Examining Disparities in PFAS Plasma Concentrations: Impact of Drinking Water Contamination, Food Access, Proximity to Industrial Facilities and Superfund Sites

By Shiwen Li, Jesse A. Goodrich, Elizabeth Costello, Douglas I. Walker, Carlos Cardenas-Iniguez, Jiawen Carmen Chen, Tanya L. Alderete, Damaskini Valvi, Sarah Rock, Sandrah P. Eckel, Rob McConnell, Frank D. Gilliland, John Wilson, Beau MacDonald, David V. Conti, Adam L. Smith, Daniel L. McCurry, Amy E. Childress, Adam M.-A. Simpson, Lucy Golden-Mason, Ana C. Maretti-Mira, Zhanghua Chen, Michael I. Goran, Max Aung, and Lida Chatzi.
Environ Res.
November 14, 2024
DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2024.120370

Background: Most of the US population is exposed to per- and polyfluorinated substances (PFAS) through various environmental media and these sources of PFAS exposure coupled with disproportionate co-localization of PFAS-polluting facilities in under-resourced communities may exacerbate disparities in PFAS-associated health risks.

Method: We leveraged two cohorts in Southern California with 8 PFAS concentrations measured in plasma. We obtained PFAS water testing data from the Third Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule and state monitoring data, census tract-level information on food access using the Food Access Research Atlas, the location of Superfund sites on the National Priorities List, and data on facilities known to release PFAS pollutants. These data were then spatially linked to the participants' home addresses.

Results: In the first cohort, we found that detections of PFOS, PFOA, and PFHxS in drinking water were associated with 1.54 ng/mL (95% CI: 0.77, 2.32), 0.47 ng/mL (0.25, 0.68), and 1.16 ng/mL (0.62, 1.71) increase in plasma PFOS, PFOA, and PFHxS. The presence of Superfund sites was associated with higher plasma concentrations of PFOS, PFHxS, PFPeS, and PFHpS (betas [95% CIs]: 0.96 [0.21, 1.71], 0.9 [0.22, 1.58], 0.04 [0.02, 0.06] and 0.05 [0.02, 0.09], respectively). Each additional PFAS-polluting facility present in the neighborhood was associated with a 0.9 ng/mL (0.03, 0.15) increase in the concentration of PFOS. In the other cohort, we found that the presence of Superfund sites was associated with higher plasma PFDA, PFHpS, PFOS (betas [95% CIs]: 0.03 [0.01, 0.06], 0.05 [0.01, 0.09], and 1.96 [0.31, 3.62]). Neighborhood low access to food was associated with a 2.51 ng/mL (0.7, 4.31) increase in plasma PFOS, 0.6 ng/mL (0.16, 1.06) increase in plasma PFOA and 0.06 (0.02, 0.1) increase in plasma PFHpS.

Conclusion: Reducing sources of PFAS exposure in under-resourced neighborhoods may help reduce disparities in human exposure levels.