There are also huge benefits to supporting new farmers. Aside from bolstering our food supply, new and young farmers tend to bring unique new perspectives to the field, including a dedication to sustainable farming methods. According to the National Young Farmers Coalition’s (NYFC’s) 2022 National Young Farmer Survey, 86 percent of young farmers practice regenerative farming—growing in harmony with nature—while 97 percent use other sustainable practices.

However, for young people interested in a career in agriculture, there can be many roadblocks in their path. The price of land continues to rise, grants and educational opportunities can be hard to come by and there’s a steep learning curve for folks who didn’t grow up in a farming family. 

With these stories, we spoke to young farmers directly about how they see farming as a viable future and what they need to succeed.

What Are the Big Issues for Young Farmers? We Asked Them

By Emily Baron Cadloff

Modern Farmer sat down with the co-founder of Young Agrarians, a farmer-to-farmer resource for young people, to find out what might hamper young folks looking to enter the agriculture industry.

Where to Get Started: A Guide For Young Farmers

By Emily Baron Cadloff

If you’re a young person looking to start a career in farming, check out these organizations.

Meet the Farmer Training Indigenous Youth and Revitalizing a Culture of Food Sovereignty

By Jennifer Cole

An Indigenous-led training hub, Tea Creek, in northern B.C. may be an answer to Canada’s looming farmer shortage.

Young Farmers Dig Into Land

By Claire Duncomb 

These new farmers get by with a little help from their friends—a co-housing community, a food co-op, and lots of trail and error.

Young People Need to Find Farming. 4-H is the Answer.

By Sara Bailey

The average age of farmers in the US is close to 60, and young farmers have trouble finding a way into the field. Programs like 4-H are the best option.

Coming soon….

Five Young Farmers Cultivating Change

From the Modern Farmer Community

We asked our community to share their favorite young farmers and we’ve profiled a few of these inspiring individuals.

The post The Future is Farmers appeared first on Modern Farmer.

In previous coverage, we’ve told you about PFAS—per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances that don’t readily break down and can accumulate in humans, causing serious health problems.

We’ve also told you about how the EPA recently passed its first-ever regulations on a handful of PFAS in drinking water, and how these rules leave a lot to be desired.

And then we told you about some of the ways you can reduce your own personal exposure to these chemicals while you wait for the slow wheels of government to turn. And if you read that article, you know that making shrewd decisions while you shop can help reduce the amount of PFAS with which you come into contact. 

“I think the best thing that people can do is be educated consumers,” says Kyla Bennett, science policy director for Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).

Many items in the retail sphere won’t have information about PFAS use because it’s not required. To make matters more complicated, a PFAS-free label doesn’t necessarily give you all the information you need. Potential PFAS-free greenwashing may or may not be intentional, but regardless, that label might need closer inspection. We consulted some experts to help you understand how to find PFAS-free items in the marketplace.

Start with a trustworthy list

Verifying if something is PFAS-free can be tough, so don’t reinvent the wheel if you don’t have to. Here is a trustworthy list of brands and products that you can buy knowing they are PFAS-free, as well as a comprehensive buying guide.

This list from PFAS Central is a good source for outdoor gear, apparel, kitchenware and more. Food & Water Watch recently released a thorough buying guide to help you side-step PFAS in everything from paint to menstrual products to furniture.

Know the laws where you live

More than a dozen states have passed some kind of legislation restricting the use of PFAS in consumer products such as foods, packaging, apparel and carpeting. We do not yet have the ability to test for all of the thousands of PFAS, so one way to screen for PFAS is by testing for the total amount of fluorine in a product. This test can serve as a good indicator of whether there is PFAS in a product, although it’s not yet clear exactly what level of PFAS is present from directly adding PFAS versus unintentional PFAS contamination.

“It’s an imperfect method, but it’s one of the better methods that are out there, especially when you couple it with more in-depth testing,” says Mike Schade, director of the Mind the Store Program for Toxic-Free Future. 

Washington State has been a leader on this front, and Schade points to the state’s Safer Products for Washington Act, which gives the state regulatory authority to ban chemicals that are hazardous.

“Raise your voice for policy change,” says Schade. “We know that the federal government is slow at making change around chemicals like PFAS. There’s been a lot more progress at the state level.”

You can use this bill tracker from Safer States to find out what states have either introduced or enacted legislation to ban PFAS in different product categories. 

Ask the right questions

When you have the time and opportunity to ask a company about its products, asking the right questions is key. Inquiring whether something is PFAS-free might not cut it.

Here are three key questions you can ask:

Does this product use nonstick or waterproof properties?

PFAS specifically are used for their waterproof and nonstick qualities, so those are good flags.

