-tap-water-protections-leaving Office of Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison. (2026, July 21). Attorney General Ellison opposes Trump rollback of PFAS limits in drinking water . https://www.ag.state.mn.us/Office/Communications/2026/07/21_Drinking-Water.asp The New Lede. (2026, August). The EPA says they want 'PFAS out.' Their policies are allowing more of them in . https://www.thenewlede.org/2026/08/the-epa-says-they-want-pfas-out-their-policies-are-allowing-more-of-them-in/ The History of Suppression EcoWatch. (2018, May 15). Trump admin. blocked toxic chemicals study fearing 'public relations nightmare' . https://www.ecowatch.com/toxic-chemicals-study-blocked-2569008321.html Gaber, N., Bero, L., & Woodruff, T. J. (2023). The devil they knew: Chemical documents analysis of industry influence on PFAS science. Annals of Global Health, 89(1), 37 . https://annalsofglobalhealth.org/articles/10.5334/aogh.4013 Union of Concerned Scientists. (2018). Bipartisan outrage as EPA, White House try to cover up chemical health assessment . https://blog.ucs.org/michael-halpern/bipartisan-outrage-as-epa-white-house-try-to-cover-up-chemical-health-assessment/ Union of Concerned Scientists. (n.d.). How the chemical industry deployed the disinformation playbook on PFAS . https://blog.ucs.org/genna-reed/how-the-chemical-industry-deployed-the-disinformation-playbook-on-pfas/ University of California, San Francisco. (2023, May 31). Makers of PFAS 'forever chemicals' covered up the dangers . https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2023/05/425451/makers-pfas-forever-chemicals-covered-dangers Health Science IARC Monographs Working Group. (2023, November 30). Carcinogenicity of perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid. The Lancet Oncology . https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanonc/article/PIIS1470-2045(23)00622-8/abstract International Agency for Research on Cancer. (2023, December 1). IARC Monographs evaluate the carcinogenicity of PFOA and PFOS . https://www.iarc.who.int/news-events/iarc-monographs-evaluate-the-carcinogenicity-of-perfluorooctanoic-acid-pfoa-and-perfluorooctanesulfonic-acid-pfos Ragnarsdóttir, O., Abdallah, M. A.-E., & Harrad, S. (2024). Dermal bioavailability of perfluoroalkyl substances using in vitro 3D human skin equivalent models. Environment International . https://research.birmingham.ac.uk/en/publications/dermal-bioavailability-of-perfluoroalkyl-substances-using-in-vitr/ University of Birmingham. (2024, June). New study confirms forever chemicals are absorbed through human skin . https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/news/2024/new-study-confirms-forever-chemicals-are-absorbed-through-human-skin-1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2024, April). PFAS national primary drinking water regulation — Questions and answers . https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-04/pfas-npdwr_qa_general_4.9.24v1.pdf Home Filtration Evidence and How-to Duke University. (2020, February 5). Not all in-home drinking water filters completely remove toxic PFAS [Press release]. EurekAlert . https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/694230 Environmental Working Group. (2025, September). PFAS in drinking water: What you need to know . https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news/2025/09/pfas-drinking-water-what-you-need-know Herkert, N. J., Merrill, J., Peters, C., et al. (2020). Assessing the effectiveness of point-of-use residential drinking water filters for perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs). Environmental Science & Technology Letters, 7(3), 178–184 . https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.estlett.0c00004 Tap Score. (n.d.). Quick guide to NSF certified filters for PFAS . https://mytapscore.com/blogs/tips-for-taps/quick-guide-to-certified-filters-for-pfas State Action Ballard Spahr. (2026, June). EPA rolls back PFAS regulations, states fill the gap . https://www.ballardspahr.com/insights/alerts-and-articles/2026/06/epa-rolls-back-pfas-regulations-states-fill-the-gap Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner. (n.d.). PFAS drinking water standards: State-by-state regulations . https://www.bclplaw.com/en-US/events-insights-news/pfas-drinking-water-standards-state-by-state-regulations.html

PFAS, microplastiques, pesticides : face aux pollutions diffuses, les gestes individuels montrent rapidement leurs limites. Filtrer son eau ou changer certains ustensiles peut réduire l'exposition personnelle, mais les « polluants éternels », eux, exigent surtout des réponses collectives. En Allemagne, des chercheurs du Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf travaillent justement sur deux procédés capables de détruire les PFAS directement dans les eaux contaminées.Le défi est considérable. Ces substances sont extrêmement persistantes parce qu'elles contiennent des liaisons entre carbone et fluor particulièrement difficiles à casser. Première piste : la cavitation hydrodynamique, étudiée par l'équipe depuis 2022. Le principe consiste à faire circuler l'eau polluée dans un passage très étroit. La chute de pression provoque alors la formation de petites bulles de vapeur. Les PFAS à longue chaîne, qui possèdent des propriétés de tensioactifs, viennent s'y fixer. Lorsque la pression remonte, ces bulles implosent brutalement. Les molécules sont alors exposées localement à des températures pouvant atteindre plusieurs milliers de degrés. Le phénomène produit également des radicaux hydroxyles, des espèces chimiques extrêmement réactives susceptibles d'accélérer la destruction des PFAS et de leurs produits intermédiaires. Des essais menés avec du PFOS, l'un des PFAS les plus connus, ont permis de dégrader environ 37 % des molécules présentes, avec un taux stable. L'objectif est désormais de dépasser 80 %.La seconde méthode utilise du plasma froid associé à une injection de gaz. Les PFAS s'accrochent aux bulles, remontent vers la surface de l'eau et y rencontrent le plasma, qui les décompose. Cette technique a permis d'éliminer presque totalement les PFAS, qu'ils soient à chaîne longue ou courte. Elle est plus rapide que la cavitation, mais consomme davantage d'énergie et produit de nombreux composés intermédiaires. Les chercheurs vérifient encore leur innocuité.La prochaine étape consiste donc à combiner les deux approches : profiter de l'efficacité chimique du plasma tout en utilisant les effets de la cavitation. Reste un obstacle majeur : changer d'échelle. Les expériences ont jusqu'ici porté sur seulement 50 millilitres d'eau. Le véritable enjeu sera désormais de transformer cette réussite de laboratoire en procédé capable de traiter les volumes d'une station d'épuration. Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

PFAS rules from the EPA have been getting a lot of attention, as the Trump administration looks to make controversial adjustments. One recent rule change effected drinking water, but crucially, only impacted publicly owned municipal drinking water systems.  HRP's Bryan Massa, LSP, Regional Office manager for HRP Massachusetts, and PFAS expert, has worked closely with exactly the type of drinking water utilities that will have to be incompliance with these agency rules.  For today's episode of the PFAS Pulse Podcast, Bryan will walk us through the rules as they've stood and explain the nuances and complexities that come with utilities remaining in compliance.  Listen to learn more and subscribe to The Pulse for all the details.

Join hosts Tom Simmons and Matthew Wallace as we talk the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's newly released Draft Guidance for Reducing Risk from PFOA and PFOS in Biosolids. We begin by explaining what biosolids are, why they can contain PFOA and PFOS—the two most historically used and commonly detected PFAS chemicals in the United States—and why these contaminants have become a growing concern. While the EPA's new guidance offers recommendations for testing, monitoring, and reducing risk, it's important to note that the guidance is entirely voluntary. We also explore how states are taking their own approaches to regulating PFAS in biosolids. Finally, we examine the practical challenges facing wastewater treatment plants if biosolids can no longer be land applied Join us as we unpack the latest EPA guidance, the growing patchwork of state regulations, and what comes next for biosolids management in the evolving world of PFAS. Listen to learn more and subscribe to The Pulse for all the details.

Send us Fan MailParks maintenance sits at a weird crossroads in city government: it's part infrastructure, part hospitality, and part community identity. So where should it live on the org chart, under Public Works or inside a standalone Parks and Recreation department? We wrestle with that question in a practical, no-theory way, because the choice changes budgets, staffing, equipment decisions, and the level of service residents feel every time they book a shelter, show up for a tournament, or walk a trail.I'm joined by Greg Hoig, our Parks and Building Maintenance Manager at the City of Brooklyn Park, who brings decades of experience across small cities and a growing metro community. We talk through what breaks when leaders don't communicate, why parks has a different rhythm than “make normal happen” public works, and how “who owns the revenue” versus “who owns the expense” can distort budget conversations. We also dig into the upside of keeping parks maintenance under the public works umbrella: equipment sharing, smarter purchasing, fewer petty boundary fights, and more consistent policies for maintenance crews.Then we shift into leadership and emergency management. Greg reflects on serving as interim Public Works Director for months without backfilling his core role, navigating major city priorities like PFOS planning and large capital work, and supporting real incidents that demand fast, coordinated logistics across departments.Subscribe for more public works leadership conversations, share the episode with a colleague, and leave a review. What structure does your city use for parks maintenance, and why?

State pilot focuses on 'forever' chemicals About 20 percent of private wells tested in Putnam County under a state pilot program exceed guidelines for a family of chemicals linked with cancers and other health problems, officials said on Wednesday (July 22). Public Health Director Rian Rodriguez and Brian Stevens, an associate public health sanitarian, told the Legislature's Health Committee that 540 well owners have applied to have their water tested for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) under a $1.5 million, five-year program funded by the state. Of the 480 wells tested so far, just over 20 percent have PFAS levels that exceed the state guidelines of 10 parts per trillion for PFOA and PFOs, the two most common versions of the chemicals. Those owners can each request up to $5,000 to install a filtration system on the main water line entering their home or business. The state will also subsidize up to $1,000 for filters installed on faucets or other outlets and up to $10,000 to connect a property to a public water system. Stevens said the county had just received its first rebate request and expects many more. "In the next week or so, the state will be providing additional training on how to process those payments and those applications," he said. Putnam and Dutchess are two of six counties selected by the state for a pilot program to address PFAS contamination in private wells. Known as "forever chemicals" because of their duration in the environment and the human body, PFAS have been used for decades in nonstick cookware, water-repellant clothing and other consumer products, as well as firefighting foams. Researchers have linked them to various health problems, including cancers, low birthweights and high cholesterol. Health concerns have led public health officials to close contaminated water sources serving the City of Newburgh and other municipalities, and supply filters to well owners in Mahopac, Putnam Valley and other parts of Putnam County. Rodriguez told the Health Committee in February that the state chose Dutchess, Putnam and four other counties — Orange, Suffolk, Ulster and Westchester — for its pilot because they are "at higher risk" of PFAS contamination. Dozens of properties near the Mahopac Business District received water main filters after testing found about 100 wells had high PFAS levels. The state traced the pollution to dry-cleaning chemicals. New York State has allocated funds to Kent, two neighborhoods in Brewster and the Floradan Estates in Putnam Valley to address contamination. The Putnam Valley school district traced PFAS contamination at its elementary school to foams used by the Putnam Valley Fire Department. When asked by Legislator Nancy Montgomery, who chairs the committee and represents Philipstown and part of Putnam Valley, if testing has identified clusters, Stevens cautioned that the county needs to collect more data. By one estimate, as many as half of U.S. households have some level of PFAS in their water, whether supplied by well or tap. New York State and the federal Environmental Protection Agency regulate PFAS limits in public water supplies, such as the reservoirs that supply drinking water to Beacon and Cold Spring. But an estimated 1 million homes and businesses in the state, and 40 million people nationwide, rely on wells, which are not regulated.

