Search

EnvironHealthPerspect.129(4):045002(2021). https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP8572 The correspondence address provided for the corresponding author was not accurate. This address has been modified to reflect the correct address, which is provided below. Correspondence address: Mathematica, [...]

Background: Wastewater testing offers a cost-effective strategy for measuring population disease prevalence and health behaviors. For COVID-19, wastewater surveillance addresses testing gaps and provides an early warning for outbreaks. As U.S. federal agencies build a National Wastewater Surveillance System around the pandemic, thinking through ways to develop flexible frameworks for wastewater sampling, testing, and reporting can avoid unnecessary system overhauls for future infectious disease, chronic disease, and drug epidemics. Objectives: We discuss ways to transform a historically academic exercise into a tool for epidemic response. We generalize lessons learned by a global network of wastewater researchers around validation and implementation for COVID-19 and opioids while also drawing on our experience with wastewater-based epidemiology in the United States. Discussion: Sustainable wastewater surveillance requires coordination between health and safety officials, utilities, labs, and researchers. Adapting sampling frequency, type, and location to threat level, community vulnerability, biomarker properties, and decisions that wastewater data will inform can increase the practical value of the data. Marketplace instabilities, coupled with a fragmented testing landscape due to specialization, may require officials to engage multiple labs to test for known and unknown threats. Government funding can stabilize the market, balancing commercial pressures with public good, and incentivize data sharing. When reporting results, standardizing metrics and contextualizing wastewater data with health resource data can provide insights into a community's vulnerability and identify strategies to prevent health care systems from being overwhelmed. If wastewater data will inform policy decisions for an entire community, comparing characteristics of the wastewater treatment plant's service population to those of the larger community can help determine whether the wastewater data are generalizable. Ethical protocols may be needed to protect privacy and avoid stigmatization. With data-driven approaches to sample collection, analysis, and interpretation, officials can use wastewater surveillance for adaptive resource allocation, pandemic management, and program evaluation. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP8572, Introduction In the United States, the COVID-19 pandemic has been exacerbated by an inability to track infections in a timely and comprehensive manner (Parodi and Liu 2020). Traditional testing has [...]

Background: Between 2013 and 2015, concentrations of poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in public drinking water supplies serving at least six million individuals exceeded the level set forth in the health advisory established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Other than data reported for contaminated sites, no systematic or prospective data exist on the relative source contribution (RSC) of drinking water to human PFAS exposures. Objectives: This study estimates the RSC of tap water to overall PFAS exposure among members of the general U.S. population. Methods: We measured concentrations of 15 PFAS in home tap water samples collected in 1989-1990 from 225 participants in a nationwide prospective cohort of U.S. women: the Nurses' Health Study (NHS). We used a one-compartment toxicokinetic model to estimate plasma concentrations corresponding to tap water intake of PFAS. We compared modeled results with measured plasma PFAS concentrations among a subset of 110 NHS participants. Results: Tap water perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA) were statistically significant predictors of plasma concentrations among individuals who consumed [greater than or equal to] 8 cups of tap water per day. Modeled median contributions of tap water to measured plasma concentrations were: PFOA 12% (95% probability interval 11%--14%), PFNA 13% (8.7%-21%), linear perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (nPFOS) 2.2% (2.0%-2.5%), branched perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (brPFOS) 3.0% (2.5%-3.2%), and perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS) 34% (29%- 39%). In five locations, comparisons of PFASs in community tap water collected in the period 2013-2016 with samples from 1989-1990 indicated increases in quantifiable PFAS and extractable organic fluorine (a proxy for unquantified PFAS). Conclusions: Our results for 1989-1990 compare well with the default RSC of 20% used in risk assessments for legacy PFAS by many agencies. Future evaluation of drinking water exposures should incorporate emerging PFAS. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP4093, Introduction Poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a broad class of fluorinated aliphatic compounds that are widely used by industry and for commercial applications and have been detected in the [...]