“Every time I’m going to buy something, like if I’m buying a kitchen appliance, I call and I say is there nonstick on there? Because if it is, I’m not going to buy it,” says Bennett.

Raincoats can contain PFAS because they are waterproof. (Photo by Shutterstock)

Does this product use fluorinated chemistry?

This is a good catch-all question, because while we do not yet have the ability to test for all PFAS, if there is fluorinated chemistry in a product, this is a reliable indicator that there will be PFAS in the product.

Sometimes, companies will call out a certain PFAS by name. The specificity is helpful, but at the same time, it’s important to understand what this means. Just because the product doesn’t contain one specific PFAS doesn’t mean that it doesn’t contain another that is just as dangerous.

“[Companies] say oh, we have no PFOA,” says Bennett. “That means they have no PFOA, but they could have 11,999 other PFAS in them. So, they really have to ask the right questions like ‘Is there any fluorinated chemistry at all in your product?’ And that kind of covers the whole thing.”

What alternatives to PFAS do you use?

“PFAS-free is good, but it’s not enough,” says Schade. “And if I’m a consumer, what I would do is I would ask companies ‘How are you ensuring the alternative that you’re now using is safer? What are you doing to evaluate the safety of alternatives?’ Getting into the nuances of 100 parts per million versus 50 parts per million, I think that’s too challenging of an area for most consumers to navigate, quite honestly. But I think asking questions about how are you vetting the safety of alternatives, I think that is a more productive and useful question to ask, because most companies are not thinking about it.”

Beware suspect alternatives

In manufacturing, it’s possible to substitute one well-known PFAS for an alternative that is simply another, less common PFAS. Known as “regrettable substitutions,” these swaps can be just as harmful to your health.

But you also want to be sure that PFAS aren’t being changed out for another type of chemical that is just as bad. Schade recommends looking for certifications or policies that are specific about what types of alternatives are allowed. 

“Most laws that are out there and most company policies that restrict PFAS don’t do a good enough job ensuring that companies are utilizing truly safer alternatives,” says Schade. 

Schade points to GreenScreen Certified as an example of a third-party standard that not only restricts PFAS but also restricts other chemicals of concern—not all third-party standards will cast this wide of a net.

Want more choices? Schade also recommends EPA Safer Choice and Cradle to Cradle.

Start conversations with retailers

Businesses and retailers can be huge forces for change, says Schade. “Another thing that consumers can do is reach out to the retailer’s businesses that you support, that you shop at and ask them whether or not they’re taking action on PFAS.”

Campaigning has compelled major retailers including Whole Foods, REI and Dick’s Sporting Goods to take some action on PFAS. According to Schade, it really does have the potential to start a conversation within the company.

Visit Retailerreportcard.com to learn which companies are leading and which are lagging when it comes to addressing PFAS. You can even use this site to contact the companies at the back of the pack and ask them to prioritize safer chemicals.

Kyla Bennett is the science policy director at PEER, and she wants to answer your questions about PFAS. Submit your question to contact@modfarmer.com

The post PFAS: Behind the Label appeared first on Modern Farmer.

Last month, the EPA passed its first-ever legally enforceable drinking water standards on a handful of PFAS—a group of chemicals used to make non-stick coatings and products that resist heat, oil, water and more. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances are toxic chemicals and are often referred to as “forever chemicals” because of their tendency to not break down.

The regulations state that all public water systems have three years to complete testing for these chemicals and must implement solutions to reduce PFAS in five years. Under the new laws, the public must be informed of the level of PFAS measured in their drinking water.

In a lot of ways, the EPA decision is a ground-breaking move. PFAS have been used commercially since the 1940s, and it has long been known that these chemicals are toxic to people. Big chemical companies, such as  3M, have known about the harmful qualities of these toxic chemicals for decades but intentionally hid the evidence. 

The scary thing about PFAS is they are simultaneously very close to home and unsafe. They’re used in everyday household products such as raingear, nonstick pans and mascara and the EPA admits that “exposure to PFAS has been linked to deadly cancers, impacts to the liver and heart, and immune and developmental damage to infants and children.”

Despite the known risks, there’s a reason it has taken so long to get even one rule passed at the federal level to regulate these chemicals in drinking water. Extensive lobbying efforts by chemical companies have helped keep restraints off these substances. You can read our coverage of this lobbying here.

So what does this mean for you? 

Here are five essential takeaways for you to know about the new drinking water regulations, along with expert insights from Kyla Bennett, science policy director for Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). 

These laws apply to only six PFAS

Of the at least 12,000 existing PFAS, the EPA issued regulations for only six of them. This new regulation dips a toe into the water of regulating them. It sets maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) in drinking water for two of the oldest and most pervasive PFAS, called PFOA and PFOS, of four parts per trillion. The EPA has said that there is no safe level of exposure for PFOA and PFOS. 