PFAS regulation now has more moving parts, deadlines, and compliance pathways than ever, but the bottom-line advice for water utilities is simple: keep moving.In this episode, Amanda Canida of Black & Veatch explains how utilities can navigate the regulatory complexity while advancing the treatment projects needed to meet federal drinking water standards.Federal monitoring data indicates that roughly 10 percent of public water systems could be affected by the four-parts-per-trillion limits for PFOA and PFOS. Utilities can pursue cleaner water sources or blend supplies, but many are preparing to install treatment at a central plant or directly at an individual well.EPA has proposed retaining the PFOA and PFOS limits while restarting the regulatory process for several other PFAS compounds and creating a streamlined exemption pathway for systems that need more time. Once that exemption rule is finalized, utilities would have 180 days to apply and may need interim measures such as temporary treatment, alternate water supplies, source-control planning, or public education.The challenge is increasingly financial, as construction costs have risen and demand has grown for the equipment and treatment media needed to remove PFAS. Utilities are already slowing other capital projects, shifting money between priorities, and setting aside contingency funds to cover emerging treatment needs.Canida outlines how desktop evaluations and laboratory testing can help systems compare granular activated carbon and ion exchange before committing to longer pilot studies. Utilities must also calculate when treatment needs to be operating—not merely completed—to keep their annual PFAS averages below the federal limit by April 2029.The path forward is to pursue funding now, prepare customers for difficult decisions, and design treatment systems that can adapt as regulators address more of the thousands of PFAS compounds under review.Learn more about PFAS from Black & Veatch.waterloop is a nonprofit news outlet exploring solutions for water sustainability.

Hidden in your water, food, and even your blood, forever chemicals (PFAS) are nearly impossible to destroy - and now U.S. regulations are being rolled back. Listen in to how PFAS became unavoidable, what they're doing to our health, and whether we can ever truly get rid of them.   In this episode, Therese Markow and Dr. Carrie McDonough discuss perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), also known as forever chemicals. PFAS, which include PFOA and PFOS, are persistent organic pollutants used in various products, such as Teflon for your cooking pans and Scotchgard. While there are natural molecules that incorporate fluorine, the compounds we are most concerned about when we talk about PFAS cannot be synthesized naturally and are difficult to break down. Dr. McDonough discusses exposure risks, how we are exposed, and the efforts that have been made to regulate these chemicals. She emphasizes the need for better detection methods and remediation strategies.     Key Takeaways: While some PFAS are excreted from the human body, many are not and linger in our blood and cells. A lot of pollutants accumulate in the adipose fat in the human body. However, PFAS are mostly found in proteins and membranes, such as the kidney, liver, and blood.  The first clue that PFAS were widespread in humans was back in the 1970s. However, the results were inconclusive - they just didn't have the instrumentation they needed to confirm it or the standards from the companies in order to identify the PFAS. Biomagnification causes creatures, including humans, that are higher up the food chain to have higher concentrations of PFAS than those lower in the food chain. This includes those who are herbivores, omnivores, and carnivores.  Companies have been putting these things out into our environment for decades; for some amount of that time, they knew that they were doing it and that they were toxic, but didn't tell anyone. There is really no way to protect anyone from these chemicals that we did not consent to being in our bodies.    "If you're not living in an area with highly contaminated water, or some kind of large contamination issue, your main source of PFAS is probably your diet." —  Dr. Carrie McDonough   Episode References:  Toxic Gaslighting: How 3M Executives Convinced a Scientist the Forever Chemicals She Found in Human Blood Were Safe: https://www.propublica.org/article/3m-forever-chemicals-pfas-pfos-inside-story  PFAS leave fingerprints in your blood – researchers are figuring out how forever chemicals transform in your body to read these clues: https://theconversation.com/pfas-leave-fingerprints-in-your-blood-researchers-are-figuring-out-how-forever-chemicals-transform-in-your-body-to-read-these-clues-280396 Dark Waters: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9071322/  They Poisoned the World: Life and Death in the Age of Forever Chemicals by Mariah Blake: https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/554198/they-poisoned-the-world-by-mariah-blake/    Connect with Dr. Carrie McDonough: Professional Bio: https://www.cmu.edu/chemistry/people/faculty/mcdonough.html  Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Xq5HrPYAAAAJ&hl=en  Website: https://groups.chem.cmu.edu/mcdonough/  LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/carrieamcd    Connect with Therese: Website:  www.criticallyspeaking.net Bluesky: @CriticallySpeaking.bsky.social Instagram: @criticallyspeakingpodcast Email: theresemarkow@criticallyspeaking.net   Audio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it.  

