'Forever chemicals' lurk in Midwest soil and drinking water, can lead to health problems

Editor's note: As legislators across the region look to impose new standards on PFAS (also known as "forever chemicals") and as the U.S. EPA looks to expand rules governing PFAS pollution in drinking water supplies, the USA Today Network's Midwest community papers will explore the impact these changes and years of pollution have had on Midwestern states, cities and towns.

From the far north in Minnesota to the river bottoms of Southern Indiana, a class of potentially deadly and difficult-to-remove pollutants lurk beneath Midwestern soil and in the region’s drinking water supply, a byproduct of manufacturing and decades of chemical production, among other sources.

Who's at risk:Nearly half of nation's tap water contains PFAS, a new study finds. Americans living in urban areas are most at risk.

The pollutants belong to a class of compounds known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS. The so-called “forever chemicals” − a name attributed to PFAS' centuries-long half-life − are ubiquitous: In addition to drinking water, they are found in everything from non-stick cookware to carpeting, to children’s toys and water-resistant fabrics. 

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, long-term human exposure to certain PFAS compounds, even in low doses, can cause cancers, disrupt the functioning of the liver, lower immune response to vaccines and complicate pregnancies. Exposure to high levels of PFAS could cause infants to be born underweight and with birth defects, the EPA said.

So, it's imperative that drinking water supply for every town and city be evaluated for the presence of these toxic chemicals, said Abinash Agrawal, a groundwater remediation expert and professor of earth and environmental sciences at Wright State University in Ohio.

While the compounds offer immense utility, regulators increasingly view them with concern: PFAS leaks, creeps and winds its way into ecosystems, groundwater, and drinking water.

“Because of (PFAS) use in the '40s and onward, what we have learned is that these compounds do not naturally break down in the environment, the ones that are being used,” Eric Medlock, of the Missouri Department of Natural Resources, said.

The upshot is that across the Midwest, states, cities and towns are grappling with how best to address the growing problem even as chemical industry giants pay billions to settle claims that PFAS pollution inflicts real-world harm.

Some state legislative solutions, such as Indiana’s House Bill 1399, have drawn criticism from environmental activists for what they described as an attempt to regulate PFAS pollution while still affording the industry certain protections.

“Even though we’re putting regulations in place, there’s nothing in place yet to keep (PFAS) from being used,” Medlock said. “So that’s where these companies have gone from using the ‘legacy’ PFAS compounds ... to chemicals that may still have some of the same chemical properties.”

What are PFAS, or 'forever chemicals?'

In 2023, the U.S. Geological Survey estimated that 45% of America’s tap water contained one or more of the 32 specific PFAS compounds it tested for, including in Kansas, Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota and Ohio. Researchers believe up to 98% of Americans have PFAS coursing through their blood.

The compound that started it all is as famous as it is controversial. In the 1940s, DuPont unveiled a revolutionary new product called Teflon, which a researcher had accidentally discovered while attempting to manufacture a new kind of refrigerant in the late 1930s.

Teflon quickly found use in manufacturing processes, where its water, heat and oil-repellant properties proved immensely useful. In the ensuing decades, Teflon redefined the home cooking experience by introducing non-stick pans to the masses. This was the era of “better living through chemistry,” when science promised to make daily life easier in a booming, post-war America.

The wonder chemical responsible for Teflon’s great utility is known as PFOA, one of the first compounds of its type. Tightly bonded carbon and fluorine atoms give PFOA toughness, hinting at its water- and oil-resistant properties. These chemical bonds also prevent natural processes from breaking PFOA down, hence the name: “Forever chemicals.”

Similar compounds soon emerged, such as 3M’s PFOS, the magic behind the stain remover Scotchguard.

In the 2000s, a series of lawsuits uncovered rampant PFOA and PFOS pollution in West Virginia and other states, and linked PFAS exposure to serious health conditions. Documents obtained during the civil suits showed chemical giants DuPont and 3M knew of PFAS-related harms to health but hid that information from regulators and the public for decades.

Per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances are found in thousands of products most Americans use or come into contact with daily, from water-resistant clothing, children’s toys and food packaging (such as pizza boxes and microwave popcorn bags).