“It’s a good first step. I think it’s too little too late given that it’s only for six PFAS and there are 12,000 to 14,000 of them,” says Bennett.“It alleviates the stress a little bit, but not a whole lot…Nobody should relax.”

Food & Water Watch recently released a thorough buying guide to help you side-step PFAS in everything from paint to menstrual products to furniture.

This is only for public drinking water systems

Public water systems have to complete initial water monitoring within three years, and if the levels are too high, take steps to reduce them within five years. For example, this could mean shutting down a contaminated water source or installing a filtration system. Data about public drinking water systems is available online. Private wells, common in rural or farm areas, won’t automatically be tested for PFAS. 

“[This regulation] does not apply to private wells,” says Bennett. “And I know a lot of farmers do have private wells. However, there is money available for private well owners if they are contaminated, to get a filter put in or to get it fixed. So, that’s good news for private well owners.”

Installing a filter at your kitchen sink can help reduce your exposure if there is PFAS in your water. Bennett recommends looking on The National Sanitation Foundation website for filters that will reliably reduce total PFAS in your water.

Private wells will not automatically be tested for PFAS. (Photo by Shutterstock)

The burden is on municipal drinking water systems, not directly on polluters

The drinking water regulation puts the burden of fixing high contaminant loads on public drinking water systems and municipalities, not the polluters themselves. This also means that, under this law, there is no direct lever for polluting companies to change their practices.

However, this regulation could start a domino effect—municipalities that don’t want to be on the hook for installing very costly filtration systems might begin putting more pressure on polluting companies in their jurisdictions.

“States are going to want to help the municipalities within their states, and they are going to then start putting in PFAS limits in the effluent, which will help reduce the amount of PFAS going into the public drinking water,” says Bennett.

Is there PFAS pollution in your area? Consult the Environmental Working Group’s interactive map.

A still image of the Environmental Working Group’s Interactive PFAS pollution map. The light blue dots show where drinking water PFAS levels are known to be above the new limits, and the dark blue dots show where it is known to be below the new limits. (Image courtesy of the Environmental Working Group)

The EPA should regulate PFAS as a class, not individually

There are at least 12,000 known PFAS, and we can only currently test for about 70 of them. Bennett says that the EPA should define PFAS broadly, and then regulate them as a class, instead of doing more of this “whack-a-mole regulation,” where they only deal with a handful at a time. And then, she says, we should ban all non-essential uses, such as cosmetics.

It’s important to regulate PFAS broadly, says Bennett, because addressing only a handful of PFAS does nothing to protect people from what are called “regrettable substitutions”—where companies using PFAS just swap restricted ones for other PFAS that remain unregulated (remember, there are hundreds of these chemicals out there). 

While the federal government moves slowly, individual states have made more moves restricting PFAS. You can use this bill tracker to find out what states have either introduced or enacted legislation to ban PFAS in different product categories.

You still need to protect yourself from PFAS

The EPA’s working assumption right now is that 20 percent of your PFOA and PFOS exposure comes from drinking water. Even if all “forever chemicals” were eliminated from your water, it’s still critical to eliminate other sources of exposure. While PFAS is a large, systemic problem, and solving it should not be on the individual’s shoulders, taking action now can help protect you while we wait for legislation to hopefully catch up. 

“It shouldn’t be this way,” says Bennett. “But right now, because the states and the federal government are acting so slowly, we have to take it upon ourselves to reduce our risk as best we can. So, education can go a long way in getting people to realize what they should and should not be buying, what they should and should not be using, what they should and should not be eating…It sucks that the government isn’t taking care of us. But people assume that if something’s legal, it’s safe. And that’s simply not true.”

Kyla Bennett is the science policy director at PEER, and she wants to answer your questions about PFAS. Submit your question to contact@modfarmer.com

The post The EPA Just Passed the First-Ever Federal Regulations for ‘Forever Chemicals’ in Drinking Water. Here are the Top Five Things You Need to Know. appeared first on Modern Farmer.

“Haw River watershed is beautiful,” says Emily Sutton, Haw Riverkeeper for the Haw River Assembly. “It’s really rocky. There’s some high bluffs and fun rapids to paddle and lots of hikes—it’s [a] very accessible river.”

The river is undeniably beautiful. But per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, commonly abbreviated as PFAS, are not visible to the naked eye. PFAS are chemicals that have been linked to debilitating health effects in high concentrations, and they are now so widespread that they are found in the blood of 97 percent of Americans.