Pregnancy and the postpartum period are critical windows of increased stroke risk, driven by physiologic changes such as hypercoagulability and blood pressure fluctuations. This episode highlights key warning signs, including headache and hypertension, along with practical guidance on evaluation, management, and risk reduction to improve outcomes for pregnant and postpartum patients. In this episode, Kait Nevel, MD, speaks with Michelle H. Leppert, MD, author of the article "Pregnancy and Stroke Risk" in the Continuum® June 2026 Cerebrovascular Disease issue. Dr. Nevel is a Continuum® Audio interviewer and a neurologist and neuro-oncologist at Indiana University School of Medicine in Indianapolis, Indiana. Dr. Leppert is an associate professor of neurology at Tufts Medical Center in Boston, Massachusetts. Additional Resources Read the article: Pregnancy and Stroke Risk Subscribe to Continuum®: shop.lww.com/Continuum Earn CME (available only to AAN members): continpub.com/AudioCME Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): continpub.com/Aloud More about the American Academy of Neurology: aan.com Social Media facebook.com/continuumcme @ContinuumAAN Host: @IUneurodocmom Guest: @humich Full episode transcript available here Dr Nevel: The time during and around pregnancy is often thought of as a very joyful time, full of hope. But for some, medical complications such as stroke can lead to devastating disability and sometimes even death. Today, we're going to learn about pregnancy and postpartum stroke, including stroke risk evaluation and best practices in management and risk reduction to help our pregnant and peripartum patients reduce stroke risk and achieve best possible outcomes.  Dr Jones: This is Dr. Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast.  Dr Nevel: Hello, this is Dr. Kait Nevel. Today, I'm interviewing Dr. Michelle Leppert about her article on pregnancy and stroke risk. This article appears in the June 2026 Continuum issue on cerebrovascular disease. Michelle, welcome to the podcast, and please introduce yourself to the audience.  Dr Leppert: My name is Michelle Leppert. I'm a stroke neurologist, and I currently work at the Tufts Medical Center in Boston, Massachusetts.  Dr Nevel: Thank you so much for being here, Michelle, and I'm looking forward to talking to you about your article. I always love starting with the question, what's the most important takeaway from your article for the practicing neurologist?  Dr Leppert: I think in this article, I'm trying to highlight that during pregnancy and especially postpartum, there's a heightened risk of stroke for women, and that's important for clinical neurologists to understand that this is a particularly vulnerable time for the population that we take care of. I think that one of the few of the things that could be informing this heightened stroke risk are the physiological changes that women undergo during pregnancy. So, that includes coagability, where there's an increased likelihood of clotting, and also the cardiovascular adaptations, including increased cardiac output and having an increased cardiac volume. And all of these mechanisms all contribute to the increased risk of strokes around pregnancy and postpartum.  Dr Nevel: Great. Thanks for that. What are some of the unique aspects of stroke types in etiology in pregnancy that we should be aware of?  Dr Leppert: When we think of strokes overall, generally the majority of our strokes are ischemic. So, for the overall population, about eighty-seven percent of strokes are ischemic, while the remainder are hemorrhagic. However, interestingly, during pregnancy, what we're seeing is about half of our strokes become hemorrhagic strokes, and now only a half of our strokes are ischemic, and this is in contrast to what we see in the overall population. One of the reasons is because pregnancy is associated with preeclampsia, and preeclampsia increases the risk of hemorrhagic stroke during pregnancy.  Dr Nevel: Can you tell us just more about headache in general in pregnancy and association of headache with secondary causes of headache and how that relates to stroke risk in this patient population? It seems like in this patient population that when somebody has a headache, we need to be very careful in our headache questions and evaluation.  Dr Leppert: Yeah. And I think the most concerning symptom that we're finding in this population is headaches, and the reason is because headaches is one of the clinical signs of having preeclampsia, which dramatically increases your risk of having a stroke, and especially a hemorrhagic stroke. So just to back up, we can talk about blood pressure for a little bit and some of the pathophysiologic changes during pregnancy. What most people may not know is that there's a dramatic vascular expansion that occurs during pregnancy. And somewhere during the second trimester, your blood pressure is actually the lowest. So, it can drop below pre-pregnancy levels and make your blood pressure appear low for the baseline. However, during the third trimester, as the baby is growing, there is increased vascular volume. The blood pressure starts to increase. We're seeing some of the highest prevalence of blood pressures, which is a sign for preeclampsia, and headaches develop during that third trimester, and particularly during the time around delivery and postpartum. And one of the most concerning signs, the most common sign of preeclampsia is having a headache. So, I think that with any patient that's presenting with a headache, especially during the third trimester or after delivery, that we really need to pay attention and take their blood pressure. That's one of the easiest clinical indicators that something could be going very wrong. Some of the other red flags clinically that we look for in headaches is that acute onset of a severe headache. That headache quality is different from what they usually have. Any woman with focal neurological symptoms associated with their headache, kind of excessive nausea and vomiting that's not characteristic for them. Not getting any relief with medications, and then lastly, checking that blood pressure is very important.  Dr Nevel: And what are the thoughts on blood pressure management in this patient population? I know that there is a little bit of difference in guidance in some of the obstetric societies on how we should manage blood pressure in this patient population. And then, is there anything beyond blood pressure management that we should be thinking about doing for this patient population to reduce their stroke risk?  Dr Leppert: I think that's a good question, and I hadn't really understood that this could be an area of controversy, cause my practice is mostly in stroke, and for most of adult population, the guidelines for blood pressure is very clear. We treat everybody over 130/80. If you're elderly, then your blood pressure limit might be a little higher. However, there's disagreement in the OBGYN guidelines from the American guidelines to the European guidelines. So, what the current American guidelines suggests is that if you have a history of chronic hypertension, then we would want your blood pressure treated during pregnancy below 140/90. However, if you don't have a history of chronic hypertension, then we allow the blood pressure to be higher and then it's an acute intervention if it's anything over 160. One of the issues with this strategy that is concerning is we had just mentioned that the pathophysiology of a pregnancy where you have the lowest blood pressure in that second trimester, and so your blood pressure may be abnormally good. [laughs] And it appears that it's better than your baseline. And so, by the OBGYN definition, any gestational blood hypertension is considered at 20 weeks and later. Sometimes these blood pressures are masked in some women who are pregnant. I think regardless of the controversy and what the practice should be, the focus is that most of the strokes are happening actually peripartum and postpartum, right? So, the woman's no longer pregnant. It is these time periods of the highest risk that we wanna make sure that the blood pressure is controlled. So, after the woman delivers the baby, we're no longer, you know, hampered by the whatever is chronic or gestational. We should be treating that blood pressure to 140/90. I think that not focusing on the controversy until the science catches up is probably what we should do. But like, really, the message here is that we should be checking women around the time of delivery and also postpartum, that we can't forget about their blood pressures postpartum, cause it actually doesn't peak until day five after they deliver the baby.  Dr Nevel: Does knowing that, that blood pressure peaks around day five, do you think that that should impact how we counsel patients in checking their blood pressure at home? Cause most women at day five are home. They're not still in the hospital.  Dr Leppert: Yeah, I think that's a really good point. One of the best interventions has been having a blood pressure at home for pregnant women. So even during their pregnancy and then postpartum, allow them to check their blood pressures, cause there's... Most of the cases, to be honest, that I've seen of preeclampsia and intracranial hemorrhage has happened postpartum. And I think what's unfortunate is that the woman is at home, they're distracted cause they have a newborn baby. They have a headache. They're just taking some Tylenol. And then if you have that blood pressure cuff readily accessible, that's a, a really easy way for them to check and notice that, hey, the blood pressure's too high, they have to go into the hospital.  Dr Nevel: Yeah, absolutely, and it's not just like a headache because you're sleep deprived and have a newborn. It's a headache that you need to pay attention to. Okay, maybe we could talk a little bit now about evaluation when we are suspicious of potential stroke. What do we need to know about imaging modalities and safety considerations of imaging in this patient population?  Dr Leppert: Yeah, that's a great question. I think when I was training, it was fairly controversial to give a pregnant woman MR contrast with gadolinium during their pregnancy. And as I was researching for this article, actually there's not definitive evidence that that is harmful for the fetus. However, in general, for the acute evaluation of patients during pregnancy, we're recommending using the CAT scan and then a CT angiogram. And then if the acute evaluation is not necessary, then an MRI. And if we need vessel imaging, you can employ an MRA time-of-flight study. That doesn't require the gadolinium contrast. However, one thing that I learned from this article that I thought was really interesting was the use of abdominal shielding. So, you're scanning someone's brain. I always thought, "Hey, doesn't it make sense to put a lead shield over the abdomen?" It turns out the lead shield actually interferes with the automatic calibration of the CT machine, so studies have found that actually increases the dose of radiation that the fetus is exposed to. So, it's much better when we're doing acute evaluations to not shield the abdomen, and really the only thing that can help reduce the radiation dose is the duration of the study. So, what we would recommend is if you want a rapid CT angiogram, rapid CT head, go ahead and obtain it. But if you don't need extra sequences, like a delayed phase of the CT angiogram, then to avoid that and reduce the exposure. Dr Nevel: I'm so glad that you talked about that because I was shocked when I read that in your article that we shouldn't be using abdominal shielding in pregnant women. I had no clue. I thought that that was, like, something that we absolutely should do. So, I found that really interesting. Thank you for that. So, any special considerations for acute stroke intervention or management in pregnancy in the postpartum phase, especially things like thrombolysis and thrombectomy?  Dr Leppert: Yeah. So, I think that as our evidence is getting better for thrombectomy, I would be more judicious about using IV thrombolysis, especially around the time of delivery, cause there is some evidence that it can be associated with postpartum hemorrhage. Patient selection, I think, is key here. So, women who have disability associated with their stroke, and then women who aren't candidates for thrombectomies are still candidates for IV thrombolysis. But understanding that this is a little bit of an unchartered territory for us, and only using IV thrombolytics when we think that there is a big benefit to be had.  Dr Nevel: Can you talk a little bit more about RCVS and PRESS in pregnancy and some of the overlap that we see in this patient population and its relationship to preeclampsia? It seems like there's a lot of interconnections there, and I thought that that was pretty interesting in your article.  Dr Leppert: Right now, the thinking is that RCVS and PRESS are on the same spectrum of pathology, and we think that it has something to do with the autoregulation of vascular resistance in the posterior circulation of the brain. We're not sure what triggers this, but there is something about pregnancy that classically we'll see this postpartum RCVS phenomenon. It likely has to do also with blood pressure that we're seeing. So really classically we think of this, like, thunderclap headache. You see vasospasms on imaging that is transient, that are kind of the classical signs of RCVS. But I think that we're still not completely sure what triggers it, but it's a very well-described clinical phenomenon.  Dr Nevel: Great. Thank you. Could you share a little bit about migraines in pregnancy and stroke risk? [laughs] I also thought that this also a segment of your article that caught my attention because migraines are so common. What's the association of migraine, pregnancy, and stroke risk?  Dr Leppert: Yeah. So that's a very complicated association. So, we know that migraines are associated independently with strokes, and especially people with migraines with aura. However, migraines are also highly associated with PFOs, right? And during pregnancy, what we see is that there is a hypercoagulability state, and so we see lots more DVTs, we see more PEs associated with women during pregnancy. So potentially, because migraineurs also are more likely to have PFOs, they could be presenting with more cardioembolic, kind of paradoxical emboli from these thrombus. But I'm not quite sure that we know why migraines in and of itself, especially with migraines with aura, lead to strokes. And especially during pregnancy, I'm not sure because we have very little understanding about pathophysiology of pregnancy while having migraines with aura also leads to more strokes, or that risk is really just associated with PFOs. So, I think that we need to think about that a lot more. The recommendation is a baby aspirin if you have some of these risk factors for preeclampsia, any vascular risk factors, and including migraines with aura during pregnancy. And we think that baby aspirin is relatively safe, especially starting around the 12 to 16-week period.  Dr Nevel: So just to clarify, in a woman who's pregnant, who's 12 weeks or beyond in their pregnancy and who has migraine with aura, is that a patient that we should consider aspirin for them to reduce their stroke risk?  Dr Leppert: I think you can. I am not sure that there is a specific recommendation. I think that, like, a conversation with your OBGYN is, you know, a good idea. But we do recommend that baby aspirin for women, um, above 35 years old because it's considered advanced maternal age. And then we recommend baby aspirin with women with a history of hypertension, multiple gestations, diabetes, renal disease, autoimmune disease. So, I definitely think that is something to consider.  Dr Nevel: Yeah. Interesting. Okay, great. Thank you for that. When someone has a stroke and they're pregnant again, what are some strategies for secondary stroke prevention? And you mentioned some of the primary risk reduction, but are there any others that you haven't mentioned yet other than aspirin and blood pressure control for primary prevention? Dr Leppert: Yeah, absolutely. So, I think that it's important to plan ahead. So, for women who are thinking about getting pregnant after they've had a stroke, one of the tenets of stroke neurology is trying to figure out why the first stroke happened. So, I feel like before getting pregnant, it's great to have a very thorough stroke workup so that you understand what the risk factors were and that those risk factors are controlled. One of the interventions, one of the only interventions that's, has evidence in young people with strokes is PFO closure. So, if you do have a stroke from a PFO, we recommend you get that closed prior to your pregnancy because then hopefully even given the hypercoagulability of pregnancy, there's some protection against another embolic stroke.  Dr Nevel: Another really interesting part of your article that I did not know before I read it was about the risk of cardiovascular disease long term in women who have had stroke during pregnancy. Could you talk a little bit more about that?  Dr Leppert: What we understand is that gestational diabetes and gestational hypertension sets you up for having diabetes and hypertension later on in life, and it's really developing the actual diabetes to the hypertension that increases your risk of strokes. So, what's really an important takeaway for providers is that after women develop gestational diabetes or they have gestational hypertension or they develop preeclampsia, it's very important for their primary or their neurologist to be very vigilant of these risk factors developing so that they can be modified before the women are at higher risk for strokes. And the reason why we think this happens is because pregnancy is like a stress test for your body. And so, the fact that you've developed the gestational diabetes or the gestational hypertension kind of already suggests that you're more likely and more vulnerable to developing these traditional risk factors later on.  Dr Nevel: That makes sense. Thank you for that. What do you think is a common misconception about stroke in pregnancy?  Dr Leppert: When I was earlier in my training, it kind of felt like having a stroke during pregnancy was being struck by lightning. It was really random. There was nothing you could do. It just happened to people. And I think as I learned more in my career, and especially researching for this article, I'm kind of shocked and disturbed by how much of the strokes in pregnancy we can actually prevent. Through management and monitoring of blood pressure for women. And so, I do think that it does our patients a disservice if we think that these are rogue events. But really, it might be a sign of the failure of our health system where we're not taking care of women around their delivery and postpartum and being more vigilant about their blood pressure and more vigilant about the clinical signs that they're developing.  Dr Nevel: Yeah, I really got that from your article, how important it is to monitor for blood pressure and other risk factors, and that that continues after the baby's born. Thank you so much for that, and thank you for talking with me today about your article about stroke and pregnancy. Again, today I've been interviewing Dr. Michelle Leppert about her article on pregnancy and stroke risk. This article appears in the June 2026 Continuum issue on cerebral vascular disease. Please be sure to check out Continuum Audio episodes from this and other issues. And thank you so much to our listeners for joining us today.  Dr Monteith: This is Dr. Teshamae Monteith, Associate Editor of Continuum Audio. If you've enjoyed this episode, you'll love the journal which is full of in depth, and clinically relevant information, important for neurology practitioners. Use the link in the episode notes to learn more and subscribe. AAN members– you can get CME for listening to this interview by completing the evaluation at continpub.com/audioCME. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio.