Fire-retardant foam, which contained PFAS compounds for decades, often found use at military bases and airstrips, causing costly pollution to nearby water sources. The U.S. Department of Defense was slow to address the problem. Chemical companies, including 3M and DuPont, claim PFAS compounds are safe when properly managed.

How can PFAS or 'forever chemicals' affect your health?

The thousands of similar carbon fluorine compounds that together constitute PFAS can take centuries to break down in the environment, where the chemicals easily move through soil and water, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. PFAS then accumulates the biomass in fish, wildlife, ecosystems and humans.

Researchers have linked exposure to some PFAS compounds to serious health conditions. Two of the primary compounds of concern, PFOA and PFOS, pose a host of potential risks, particularly to children and pregnant women, the CDC found.

• Increased cholesterol levels
• Changes in liver enzymes
• Pregnancy-induced hypertension and preeclampsia
• Lower antibody response to some vaccines
• Decreases in birth weight

Given the health risks, the quality of drinking water supply should be evaluated for the presence of highly toxic PFAS family of six toxic chemicals, Agrawal said.

Those toxins include Perfluorobutane sulfonic acid (PFBS), Perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (PFHxS), Perfluoro nonanoic acid (PFNA) and Hexafluoro propylene oxide dimer acid (GenX), in addition to Perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS), Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA),

"Mixtures of PFAS chemicals can pose a greater health risk than individuals," Agrawal said. "(Therefore), measuring all six PFAS can help account for increased risks from mixtures of PFAS chemical that are found together and have similar health effects."

PFOA is also linked to cases of kidney and testicular cancer, according to federal researchers. The EPA has determined that exposure to "certain levels of PFAS" could cause fertility issues and high blood pressure among women; impact childhood development; interfere with the body's natural hormones and increase risks associated with obesity.

The EPA has identified some of the most common activities and occupations that could be associated with PFAS exposure. These include jobs such as firefighting, chemical manufacturing (and processing, consuming PFAS-contaminated drinking water and food items such as fish).

But scientists are still working to understand precisely how PFAS compounds interact with human bodies, particularly when exposure to PFAS is chronic. In 2018, Elsie Sunderland of Harvard's School of Public Health, said the chemical industry's practice of manufacturing ever-increasing numbers of new PFAS compounds − even as they phase out old ones − has researchers scrambling to assess new chemicals for safety.

"People call it chemical whack-a-mole," Sunderland told ProPublica, referring to a practice whereby manufacturers pull the most harmful chemicals from the market only to replace them with similar, potentially harmful substitutes.

And information showing that PFAS threatened human health was not always presented to the public with transparency. During the course of lawsuits against chemical companies in the 2000s and 2010s, internal documents obtained during discovery showed 3M and DuPont researchers knew PFAS was linked to cancer cases and other health disorders, though executives fought to keep those findings hidden from the public and regulators − including the EPA.

Accusations that officials had sought to downplay PFAS-related harm flared in 2018 when leaked emails obtained by Politico showed that then-EPA Director Scott Pruitt and then-President Donald Trump's administration feared a new study could be a "public relations nightmare."

According to the emails, a Health and Human Services study found that PFOA and PFOS posed a danger to human health at levels below what the EPA had previously deemed safe.

How common is PFAS pollution in the Midwest?

In August, the West Terre Haute, Indiana, city water utility detected PFOS in two wells, notching a level of 6.2 parts per trillion: That’s higher than the proposed limit of 4 ppt, which regulators say is the maximum acceptable level for PFOA in drinking water.

Even at 6.2 ppt, PFOS poses a significant health risk to the public. The agency is set to decide in the coming weeks whether the limits should regulate PFAS contamination in water systems across the United States – a move that could increase expenses on rural water utilities.

A part per trillion is equivalent to a pinch of salt in 10 tons of potato chips or a grain of sand in an Olympic-size swimming pool.

In South Elgin, Illinois, August tests showed PFOA was present in well water at a level of 5 ppt, just above the proposed limit of 4 ppt for that compound.

That’s according to new EPA data collected under the Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR). Between 2023 and 2025, water districts across the county will test for PFAS and other chemicals to bolster the EPA data program, which aims to inform regulators and policymakers about potential solutions. 

