Credit: (Jacek Dylag/Unsplash)

The number of Paulsboro residents who have participated so far in a test for “forever chemicals” in their blood is less than half of what researchers hope for, according to new data. 

Only 594 people have come forward in the last year to undergo blood and urine tests for the presence of about seven PFAS chemicals including PFNA, which was found at very high levels in one public drinking-water well in Paulsboro in 2009 and 2013. 

A total of 549 adults and 45 children have been tested. The goal for researchers is 1,000 adults and 300 children for each of eight study sites around the United States in the investigation headed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention into how the chemicals are affecting the health of people exposed to them in their drinking water. 

Although Paulsboro, a Gloucester County town of about 6,000 people, is a relatively small community, it has the highest proportion of its population who have participated among the eight sites and has the third-largest number of participants. 

Dr. Rob Laumbach, a Rutgers University professor who is leading the Paulsboro study, said the number of participants so far exceeds his expectations even though it is still far short of the target. The project first planned to stop taking participants in May but will now stay open at least through the summer as long as people are still coming forward, the project announced at a meeting Thursday to update the public on its progress. 

Laumbach attributed the relatively low turnout to people’s “busy lives” as well as the need for an office visit to take blood and urine samples, and an hour-long phone call during which researchers fill out a questionnaire about a participant’s health. 

Asked in an interview with NJ Spotlight News whether he was disappointed by the small number of child participants so far, Laumbach said the number was in line with expectations given that “many people are afraid of needles, especially children,” and that children must also take a neuro-behavioral assessment to see if their development has been affected by the chemicals. 

Who can help 

The study is seeking people ages 18 or older who lived in Paulsboro at any time from January 2005 to April 2014, and children between the ages of 6 and 17 who lived in the town at any time from conception to April 2014. Participants are given individual test results that they can share with their doctors, as well as gift cards of up to $75. 

In the latest tests, about 400 volunteers agreed to give an extra vial of blood so that researchers can test for so-called replacement compounds — PFAS alternatives that some manufacturers have recently started using in response to increased regulation of the original chemicals, but which advocates say may be just as toxic. 

PFNA and other kinds of PFAS are widespread in people’s blood and the natural environment because of their pervasive use in consumer products such as nonstick cookware and flame-resistant fabrics since the 1940s. Even though some kinds of the chemicals are no longer made or used in the U.S., they are still present in some drinking water sources because they do not break down in nature, and so have become known as forever chemicals. 

‘Virtually everyone has these compounds in their blood. There are some health outcomes that we have evidence for but there is also a lot of debate about exactly how much health risk there is from exposure to these PFAS chemicals.’ — Dr. Rob Laumbach, Rutgers University 

They are linked to serious illnesses including some cancers, ulcerative colitis, impaired response to vaccines in children and high cholesterol. Their threat to public health was underlined on March 14 when the Environmental Protection Agency proposed the first national regulation of six commonly found PFAS chemicals. Two of those chemicals — PFOA and PFOS — will be required at no more than four parts per trillion (ppt) in public drinking water, lower than any state limit, including that in New Jersey. The EPA also proposed an enforceable health limit for PFNA in combination with three other related chemicals. 

New Jersey, which has higher rates of PFAS contamination than many other states, now requires health limits on PFNA, PFOA and PFOS in drinking water at some of the strictest levels in the country. But those levels would be overridden by the even tougher federal limits, which are expected to be finalized by the end of 2023. 

Why Paulsboro? 

In Paulsboro, PFNA was first found in a public water well in 2009 at 96 ppt, more than seven times higher than the 13 ppt limit that was later set by New Jersey. In 2013, the chemical was found to be even higher in that well, at up to 150 ppt, prompting the well’s temporary closure and a state health warning that children under 1 year old should not be given tap water to drink. The well was reopened in 2016 after new filters removed the PFNA. 

Since the filters were installed, the level of PFNA in people’s blood fell, according to an earlier Rutgers study conducted between 2017 and 2020. 

Paulsboro was chosen as the only New Jersey site in the national study because of its previously high level of PFNA in public water, Laumbach said in a presentation to Thursday’s meeting. Although the chemical, unlike some other kinds of PFAS, is not used in consumer products, it is still used in plastics manufacturing, and has been found in the blood of 98% of Americans, he said. In an earlier legal settlement, blood tests on 1,300 Paulsboro residents found they had PFNA and PFOA at much higher rates than the national average. 

Researchers have blamed the town’s high PFNA level on Solvay Specialty Polymers, a chemical company based in nearby West Deptford, which voluntarily stopped using the chemical in 2010. 

The new data is expected to be a significant contribution to public health, Laumbach said. 

“It’s very important, given the fact that so many people are exposed to PFAS,” he said. “Virtually everyone has these compounds in their blood. There are some health outcomes that we have evidence for but there is also a lot of debate about exactly how much health risk there is from exposure to these PFAS chemicals. 

“So this study will help us find answers that can help us more clearly understand the health effects at what levels of exposure so we can better regulate these compounds and protect people’s health.”