Primary stroke prevention is a critical opportunity for neurologists, with most stroke risk driven by modifiable factors such as hypertension and lifestyle behaviors. This episode highlights practical tools and strategies, including Life's Essential 8 and contemporary risk calculators, while also exploring evolving approaches to shared decision making and secondary prevention. In this episode, Katie Grouse, MD, FAAN, speaks with Mitchell S. Elkind, MD, MS, FAAN, author of the article "Stroke Prevention" in the Continuum® June 2026 Cerebrovascular Disease issue. Dr. Grouse is a Continuum® Audio interviewer and a clinical assistant professor at the University of California, San Francisco in San Francisco, California. Dr. Elkind is the Chief Science Officer for Brain Health and Stroke at the American Heart Association in Dallas, Texas, and a professor of neurology and epidemiology at Columbia University in New York, New York. Additional Resources Read the article: Stroke Prevention Subscribe to Continuum®: shop.lww.com/Continuum Earn CME (available only to AAN members): continpub.com/AudioCME Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): continpub.com/Aloud More about the American Academy of Neurology: aan.com Social Media facebook.com/continuumcme @ContinuumAAN Guest: @MitchElkind Full episode transcript available here Dr Grouse: Neurologists have generally been more involved in secondary stroke prevention, but primary stroke prevention is increasingly recognized as an important topic of discussion for neurologists. Today, I have the opportunity to interview Dr. Mitchell Elkind, who wrote the article on stroke prevention in the newest Continuum issue on cerebrovascular disease.  Dr Jones: This is Dr. Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast.  Dr Grouse: This is Dr. Katie Grouse. Today, I'm interviewing Dr. Mitchell Elkind about his article on stroke prevention. This article appears in the June 2026 Continuum issue on cerebrovascular disease. Welcome to the podcast, and please introduce yourself to the audience.  Dr Elkind: Thank you so much, Katie. So, my name is Mitch Elkind, and I'm the Chief Science Officer for Brain Health and Stroke at the American Heart Association and a stroke neurologist by background.  Dr Grouse: Well, I just want to start by saying that I really enjoyed reading this article. I think this is just a really wonderful article I recommend strongly. Such a high yield, an important topic for a lot of us who see patients who are interested in learning about their stroke risks or need help with, uh, stroke prevention after having a stroke. So, I wanted to start. What's changed in the last couple of years? You know, what are some big highlights that you really want to stress that are different from maybe the last time we reviewed this topic?  Dr Elkind: Sure. Well, there's been a lot of development in the field of secondary stroke prevention, for one thing. But even beyond that, I think we increasingly appreciate how important it is to control what we call the social drivers of health on the earlier side, primordial or primary prevention. And that has been a big advance, I'd say. And I would also say, I think it's really important for neurologists to understand some of those questions about primordial and primary prevention. You know, we tend to get involved with patients after they've had a stroke or maybe a TIA, some kind of event. But sometimes we find people who are following for, you know, non-stroke related conditions who have risk factors also. And we can really play an important role in identifying those risk factors and helping to prevent a first stroke or vascular event as well. So, I think it's real important for us to be doctors even before we're neurologists. So, you know, Katie, about ninety percent of stroke risk is modifiable, so we can do a great job as neurologists in preventing stroke. And one of the most important things that we can do is to identify and treat high blood pressure. And recently, actually, the American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology guidelines on the management of hypertension have said that treatment of high blood pressure not only prevents stroke, but it can also help to prevent cognitive decline and dementia. And this is the first time that we've had a class of recommendation one and level of evidence A, the highest level of recommendation we give for the use of blood pressure treatment to prevent dementia. And that's largely based on the results of some large trials that have come out recently showing that you can prevent dementia with blood pressure control. So that's a really exciting link, I think, between cardiovascular risk factor control and subsequent brain health. It just illustrates the role that neurologists can play in, so many conditions outside of stroke as well.  Dr Grouse: That's a really great point, and I want to get a little more into the idea of primordial stroke prevention. Can you tell us a little bit more about what that might be?  Dr Elkind: So primordial prevention refers to addressing how we can prevent risk factors from occurring in the first place, and how can we improve the environments in which people live. You know, we know that only about twenty percent of health outcomes is dependent on what happens between the patient and their doctor in the office. About eighty percent of it is due to what happens in the environments in which we live, work, pray, and play. And so that's what we mean when we refer to the social drivers of health. What is the neighborhood like where somebody lives? Do they have access to healthy food? Do they have places where they can go to exercise? Is there air pollution in the area that may affect their health? You know, one really interesting fact that's become apparent in the last few years is that air pollution is a major risk factor for stroke. Something like a sixth of all strokes can be attributed to the quality of air. And so, what are the things we can do at the broader public policy, community level to reduce the risk of risk factors like high blood pressure and diabetes even before somebody has an event that brings them to the attention of the doctor? So that's what we're thinking about with regard to primordial prevention. It's the earliest stage in prevention.  Dr Grouse: And that's really fascinating. You know, I think an area that we haven't, as neurologists, really put a lot of our time thinking about, but clearly a very important thing. I really appreciated reading your article about how you incorporated the fact that, you know, a lot of these risk factors overlap very, very closely with all the risk factors for various types of cardiovascular events. And I would imagine that the work you've done as the Chief Clinical Science Officer for the American Heart Association has informed a lot of the way you've thought about-Trying to bring all these risks together and think a little bit more holistically about the whole thing. Could you tell us a little bit more about that and the work that you've done on the American Heart Association's Life's Essential 8 score?  Dr Elkind: Sure. I can't take credit for it. It's really work that was done by others at the Heart Association, particularly a cardiologist and epidemiologist named Don Lloyd-Jones. But many other volunteers participated. Life's Essential 8 is our approach to primary stroke prevention and cardiovascular prevention more broadly. We say Life's Essential 8 because it includes four health behaviors and four health factors that people can observe to reduce their risk of cardiovascular disease. The four factors are kind of things like know your numbers, your blood pressure, your blood sugar, your body mass index, right, which is a combination of weight and height, and your cholesterol level. So, know those numbers and keep them within the recommended ranges, and talk to your doctor if they're not. And then four lifestyle behaviors. So, one of them is to eat a healthy diet, and typically that means the Mediterranean diet. It means getting regular exercise, and we recommend 150 minutes a week of moderate to vigorous physical activity. Of course, it means abstinence from smoking or other tobacco products. And the last one, the eighth one, which I was so excited about when we added this, is sleep, recommending at least seven hours of sleep a night. So, I was really excited about this because we used to talk about Life's Simple 7, and then the last iteration of our recommendations included this recommendation for adequate sleep because of the mounting evidence of the importance of sleep to cardiovascular health. But sleep is really a brain function, right? And so, it was really the first, in a way, specific brain function that was added to our recommendations. So that's Life's Essential 8. People can read about it online at heart.org and recommend it to your patients as a simple way for people to understand the best approach to reducing their risk of cardiovascular disease, including stroke.  Dr Grouse: I checked it out myself after reading the article. It's very accessible to patients. It's a great education tool. And they can, you know, see their own score and use that in their own way to, to think about what their risks are and how they can help mitigate and then rescore themselves down the line. There's also, though, on the kind of more the clinician side, the PREVENT calculator as well. Could you tell us a little bit more about how we could use that in approaching this patient population?  Dr Elkind: Yeah. So, I think of Life's Essential 8 as being a patient-focused tool that people can use. PREVENT is really more for clinicians. Anybody can look it up online and enter your data into it. There's a risk calculator online. But the basic idea behind PREVENT and other similar risk calculators is that it's a way to estimate somebody's risk of having a cardiovascular event like stroke or a heart attack or even heart failure by entering information about your health. And we used to think, we used to use something called the ASCVD, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk calculator, or the Framingham score. Framingham Heart Score, for example, was another one. PREVENT is the latest version, and it has several advantages over those earlier types of risk predictors. For one thing, it predicts risk at younger ages as well. It goes down to age 30. It predicts risk over a longer duration of time, so over 30, 10 or 30 years. It eliminates the use of race as an item to put into the calculator and substitutes for that socioeconomic status, so it's not a race base, but a measure of social disadvantage. And it also includes kidney elements, kidney measures. It includes renal function, for example, that weren't included in prior measures, and it can also be used to predict heart failure, which was not part of the original calculators. Another major advantage of the PREVENT study is that it was based on real-world data from about three million patients, many, many more than the 50,000 or so that the earlier risk calculators were based on. So, it has a much more robust data set and therefore allows a bit more precision in the ability to predict future risk of events. And typically, primary care doctors would enter their patient's data, calculate a risk, and then based on the results of the risk calculator, they can make recommendations about what type of medications a person should take or what other strategies they could use to reduce their risk. And so that's the role that PREVENT plays, is really being focused more for the clinician than the patient.  Dr Grouse: Really great tool for us to be aware of. You earlier alluded to the fact that neurologists are in the situation where we sometimes are helping patients with this primary prevention. But you also make a case for why it's in the patient's best interest for us to be involved in, in these conversations when we can, when we have the opportunity. Can you tell us more about that?  Dr Elkind: Shared decision-making is really important because we know that people aren't going to lead the healthiest possible lives if they're not invested in their care. And so, a doctor telling somebody what to do if the patient doesn't want to do it is gonna have limited benefit.So we emphasize the importance of shared decision-making as much as possible. And I think that where this comes up a lot is actually in the situation of, for example, atrial fibrillation, where patients will often be put on a blood thinner. And many people are fearful of blood thinners. They worry about the risk of bleeding. Maybe they know a relative who's had a bleeding complication from a blood thinner, and so they may be disinclined to try it. And so, it's really important to have these discussions about the risks and the benefits of medication and engage the patient in thinking about this. And there are even tools and visual aids that people can look to to help explain some of these complicated concepts to patients. So, these are the kinds of things that reflect implementation science as a way to improve adherence. We know what works in a clinical trial setting often, but the challenge is translating that into the real world and getting our patients to use the medications that we believe scientifically have been shown to be of benefit. I've actually been surprised sometimes at conversations I've had with people, in some cases, healthcare professionals who resist going on blood thinners because of their fear of the complications. And I feel like the evidence is there. Why don't they believe me? And that's why it's really important to have the conversation. Even our peers and colleagues can sometimes question the evidence, and it's important for us to be aware of that.  Dr Grouse: Absolutely. I think that sounds very reasonable to me, and hopefully these tools will help us with making some of these decisions with our patients. Now, turning our attention a little bit to secondary prevention. So, you know, someone's already had a stroke or a TIA, sort of thinking about what we can do to optimize their risk factors for further strokes. You know, I think there has been some changes that have happened, I think, in the last few years that might be affecting some of the decisions we're making and some of the advice we're giving our patients. I wanted to talk a little bit about GLP-1 receptor agonist medications. Is the data there to support use of this either in secondary prevention or even in primary prevention in the case of stroke?  Dr Elkind: There is evidence that supports the use of GLP-1s for stroke prevention. We need more data, though. We need trials that focus only on patients with stroke, for example, there have been studies in patients with cardiovascular disease broadly that include stroke patients. But if you look at the subcategory just of stroke patients alone, the data in that subgroup alone don't always show a benefit. And so, we need more data that's focused on stroke patients alone. So, I think the data are continuing to emerge, but we need more still.  Dr Grouse: Is there any development in the thought about whether we should be putting patients on antiplatelet therapies for incidental, incidentally identified strokes? For instance, if you got an MRI for migraine or for other reasons and you found one, no history of any stroke-like symptoms. Should we be putting these patients on aspirin or any other types of therapies?  Dr Elkind: That's a really great question. And again, it's an area where there's some controversy and really, there's really no definitive data that would support using antiplatelet therapy in people with incidentally discovered infarcts or what we call, you know, whispering strokes or silent strokes. Many stroke neurologists will use antiplatelet agents. This is one of those areas where it's so important to identify the risk factors. As we were saying before, patients who have other neurological disorders like migraine or epilepsy may turn out to have cardiovascular risk factors like diabetes and high blood pressure. That's why it's so important for neurologists to be able to treat those patients or refer them to specialists who can. Patients who have incidentally discovered lesions similarly are a group where we should be looking for risk factors. So, I don't think of it only in terms of do we put them on an antiplatelet or not, but really more holistically, can we identify their other risk factors and address those? Should the patient's information be entered into a risk calculator like PREVENT, for example, so that we can come up with a more global or holistic measure of their cardiovascular risk and address that as appropriate? Because if they are at risk for stroke, they're also at risk for cardiac events, including heart attack, heart failure, sudden cardiac arrest, and so forth. So, I think of it as a, as a great kind of teachable moment or an opportunity to catch somebody and bring them into the healthcare system more broadly and address those other potential risk factors.  Dr Grouse: Speaking of, of risk factors that we often like to think about and work up when possible, in cases where it seems certainly possible the patient had an embolic stroke, but perhaps we've done a few weeks or four weeks of cardiac monitoring, have not found any evidence of atrial fibrillation. What's new and what's the current recommendations for doing further monitoring when there's high suspicion for cardioembolic stroke?  Dr Elkind: This is a really active area of investigation, and guidelines suggest that we should do some cardiac monitoring for atrial fibrillation after an unexplained stroke, but it's not clear how much we should do. Studies generally show that the longer you follow somebody on a cardiac monitor after stroke, the more likely you are to detect atrial fibrillation. It could be as high as thirty percent after a few years. And that's great. And if you detect atrial fibrillation, people usually end up being recommended for a blood thinner. But how extensively we should monitor remains unknown. And I think a lot of the investigation recently has been around the question of, are there other ways to get that information rather than waiting six months or a year for the person to develop atrial fibrillation?It's a little bit funny logically to think a person has a stroke today, a year later you discover atrial fibrillation on the monitor, and you say, "Oh, now I know what caused your stroke a year ago." Right? The temporality, the causality perhaps is off in that case. And so, wouldn't it be better if we could tell what somebody's risk of having another cardioembolic stroke is, or the likelihood that they have atrial fibrillation is at the time that you first see them for the stroke, you know, in the hospital, for example. And so, there's some really new technologies that have evolved like AI or artificial intelligence interpretation of EKGs that can give a really good indication of which people are gonna go on to develop atrial fibrillation. And so, I think we need some more trials in that area to demonstrate that we can detect the risk of AFib and treat that even before it appears on one of those delayed monitors. That's an area that I think is very exciting right now. There's also a further question with regard to how to treat these patients, which is that sometimes atrial fibrillation is a consequence of the stroke itself. So, we can think about what people call known AF, meaning atrial fibrillation that's known about before the stroke even occurs, versus AF that's detected after a stroke, or AF-DAS, people will say. Those may have very different implications for the risk of recurrence and what the person's cardiovascular status is. So, I think what we've learned over the last few years is that atrial fibrillation, it used to be like the slam dunk for a stroke neurologist. It was the easy thing. You know, you had a stroke, you have AFib, you should be on a blood thinner. Now we know that there's lots of different kinds of AFib. There's AFib before stroke, there's AFib after stroke, there's burden of atrial fibrillation. So, some people may have 30 seconds of AFib, some people may have several hours, some people may be in it continuously. It comes and goes, and that can make it challenging to manage. So, we have a lot more work to do to understand this problem better.  Dr Grouse: That also gets me into some other interesting areas that I think there's still some question, you know, how aggressive should you be? How often is it a case of is this correlated or is this causative? For instance, when a patent foramen ovale is, is discovered in patients with cryptogenic stroke. Are there any tools or new developments to help us understand whether these PFOs should be closed in these cases?  Dr Elkind: PFO and stroke is a great story that's been going on for decades. And again, we've made tremendous progress in the last several years. So, it's true that about 20% or so of people have a PFO, and because of that, it can be really hard to say with any certainty whether an individual patient sitting in front of you, that the PFO was the cause of their stroke. Rarely we can have a really high degree of certainty. You know, if somebody has, uh, a DVT, for example, and shortly after that maybe they have pulmonary embolism and then a stroke, and we can say, "Oh, clearly this was a paradoxical embolism," went to the lungs and then some crossed over and went to the brain. That happens really infrequently. Most of the time you're faced with a patient who has a PFO and a stroke, and they may have some other risk factors. There are some tools that we can use to help figure out the likelihood that a PFO is related to a stroke. One of those is called the ROPE score or the risk of paradoxical embolism score that was developed by David Thaler and, uh, David Kent from Tufts and a group of other investigators as well. That score allows one to say what the likelihood is that the PFO was causative of the stroke, and it's based on a person's risk factors such that the younger you are, the more likely it is the PFO caused the stroke. And the absence of risk factors make it more likely that the PFO caused the stroke. So, the higher your ROPE score indicating the fewer other reasons you have a stroke, the more likely the PFO is to be causative. So that can be helpful in identifying patients who may have had a stroke due to their PFO. There are other features that are identified in something called the PASCAL score, which is a way of assessing the degree of shunting and whether or not there's an atrial septal aneurysm that can be used as additional factors that lead to the likelihood that a PFO was causative rather than just incidental. So, by putting this kind of information together, we can kind of do precision neurology or precision prevention by identifying which patients with a PFO are really the ones we need to worry about and do procedures like closure.  Dr Grouse: I look forward to hearing more and learning more as more advances are made in these areas. Dr Elkind: Thank you.   Dr Grouse: And thank you so much for joining us today to talk about your article.   Dr Elkind: Oh, I appreciate it. Thank you for giving me the opportunity. I really enjoyed it.  Dr Grouse: Again, today I've been interviewing Dr. Mitchell Elkind about his article on stroke prevention. This article appears in the June 2026 Continuum issue on cerebrovascular disease. Be sure to check out Continuum Audio episodes from this and other issues, and thank you to our listeners for joining today.  Dr Monteith: This is Dr. Teshamae Monteith, Associate Editor of Continuum Audio. If you've enjoyed this episode, you'll love the journal, which is full of in-depth and clinically relevant information important for neurology practitioners. Use the link in the episode notes to learn more and subscribe. AAN members, you can get CME for listening to this interview by completing the evaluation at continpub.com/audioCME. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio.