A review of UCMR 5 data and data compiled by state environmental agencies in February shows more than a dozen cities across the Midwest could be facing exposure to relatively high levels of PFAS, though the datasets are not comprehensive and do not reflect water sources that have yet to undergo testing.

By combining multiple publicly available data sources documenting PFAS contamination levels in water systems across the Midwest − in Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Arkansas, Minnesota and Kentucky − the USA Today Network found the health risk of PFAS in drinking water may be widespread.

But the extent of PFAS proliferation across the United States points to the compounds’ unique characteristics. Namely, that they are very small and extremely strong.

“They're easily dissolved, they’re soluble in water; they move around very, very easily,” said Paul Doss, a University of Southern Indiana geology professor studying underground water systems. “It almost makes sense that we’re finding them in low concentrations everywhere because there are sources of them everywhere. And they move really easily.”

But just testing for PFAS at such incredibly small scales is no easy task, said analytical chemist and USI Professor Mark D. Krahling.

“It is very challenging to try and analyze for (PFAS) at the level they appear,” Krahling explained. “They’re in (a) very, very low concentration, and you need some pretty specialized equipment to even detect them.”

“I’ve got students that are trying to do this right now, and they’re struggling,” Krahling added. Because PFAS compounds are in everything from makeup to clothing items, strict hygiene standards and high-tech testing apparatus are required to not only detect the presence of PFAS in water but also to identify specific compounds and levels of contamination. 

The Environmental Working Group, an advocacy organization founded in 1993 to combat pollution-related harm, filed Freedom of Information Act requests and compiled existing public data to create an interactive map tracking PFAS pollution across the country.

The groups' findings showed clusters of PFAS-contaminated wells around U.S. military installations, in East and West Coast metros and across rural America. The EWG produced an interactive map that allows citizens to better understand water contamination in their region.

States and local governments are increasingly collecting their own PFAS samples, but the cost and difficulty of doing so have raised questions about who should foot the bill for cleanups, with water utilities arguing customers could wind up paying to solve problems created by chemical industry pollutants. 

Independent labs offer high-quality testing services to governments and citizens with private wells.

That issue is front and center for industry groups anticipating new EPA guidance, which the agency could issue as soon as this month, which would limit PFOA and PFOS levels in water to 4 parts per trillion. If a water utility's testing reveals concentrations above that level, officials would have to take steps to address the issue.

And, cities are already beginning to tackle the PFAS problem across the Midwest, albeit at a deliberative pace. Dozens of city water utilities are now using, or planning to acquire, reverse-osmosis water treatment filters and other purification tools such as carbon filters.

But even these potential solutions create a cascade of complications, according to experts and industry stakeholders. Should a water utility that played no role in PFAS pollution pay millions to install new purification systems? Multi-billion dollar settlements from chemical companies and a swathe of federal programs and grants could help ease potential financial strain stemming from the proposed rules.

What to expect in six Midwestern states at center of USA Today Network reporting

Wilken, who leads water testing programs for the Missouri Department of Environment Management, said the state had conducted detailed tests in recent years and would soon use a newly constructed board to evaluate potential health impacts for communities exposed to PFAS pollution. 

Indiana and other states have conducted testing of their own. This data will help researchers, regulators and the public to better understand the problem at the local level.

But data is only part of the story. Increased liability for rural water utilities, to private wells incurring PFAS pollution, to mothers seeking to minimize exposure for their little ones, nearly everyone is impacted in one way or another.

The stakes are high, so, there's an urgency for water supply systems to adapt to the changing PFAS drinking water guidelines and enhance the assessment the water quality in public interest, Agrawal said.

"The local officials should take steps so that the level of PFAS in drinking water meets the proposed EPA guidelines and it is safe, he said. 

Over the coming months, the USA Today Network's Midwest community papers will tell some of these stories, covering how PFAS pollution has impacted local communities.

When asked whether new EPA decisions or legislation have given him hope, Krahlink said he saw the measures as a double-edged sword.

"We have a long history of ignoring things until they become kind of this acute problem," said Krahling, the University of Southern Indiana analytical chemist. "Then we do the study, and it's like, 'Oh my gosh, this is kind of bad news.' And then we finally put in practices that deal with the problem."

Houston can be contacted at houston.harwood@courierpress.com