Send us Fan MailTurnout gear is supposed to be the last line of defense, so what happens when the fabric itself contains PFAS forever chemicals that were never clearly disclosed? This week, we pulled a crucial interview from our archives with Dr. Graham Peasley, the researcher who tested dozens of firefighter turnout gear sets and found fluorine consistent with PFAS treatments across manufacturers, enough that his lab changed how they handled the samples. We talk about what that discovery means for firefighters who wear the gear, touch it daily, and store it around the station and sometimes at home. We also slow down and make the numbers make sense. Parts per trillion versus parts per billion is not a trivia question when PFOA and PFOS have documented links to cancers and immune impacts at very low levels. We address the online pushback and the consultant op-ed culture head-on: how to evaluate sources, what “trace” really implies, and why uncertainty about skin absorption is not the same as safety. Along the way we cover real exposure pathways, from hand transfer to station dust, and how AFFF firefighting foam fits into the broader PFAS story. Then we get practical. We share straightforward steps departments can take now: keep gear at work, wash and decon consistently, rethink storage locations, and treat labeling and ingredient disclosure like essential safety information. We also dig into the hard end-of-life problem: landfilling vs high-temperature incineration, and why repurposing old gear into bags or blankets can create new risks. If you care about firefighter health, PFAS exposure, and fluorine-free turnout gear that still meets NFPA performance needs, this conversation gives you a clear place to start. Subscribe, share this with your crew, and leave a review so more firefighters can find it. What policy change would you implement first at your station?DISCLAIMERThe views, information, or opinions expressed by guests during this podcast are solely those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily represent those of AFSO21's Weekend Wrap-up Podcast and its hosts. Furthermore, any views or opinions expressed by guests are their own alone and unless otherwise stated, do not reflect the opinions, beliefs, or official policies of any organization, institution, or employer they may be associated with or employed by.  Support the showContact AFSO21's Weekend Wrap-up Podcast - Email us at podcast@afso21.comAs always, keep supporting your local fire and emergency services, stay safe, and keep on listening!

The Trump administration is rescinding the drinking water regulations for four PFAS chemicals and extending the compliance deadline for the remaining two.  Listen to learn more and subscribe to The Pulse for all the details.

EPA has pushed back the TSCA reporting rule yet again! The submission period for the PFAS Reporting Rule will begin on January 31, 2027, or 60 days following the effective date of a forthcoming final rule on the substantive requirements of the PFAS Reporting Rule, whichever is earlier. Listen to learn more and subscribe to The Pulse for all the details.

HRP's Jackie Baxley joins us to talk about the new PFAS chemical added to the Toxic Release Inventory. We've got what you need to know. Upcoming webinar: Microsoft Virtual Events Powered by Teams Listen to learn more and subscribe to The Pulse for all the details.

As per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) continue to dominate legal and scientific headlines across the country, more attention is focused on the diligence process performed before buying, selling or redeveloping contaminated properties. U.S. EPA recently published some frequently asked questions (FAQ) on the impact of its designation of two PFAS compounds, PFOA and PFOS, as CERCLA hazardous substances on Brownfield grant funding and liability protection. In this episode of Environmental L.A.W.S., Joel Eagle and Heather Richardson speak with Tom Simmons, Dan Titus and Mark Wright of HRP Associates about the EPA Brownfields FAQ and other PFAS issues including: Federal and state PFAS regulatory updates Strategies for addressing PFAS in real estate and corporate transactions Additional PFAS risk mitigation strategies PFAS concerns now affect a wide range of legal, corporate and scientific disciplines and permeate many aspects of daily life, making this episode relevant to all.

As per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) continue to dominate legal and scientific headlines across the country, more attention is focused on the diligence process performed before buying, selling or redeveloping contaminated properties. U.S. EPA recently published some frequently asked questions (FAQ) on the impact of its designation of two PFAS compounds, PFOA and PFOS, as CERCLA hazardous substances on Brownfield grant funding and liability protection. In this episode of Environmental L.A.W.S., Joel Eagle and Heather Richardson speak with Tom Simmons, Dan Titus and Mark Wright of HRP Associates about the EPA Brownfields FAQ and other PFAS issues including: Federal and state PFAS regulatory updates Strategies for addressing PFAS in real estate and corporate transactions Additional PFAS risk mitigation strategies PFAS concerns now affect a wide range of legal, corporate and scientific disciplines and permeate many aspects of daily life, making this episode relevant to all.

Our friends, Joel Eagle and Heather Richardson, both Partners at Thompson Hine, join HRP's Dan Titus and Mark Wright to talk about the intersection of PFAS and Brownfields. Our wide-ranging conversation covered the liability concerns of Brownfield owners, legal defenses, best practices for consultant's like HRP, and more!   Thompson Hine, LLP: Professionals | Thompson Hine LLP   Listen to learn more and subscribe to The Pulse for all the details.

Birchtech Corp. (NYSE American: BCHT) (TSX: BCHT) is a provider of specialty activated carbon technologies, delivering innovative solutions for air and water purification to support a cleaner, more sustainable future. The Company provides patented SEA® sorbent technologies for mercury emissions capture for the coal-fired utility sector and is developing disruptive water purification technologies with a specialization on forever chemicals such as PFAS and PFOS. Backed by a strong intellectual property portfolio and a team of activated carbon experts, Birchtech provides cleaner air to North American communities and is applying this expertise to an innovative approach in water purification.

In this episode of SHE MD, Mary Alice Haney and Dr. Aliabadi sit down with Hailey Bieber to discuss a terrifying health scare at 25. She experienced a TIA (mini-stroke) with classic stroke symptoms, and the chain of testing that led to finding (and closing) a PFO.Hailey also shares how her pregnancy was a surprise. It was complicated by a uterine septum and conversations about miscarriage risk. She explains how her care team monitored her for preterm risk.Hailey discuss induction tools like the Foley balloon, how she handled the epidural, and what it felt like when she couldn't stop bleeding after delivery. Dr. Aliabadi breaks down postpartum hemorrhage and the Jada device that was used to stop it quickly.They also cover postpartum life, including anxiety, pumping/breastfeeding, PMDD months later, postpartum rehab (including pelvic floor therapy), and Hailey's approach to balancing motherhood with building her company.Subscribe to SHE MD Podcast for expert insight on women's heart health, stroke warning signs, and what to know about PFOs, plus real talk on pregnancy risk, labor and delivery, postpartum hemorrhage, PMDD, and recovery after birth. Share this episode with a friend, and visit the SHE MD website and Ovii for research-backed resources, practical guidance, and expert support for women's health and well-being.Sponsors:Premier Protein: Find your favorite flavor at PremierProtein.com or at Amazon, Walmart, and other major retailers.Gusto: Try Gusto today at gusto.com/sheMD, and get three months free when you run your first payroll. That's three months of free payroll at gusto.com/sheMD.Care.com: Start your senior care journey with confidence. When it's not you, it's Care.com. For a limited time, go to Care.com and use code SHEMD for 20% off your initial Care.com subscription or a Senior Care Advisor Plan.Osea: She MD listeners get 10% off your first order site wide with code SHEMD at OSEAMalibu.comMidi: Ready to feel your best and write your second act script? Visit JoinMidi.com today to book your personalized, insurance-covered virtual visit.What You'll Learn: What a TIA can look like at 25, and the stroke symptoms Hailey experienced What a PFO is, why it can be missed on early testing, and how closure works What a uterine septum is, and why 3D imaging can matter for diagnosis How preterm-risk screening was explained, plus the monitoring/support plan discussed What postpartum hemorrhage can feel like in real time, and how rapid intervention can change outcomesKey Timestamps:(01:51) Hailey joins the show + why she wanted to share her story(03:41) The TIA at 25 and the stroke symptoms she experienced(05:20) PFO basics and why the first bubble study missed it(06:33) PFO closure surgery and how the closure device works(11:06) “Let's move on to the pregnancy” and why it was a surprise(12:11) What a uterine septum is and the miscarriage risk discussed(14:03) Why septums get missed on ultrasound and why 3D imaging matters(15:30) The preterm blood test explained and what it measures(16:59) What happens if you test high-risk, including progesterone, aspirin, and closer monitoring(27:03) Induction details, including the Foley balloon and epidural timing(31:51) “I couldn't stop bleeding” after delivery and what that moment felt like(33:05) Sensing panic in the room, getting meds “to clot,” and asking “am I okay?”(35:57) Postpartum hemorrhage explained and why the Jada device was used(45:12) Postpartum PMDD, diagnosis, and what it felt like(56:19) Postpartum rehab and why pelvic floor therapy mattered(59:58) Working through pregnancy and easing back in after baby(01:02:35) Closing advice on trusting your intuitionKey Takeaways:A TIA can present with classic stroke symptoms, even in a young patient.PFOs can be missed on initial testing. Additional imaging/testing can change the diagnosis.A uterine septum can be underdiagnosed on standard ultrasound, and may meaningfully affect pregnancy risk.Postpartum hemorrhage can escalate fast. Quick intervention matters.Postpartum care is more than “bouncing back.” Mental health (like PMDD) and physical rehab deserve real attention.Guest Bio:Hailey Bieber is a mom and founder who shares her experience navigating a TIA, pregnancy, birth, and postpartum recovery with Dr. Aliabadi. She says she first started seeing Dr. Aliabadi at 19, developed her company idea in 2020, and launched it in 2022. She later worked through her pregnancy in 2024 and returned when she felt ready.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Join us as we breakdown the disqualifications of several winter Olympians at the 2026 games, due to PFAS. We'll talk about where the PFAS came from, the rules around it, and the testing conducted to determine its source. You can find links to the articles discussed on HRP's PFAS Pulse. Listen to learn more and subscribe to The Pulse for all the details.

Here are your PFAS headlines from across the USA! In New Jersey we have a new ban on PFAS products! Next up is the Great Lakes region and the state of Wisconsin. We've seen a big fight over PFAS in particular in Wisconsin, where state lawmakers are trying to figure out how and where to set their PFAS limits. We've got even more happening in the state as we turn now to the small town of Stella where residents have been dealing with the fallout of contamination from a paper mill. Jumping over now to North Carolina where a study done across the state found PFAS concentrations above federal limits. Hosts Tom Simmons and Matthew Wallace are here to break it down. Listen to learn more and subscribe to The Pulse for all the details.

In this episode look at some rarer diagnoses, how they come to light and how they can be hard to live with and diagnose.Links: Pyrrole Disorder (not recognised in conventional medicine): https://www.healthline.com/health/pyrrole-disorderAcademic analysis of pyrroles (deep dive): https://academic.oup.com/labmed/article/55/3/334/7271490Patent foramen ovale: https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/patent-foramen-ovale/symptoms-causes/syc-20353487Migraines and PFO: https://www.migrainedisorders.org/diving-into-the-connection-between-migraine-and-patent-foramen-ovale/Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome: https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/17813-ehlers-danlos-syndromeSave your life in slow motion and those of others by subscribing now and sharing. Thank you for listening and for your support. It means a lot to me. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Welcome to the Water Quality Association podcast. Eric Yeggy, MWS, WQA's Technical Affairs Director, joins the podcast for one of our most popular annual episodes: top contaminant concerns and technical priorities for the year ahead. Eric begins with a recap of WQA technical affairs work in advocacy and education, standards engagement, and member-facing research tools. He explains why overlapping or poorly validated standards create confusion for regulators and inspectors, can drive duplicate testing, and may increase costs that ultimately reach end users. He then reviews last year's contaminant predictions—lead and PFAS remaining in the spotlight, ongoing arsenic concerns, and growing attention on disinfection byproducts, including new research into unregulated compounds. Looking ahead to 2026, Eric addresses the question many members are asking: whether EPA will drop proposed drinking water regulation for PFOA and PFOS, and why he believes that is unlikely. He also highlights key issues to watch in Lead and Copper Rule implementation (including how “disturbance” is interpreted) and flags lithium as an emerging topic worth monitoring. The episode closes with actionable steps for members: education programs, technical support requests, webinars, and WQA Convention (April, Miami Beach -- https://wqa.org/convention).

A leader in specialty activated carbon technologies, serving as America's Clean Coal and Clean Water Company by delivering innovative solutions for air and water purification to support a cleaner, more sustainable future. The Company provides patented SEA® sorbent technologies for mercury emissions capture for the coal-fired utility sector and is developing disruptive water purification technologies with a specialization on forever chemicals such as PFAS and PFOS. Backed by a strong intellectual property portfolio and a world-class team of activated carbon experts, Birchtech provides cleaner air to North American communities and is applying this expertise to a novel approach in water purification.

Industrial firefighting foams are an essential part of on-site safety in UK factories. But for decades some of these familiar canisters contained potentially dangerous, toxic chemicals. File on 4 Investigates discovers that 3M the multi-billion dollar chemical company responsible for producing the chemicals knew about the risks as early as the 1960s because their own internal studies on animals and tests on workers indicated a possible increase in rates of cancer. Despite this, the company failed to warn its workers of the dangers associated with using the foams for decades and was involved in an environmental accident at one of its sites that led to the chemicals being released into a Welsh river.The programme obtained never seen before documents showing the regulator warning the company it thought it had committed an offence but choosing not to prosecute it.In 2004, with evidence of the risks to the environment of the two specific forever chemicals PFOS and PFOA, a report commissioned by the government recommended any remaining firefighting foams containing the chemicals be incinerated. But we discover in the years after that companies struggled to dispose of legacy stock of foams, and, appearing unaware of the unofficial advice, discharged them straight into the sewer with no treatment, in one case with permission from the water company.3M said that the health and safety of its workers and their families were “critical priorities" for the company.Reporter: Esme Stallard Producer: Anna Meisel Technical Producer: Richard Hannaford Production Coordinator: Tim Fernley Editor: Tara McDermott

Join HRP's Tom Simmons and Mattew Wallace as we walk through submitting a public comment on regulations.gov. The public comment period accompanies any new rule or proposed change in rule. It's an opportunity for the general public to speak on these rules and have their voices entered into the record. Check our YouTube channel to see what we're talking about!  Our YouTube VideoRegulations.gov - This is the main site to submit to.Commenting on EPA Dockets | US EPA - This site lists how to properly write a comment.About EPA Dockets | US EPAWhere to Send Comments for EPA Dockets | US EPA - This lists how to send physical letters as comments Listen to learn more and subscribe to The Pulse for all the details.

The state of Maine has been a leader on the PFAS issue, but it's also one beset by unique challenges. On this episode, hosts Tom Simmons and Matthew Wallace talk about the big problem Maine is facing, biosolid sludge. Wastewater treatment facilities produce a biosolid byproduct. For decades, this sludge was repurposed as fertilizer, but since treatment facilities still cannot deal with PFAS, the sludge moved the PFAS from the fertilizer, into the soil, the groundwater, the crops and animals, and ultimately, the people of Maine. Listen to learn more and subscribe to The Pulse for all the details.

Hosts Matthew Wallace and Tom Simmons talk about the EPA's new proposed rule change to how TSCA looks at PFAS. While the rule change is only "Purposed" its ramifications could be far reaching. Regardless, another delay in reporting is certain.  Listen to learn more and subscribe to The Pulse for all the details.

A leader inspecialty activated carbon technologies, serving as America's Clean Coal andClean Water Company by delivering innovative solutions for air and waterpurification to support a cleaner, more sustainable future. The Companyprovides patented SEA® sorbent technologies for mercury emissions capture forthe coal-fired utility sector and is developing disruptive water purificationtechnologies with a specialization on forever chemicals such as PFAS and PFOS.Backed by a strong intellectual property portfolio and a world-class team ofactivated carbon experts, Birchtech provides cleaner air to North Americancommunities and is applying this expertise to a novel approach in waterpurification.

In this episode of the PFAS Pulse Podcast, Host Tom Simmons and Matthew Wallace are joined by HRP's Sam Muller, to discuss a recent study, which demonstrated that PFAS are far more acidic than previously thought. What does that mean? We'll break it down! Listen to learn more and subscribe to The Pulse for all the details.

In this series, HRP's Brooke Casella is asking, what is PFAS? HRP's PFAS experts will each share their perspective on the question, answering not only, what is PFAS, but what does PFAS mean in the specific context and discipline where they operate.On the first episode, Tom Simmons, head of content for HRP Associates, and host of this podcast, share's his perspective. Listen to learn more and subscribe to The Pulse for all the details.

In modern cardiology, toxins like microplastics and PFOS have emerged as significant risks to heart health. Although they're often referred to as “forever chemicals,” therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) has been shown to dramatically reduce their levels in the body. Dr. Paul Savage and mdlifespan.com are leading the way with advanced clinics that offer comprehensive programs combining education, testing, and therapy to address the toxic exposures affecting our hearts, brains, immune systems, and more.

Story at-a-glance A specific type of fiber called beta-glucan, found in oats and barley, was shown to reduce levels of harmful PFAS chemicals in the blood within just four weeks Participants who consumed beta-glucan experienced significant drops in legacy PFAS compounds like PFOA and PFOS, which are linked to cancer and hormone disruption The fiber group was the only one to show a meaningful reduction in the seven most high-risk PFAS chemicals identified by the National Academies of Sciences, including those that raise your risk for thyroid disease, cancer and ulcerative colitis In a follow-up study using mice, animals exposed to high PFAS levels but fed beta-glucan had lower blood PFAS, improved fat metabolism and less liver stress compared to controls The key to beta-glucan's effect is its gel-forming action in your gut, which traps PFAS and interrupts their reabsorption cycle, allowing your body to eliminate them through stool

For decades, residents of the small city of Newburgh, New York, were unknowingly drinking water contaminated with toxic PFAS—also known as forever chemicals. The source turned out to be firefighting foam used on a nearby air base that had seeped into streams and creeks, and ultimately the city's main drinking water reservoir.Now, Newburgh is one of 10 sites that are part of a CDC-led study investigating the health effects of PFAS exposure. Early data out of Newburgh links PFAS with high cholesterol, high blood pressure, and heart disease. Host Flora Lichtman discusses the research with environmental epidemiologist Erin Bell and reporter Shantal Riley.Read our full story about what PFAS contamination has meant for Newburgh in English and in Spanish.Guests: Shantal Riley is an award-winning journalist and science writer, focused on environmental health.Dr. Erin Bell is an environmental epidemiologist at the University at Albany in New York.Transcripts for each episode are available within 1-3 days at sciencefriday.com. Subscribe to this podcast. Plus, to stay updated on all things science, sign up for Science Friday's newsletters.

Co-host Matthew Wallace just completed his first PFAS sampling!Here's a breakdown of what we wanted to know from the EHS&S Professional:We thought a little breakdown of Do you do much sampling generally?Without telling us who the client was, or giving away too much, can you tell us what the facility was, what it was like?What kind of sampling was this?What was the preparation that you have to for PFAS specifically?What were the special considerations for this particular event? Things you thought about doing, changes up  Listen to learn more and subscribe to The Pulse for all the details.

Join hosts Tom Simmons and Matthew Wallace, joined by HRP's EHS&S Practice Leader, Jackie Baxley, as we break down the new deadline for PFAS TSCA reporting.EPA announced an interim final rule which extended the dates of the reporting period for data submissions for the TSCA PFAS reporting rule. Submissions are now due by October 13, 2026, for most manufacturers. Small businesses reporting data solely on importing PFAS contained in articles have until April 13, 2027, to submit reports. This rule provides much needed time for the regulated community to assess its manufacturing (including import) from 2011 to 2022 relative to PFAS.  Prior to this rule being published, the reporting period was set to open this July with reports due January 11, 2026. For more information on this rule, refer to HRP's webinar presented February 2025: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNalxzfPxog  Listen to learn more and subscribe to The Pulse for all the details.

This Day in Legal History: Standard Oil Breaks UpOn May 15, 1911, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark decision in Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States, finding that Standard Oil had violated the Sherman Antitrust Act by engaging in monopolistic practices. The Court unanimously ruled that Standard Oil's dominance over the oil industry—achieved through aggressive acquisitions, predatory pricing, and exclusive agreements—constituted an illegal restraint of trade. As a remedy, the Court ordered the breakup of Standard Oil into 34 separate and independent companies, a dramatic reshaping of the American oil landscape. Among the entities created were companies that would later become industry giants in their own right, including Exxon, Mobil, Chevron, and Amoco.The decision was a defining moment in U.S. antitrust enforcement, signaling the federal government's willingness to confront corporate consolidation. It aimed to restore competition and prevent the recurrence of monopolistic control in vital sectors of the economy. However, over the next century, many of the separated entities gradually reconsolidated. Notably, Exxon and Mobil merged in 1999 to form ExxonMobil, while Chevron absorbed both Gulf Oil and Texaco, and BP later acquired Amoco.Today, a majority of the original 34 companies—or their direct successors—are now part of just a few massive corporations. This reconsolidation serves as a cautionary tale: without vigilant antitrust enforcement post-breakup, market dominance can re-emerge in new forms. The Standard Oil saga demonstrates not only the power of antitrust law but also its limitations if not actively maintained. It underscores that breaking up monopolies is only one step—the preservation of competition requires ongoing oversight.The EPA announced it will weaken several Biden-era regulations on PFAS, or “forever chemicals,” in drinking water. Specifically, the agency plans to rescind enforceable limits on three types of PFAS—PFNA, PFHxS, and HFPO-DA (also known as GenX)—as well as on combinations of those and PFBS. At the same time, the EPA is giving water systems two extra years, until 2031, to comply with limits on PFOA and PFOS, the two most well-known and studied PFAS chemicals, citing the challenges especially for smaller and rural systems.The original Biden administration rule had set an enforceable limit of 4 parts per trillion (ppt) for PFOA and PFOS and a non-enforceable goal of zero exposure due to their cancer and health risks. The EPA says it will revisit its regulatory decisions on the other PFAS types it is now rolling back. Administrator Lee Zeldin framed the delay as necessary flexibility while maintaining protections against the most harmful chemicals, but environmental groups like the Environmental Working Group blasted the move as a concession to industry that puts public health at risk. Some state-level regulators expressed caution and said more time is needed to evaluate the impact of rescinding the additional PFAS limits.EPA Moves to Weaken Biden-era PFAS Limits for Drinking WaterU.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. appeared before Congress for the first time in his new role, facing bipartisan scrutiny over his department's proposed 2026 budget, mass layoffs, and his response to a growing measles outbreak. Since taking office in February, Kennedy has overseen the dismissal of roughly 10,000 workers across major health agencies, aligning with broader Trump administration efforts to downsize the federal government. His budget plan calls for deep cuts, including $18 billion from the National Institutes of Health and $3.6 billion from the CDC.Lawmakers questioned Kennedy's controversial stance on vaccines—particularly during an outbreak that has resulted in over 1,000 infections and three deaths, largely among unvaccinated populations. Representative Rosa DeLauro accused Kennedy of promoting misinformation and endangering public health. Senator Bill Cassidy, who supported Kennedy's confirmation based on promises to uphold vaccine access and collaborate with Congress, emphasized the need for transparency and reassurance amid sweeping departmental changes.Kennedy defended the workforce reductions as a return to pre-COVID staffing levels and projected $1.8 billion in annual savings. Still, critics view the cuts as harmful to the country's public health infrastructure. His personal conduct also drew scrutiny after posting photos of himself swimming in Rock Creek, a site banned for public use due to unsafe water conditions.US health chief Kennedy faces lawmakers' questions on mass firings, measles | ReutersA growing number of major U.S. companies are proposing to leave Delaware as their state of incorporation—a trend being called “Dexit”—following Elon Musk's public fallout with Delaware courts. At least nine publicly traded companies, each valued over $1 billion, are preparing shareholder votes to move their legal homes, while five, including Tesla and Trump Media, have already relocated to states like Texas, Florida, and Nevada. The exodus is driven by concerns over Delaware's increasingly strict scrutiny of deals involving controlling shareholders, highlighted by a 2024 court ruling voiding Musk's $56 billion Tesla pay package.Companies say Delaware's legal environment has become unpredictable, especially for founder-led or insider-controlled firms. By contrast, states like Nevada and Texas offer looser standards and greater protection from shareholder litigation. For example, Nevada's laws shield corporate boards under the business judgment rule unless there is fraud, while Delaware courts still require fairness and transparency in insider transactions.In response, Delaware recently passed laws to limit judicial review of certain deals and curb shareholders' access to corporate records, hoping to stem the corporate departures. Still, critics like legal scholars and corporate counsel argue that Delaware's courts are now perceived as activist and uncertain, prompting companies to seek jurisdictions they believe offer more legal stability and control.In Tesla's wake, more big companies propose voting “Dexit" to depart Delaware | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Join hosts Tom Simmons and Matthew Wallace as we talk to Jonathan Thorn, Technical Director and PFAS Practice Leader, at Eurofins, as debunk the biggest myths and misconceptions around PFAS from the perspective of the lab.Jonathan Thorn has worked in the field of environmental analytical chemistry for over 28 years. For the last eight years, his primary focus has been the analysis of PFAS in environmental samples, focusing on development and implementation of analytical methods in difficult matrices, including ground water, wastewater, landfill leachate, sediment, soil, biosolids, environmental tissues, agricultural products, and animal blood. Listen to learn more and subscribe to The Pulse for all the details.

In this episode we chat to Nicole Richards, CEO of Allonnia, who are a company harnessing nature to solve the biggest environmental challenges for net positive impact. They transform liability into value by leveraging the power of biotechnology and engineered systems to help our customers reach their ESG goals in a waste-free world. Nicole has over 28 years of industry leadership within water treatment, mining, and chemicals industries and gives us the history and story behind Allonnia, how they work with mining companies, how their technology helps mining companies hit their sustainability goals and thoughts on the trade wars that are having an impact on our industry. KEY TAKEAWAYS Allonnia is leveraging synthetic biology to innovate within the mining industry, focusing on transforming waste into value and addressing sustainability challenges through biotechnology. The company is developing solutions for environmental contaminants like 1,4-Dioxane and PFOS, showcasing the potential of biotechnology to remediate harmful substances in various industries, including mining. Allonnia's first product, D-Solve, aims to selectively remove impurities from ore, which can enhance the grade of metals like nickel and improve overall mining efficiency while reducing environmental impact. The mining industry is increasingly open to innovation, with major companies actively seeking partnerships with startups to test and implement new technologies, creating opportunities for faster commercialisation. Focus on Value Unlocking: The immediate economic drivers for biotech in mining are centred around unlocking value from low-grade ores and waste streams, with long-term goals of reducing environmental liabilities and promoting sustainable practices. BEST MOMENTS "Waste is a failure of the imagination. How do you take synthetic biology or really transformational biology and bring that into these processes?" "In the near term, the biggest driver is in the value unlock... around metals recovery from low-grade ores and waste streams." "If you shut down a mine for a minute, the millions of dollars they're going to lose is incredible." "The way we look at it... is that that's been a huge improvement. They're creating innovation challenges." "What is rare is countries being able to domesticate the processing of those rare earths." VALUABLE RESOURCES Mail: rob@mining-international.org LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rob-tyson-3a26a68/ X: https://twitter.com/MiningRobTyson YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/DigDeepTheMiningPodcast Web: http://www.mining-international.org This episode is sponsored by Hawcroft, leaders in property risk management since 1992. They offer: Insurance risk surveys recognised as an industry standard Construction risk reviews Asset criticality assessments and more Working across over 600 sites globally, Hawcroft supports mining, processing, smelting, power, refining, ports, and rail operations. For bespoke property risk management services, visit www.hawcroft.com GUEST SOCIALS Get in touch at https://allonnia.com/contact-us/ Follow Allonnia on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/company/allonnia/ ABOUT THE HOST Rob Tyson is the Founder and Director of Mining International Ltd, a leading global recruitment and headhunting consultancy based in the UK specialising in all areas of mining across the globe from first-world to third-world countries from Africa, Europe, the Middle East, Asia, and Australia. We source, headhunt, and discover new and top talent through a targeted approach and search methodology and have a proven track record in sourcing and positioning exceptional candidates into our clients' organisations in any mining discipline or level. Mining International provides a transparent, informative, and trusted consultancy service to our candidates and clients to help them develop their careers and business goals and objectives in this ever-changing marketplace. CONTACT METHOD rob@mining-international.org https://www.linkedin.com/in/rob-tyson-3a26a68/ Podcast Description Rob Tyson is an established recruiter in the mining and quarrying sector and decided to produce the “Dig Deep” The Mining Podcast to provide valuable and informative content around the mining industry. He has a passion and desire to promote the industry and the podcast aims to offer the mining community an insight into people’s experiences and careers covering any mining discipline, giving the listeners helpful advice and guidance on industry topics.

Ripped from the Pulse! Your PFAS headlines for the month of April.We're talking big moves from Trump's EPA to end PFAS bans and eliminate research grants.On the research front, we also take a peek at nanocage PFAS tech!And we talk about new anti-PFAS lobbying efforts from unexpected areas.All articles and studies can be found, linked, on the PFAS Pulse!  Listen to learn more and subscribe to The Pulse for all the details.

Toxins in your daily life? In this Wellness in Minutes episode, Darin Olien breaks down the dangers of processed foods, water contamination, and unsustainable farming. Learn simple, practical steps to purify your water and minimize toxin exposure. Tune in for fast, effective health advice. In this episode, you'll discover: ✅ Harmful toxins in your food and water to watch out for ✅ The effect of PFOAs and PFOs on hormone health and metabolic health ✅ Different ways to help purify your water to ensure it's filtering out toxins - plus what you should be adding to your water

Tune in now as we are getting into a classic tale of alien abduction. In this episode we are looking at the strange encounter of Carl Higdon, a Wyoming oil rig worker who claims to have been abducted by aliens while hunting in the Wyoming wilderness in 1974. This case has everything from bizarre encounters to physical evidence and tom foolery of the highest order. Carl's encounter may also offer up more clues into the UFO phenomena as a whole and perhaps shed some light on why these encounters are so prevalent. All this and more in today's episode! If you've had a strange encounter, call the PFOS hotline at 619-866-6432 and let us know about it. Link to a short recreation of the tale: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YgB5oheYSo&ab_channel=EyesOnCinema Margery Higdon's Book: https://a.co/d/3kDpmR0 Music Credit: Git Along Little Doggies - Eddie Dean

We sit down with HRP's Laurel Pickard to talk about the latest PFAS developments regarding the MSGP for 2026. How will it impact big and small businesses when it comes to various stormwater and other sampling concerns.  Listen to learn more and subscribe to The Pulse for all the details.

"The worst European hotspot for PFAS" is located in Belgium, in the small town of Zwijndrecht, near Antwerp. There, for 25 years, the American factory 3M manufactured perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), one of the oldest of substances that is highly toxic to health and the environment. In Europe, there are an estimated 2,300 other such "hotspots" and a total of 23,000 polluted sites. A recent collaborative survey estimates the cost of decontamination at 100 billion euros per year. How is this decontamination carried out in practice? And what is the cost for residents already affected by one of the biggest environmental scandals? Alix Le Bourdon, Anna Joris and Dave Keating report.

A leader in specialty activated carbon technologies, delivering innovative solutions for air and water purification to support a cleaner, more sustainable future.The Company operates two divisions: ME2C Environmental, a pioneer of SEA® sorbent technologies for mercury emissions capture to the coal-fired utility sector, and WE2C Environmental, dedicated to developing disruptive water purification technologies with a specialization on forever chemicals such as PFAS and PFOS.Backed by a strong intellectual property portfolio and a world-class team of activated carbon experts, Birchtech provides cleaner air to North American communities and is applying this expertise to a novel approach in water purification.

In the last podcast, I discussed sources of toxins and how they can impact the brain and development.In this podcast, I'll focus on ways to reduce exposure. I say reduce because there is no way to completely eliminate our exposure to toxins. This reality can be liberating for those who struggle with perfectionism.If you're new at this, feel good about starting. Avoid feeling bad about what you haven't done yet. (Negative thoughts aren't great for detoxification;)For me, lowering exposures has been a stepwise process. When I began, I had to avoid overwhelm and resist trying to do everything at once.Though I've familiarized myself with the most researched toxins and their specific health impacts, I try to focus more on what I can do to avoid them so I can get on with life and not think about them.Some of the most researched toxins (last I checked) include mercury, lead, arsenic, cadmium, PBDEs, organophosphates, glycerophosphate, BPA, BHA, BHT, PCBs, sodium benzoate, butane, tartrazine dye, potassium bromate, ADA, BVO, yellow food dye number's 5 and 6, red dye number 40, bovine growth hormone, synthetic hormones, ractopamine, phthalates, parabens, phenylenediamine, oxybenzone, acrylic, DEA, triclosan, PFAS including PFOS, benzene, chlorine, chloramine, ochratoxin, trichothecenes, aflatoxin, chaetoglobosin, gliotoxin, and zearalenone.Electromagnetic fields, though not “toxins,” are considered toxicants, which have similar impacts on our bodies and brains. I've previously shared how we can start to assess and lower those.To learn more about the root causes of brain symptoms and the consultations that I offer, visit courtneysnydermd.comDisclaimer:This podcast is for educational purposes and not intended or implied to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment for yourself or others, including but not limited to patients you are treating (if you are a practitioner). Consult your physician for any medical issues that you may be having. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit courtneysnydermd.substack.com

Join host Ryan Feldman in an insightful episode of "The Poison Lab" as he sits down with Dr. John Downs, Director of the Virginia Poison Center, and one of the leading experts on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), commonly known as "forever chemicals." Known for their persistence in the environment and human body, PFAS have raised significant public health concerns over the past few decades. Dr. Downs shares his journey through occupational medicine, toxicology, and public health, which uniquely positioned him to provide expertise on PFAS exposure, health risks, and ongoing regulatory efforts. Together, they delve into the origins, uses, and potential health effects of these ubiquitous compounds, while examining government policies, environmental impact, and strategies to reduce exposure. A must-listen for anyone interested in the intersection of environmental health and toxicology! Episode Breakdown:2:42 – What Are Forever Chemicals?8:01 – History of PFAS and Associated Health Concerns15:41 – Government Regulation of PFAS20:42 – Shortcomings in PFAS Regulation25:20 – How Individuals Can Mitigate Risk31:15 – Testing for PFAS Levels and Exploring Treatment Options41:14 – Future Directions and Research Needs for PFAS45:29 – Conclusion and OutroKey Topics Discussed2:42 – What Are Forever Chemicals?PFAS are a large group of man-made chemicals that are persistent in the environment and human body.The podcast focuses primarily on PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid) and PFOS (perfluorooctanoic sulfonic acid), as these were the first compounds identified as having very long elimination half-lives, measured in years, and not undergoing significant human metabolismThe podcast mentions that there are potentially thousands of different PFAS compounds and that more research is needed to determine if they all induce the same health effects as PFOA and PFOSCommonly used for their water- and oil-resistant properties in nonstick cookware, fast food wrappers, firefighting foams, and more.8:01 – History of PFAS and Associated Health ConcernsFirst created by Dupont chemical, used widely in 1940's in TeflonLarge contamination of water by PFAS identified in West Virginia townLed to landmark study in West Virginia (the C8 study) on epidemiological data of PFAS-related health risks.Effects noted: High cholesterol, thyroid dysfunction, ulcerative colitis, hypertension in pregnancy, decreased immune response to vaccine, and certain cancers (testicular and kidney cancer).PFAS in the EnvironmentPFAS are not easily degraded, leading to bioaccumulation in humans and animals.Non-stick cookware: Teflon, the trade name for non-stick cookware, was one of the earliest applications of PFAS, utilizing PFOA.Firefighting foam: PFAS was used in firefighting foams, particularly for aviation fuel fires. This has led to contamination of groundwater around military installations and airports.Fast food wrappers and other consumer products: PFAS are used to make products water and oil resistant, including fast food wrappers, clothing, upholstery, and popcorn bags.Biosolids: The nitrogenous waste produced after wastewater treatment, have been found to contain concentrated PFAS. These biosolids are sometimes sold to farms as fertilizer, potentially contaminating water and crops.Ski wax: Ski waxers have been found to have a high degree of PFAS...

In this week's episode of *Heart Doc VIP*, Dr. Joel Kahn begins by expressing heartfelt concern for those affected by the recent and upcoming hurricanes, hoping everyone finds safety and shelter during such difficult times. The mini topics this week include a look at heart disease in women, the harmful effects of toxic plastic (PFOS) on sleep, and the importance of plant chemicals called phytonutrients—specifically polyphenols and carotenoids.  The main focus is an important new study examining carotid and heart plaque in asymptomatic individuals, with an average age of 69, and how it affected their survival over a 12-year period. Dr. Kahn discusses a subgroup whose worsening plaque put them at the highest risk, emphasizing the importance of Omega-3s in plaque prevention—something that's been a focus at the Kahn Center since 2015. You can read more about this topic in the article linked below.  Special thanks to our sponsor, Igennus. Use discount code *DrKahn* at checkout for 20% off your next purchase at igennus.com. Read more about plaque prevention here: What Do I Do with My High Coronary Calcium CT Results?

Jim Meehan asked some of the best bartenders on the planet for their favorite cocktail recipes — and put them in a book. Archaeologist Tate Paulette explores ancient beers. Market correspondent Gillian Ferguson explores how California farmers handled the latest heat wave. Investigative journalist Sharon Lerner unpacks how 3M lied to its employees — and by extension the American people — about the dangers of PFAS and PFOS. New York Times correspondent Kim Severson reports on the attempts to replace plastics in the grocery store.

HEALTH NEWS   Selenium and manganese levels significantly impact mortality risk in asthma patients Study puts understanding of long COVID and vaccination into question  Study links 'forever chemical' PFOS with colorectal cancer Nicotinamide riboside increases brain NAD+ Regularly using mobile phones linked to heart disease risk Shedding light on how oral bacteria can aggravate rheumatoid arthritis