This year, the EPA issued a proposed rule that public drinking water systems should not have more than four parts per trillion of two PFAS compounds, PFOS and PFOA. Back in 2019, Sutton and the Haw River Assembly detected 30,000 parts per trillion of total PFAS coming into the Haw from the city of Burlington—7,500 times the maximum concentration in the proposed new guidelines. For communities downstream that get their drinking water from the Haw, such as the town of Pittsboro, this invisible danger was a direct threat. The drinking water technically met all state quality standards, but only because there weren’t any for PFAS. The Haw River Assembly, the Southern Environmental Law Center and community members sprang into action.

A global pollution problem, communities such as those along the Haw River are having to deal with the reality of PFAS. While some states, such as Maine and New York, have passed laws beginning to regulate PFAS, federal oversight remains very light on these chemicals. Meanwhile, a new report from Food & Water Watch digs into why exactly these substances remain largely unregulated.

The Haw River. (Photography by Emily Sutton)

What are PFAS and when did they become a problem?

PFAS are chemicals that have been used commercially since the 1940s. They all contain a bond between the chemical elements carbon and fluorine, the strength of which keeps them from breaking down, giving them the nickname “forever chemicals.” Because these chemicals are so hardy, they bioaccumulate, meaning they grow in concentration over time. They are so widespread that they are found around the world. They are in Teflon pans, rain gear and mascara. They are in firefighting foam, electronics and hand sanitizer. They are in our blood.

The term PFAS refers to a class of chemicals that includes thousands of substances—as many as 14,000 or 15,000. “Part of the problem is that we can only test for about 70 of these 14,000,” said Kyla Bennett, director of Science Policy at Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), in a recent Food & Water Watch webinar. “So, we don’t even know the chemical formulas of the vast number of these PFAS that are out there.”

PFAS are not naturally occurring—they have historically been made by a few key corporations, such as DuPont and 3M. 

The industry has known of the chemicals’ toxicity since very early in their use, said Natalie Balbuena, researcher for Food & Water Watch, in the webinar. The public didn’t know about PFAS until 1999, when a case was brought to the courts arguing that a farmer who lived near a DuPont plant noticed his cattle were dying.

“From there, all the information came out, and people started to really pay attention,” said Balbuena. Since then, high-profile cases have been brought against PFAS manufacturers, including one that resulted in a $671-million settlement in 2017 on behalf of West Virginians near the DuPont Washington Works plant, who were experiencing a myriad of health problems, from birth defects to cancer.

When it comes to agriculture, the cattle farmer near the DuPont plant was not a PFAS anomaly. A report from FoodPrint says that agricultural land across the country could be compromised. PFAS from contaminated water and topically applied biosolids, or “sludge,” can result in PFAS uptake for both animal agriculture and produce. This means that PFAS is also a growing concern for the food system—both for consumers and for farmworkers who work on contaminated land.

“‘Biosolids’ is just a euphemism for human sewage sludge,” said Bennett. Once wastewater passes through a treatment plant, the substance left over has commonly been applied to agricultural fields as fertilizer. “Turns out, the biosolids or the sewage sludge has a ton of PFAS in it, and farmers all across the country have been applying the sewage sludge to their farms and their fields.”

The resulting contamination has shut down farms across the country. Fortunately, there are some mechanisms for farm recovery. Even so, PFAS remains a concern at every level of the food system, from agriculture to cooking in the kitchen.

The public has now known about PFAS for more than 20 years, but it’s taken until this year for the EPA to propose drinking water standards. In 2023, the EPA proposed regulated maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for a small handful of PFAS in public drinking water. This means public drinking water systems would be regularly tested for compliance. A decision on this proposed rule is expected soon.

“Is it enough?” said Bennett. “Absolutely not.”

In the Haw Rivershed

When Emily Sutton of the Haw River Assembly samples for PFAS in her watershed, she identifies potential sources of pollution on maps and how she can get to them without trespassing. 

“Oftentimes, that means we’re in boats paddling up the river to make sure that we can get as close to the pipe as possible,” says Sutton.

Wearing waders and gloves, Sutton will take sample jars over to the effluent pipe outfall and collect a sample directly from the source. She sends the samples to a lab and awaits the results.

In 2019, when the Haw River Assembly detected startlingly high levels of PFAS in an effluent pipe flowing into the Haw River, they immediately began alerting the public. The Haw River Assembly, along with the Southern Environmental Law Center, filed an intent to sue the city of Burlington. They also sent out mailers and calls to residents and held community meetings. They were able to negotiate a settlement with the city that targeted the industrial sources of PFAS, and got them to change their practices by phasing out PFAS elements or reducing their use.

“So, what used to be 30,000 parts per trillion coming from their wastewater effluent into the Haw is now consistently under 500,” says Sutton. “And it’s getting lower as that minimization plan is carried out.”

Haw Riverkeeper Emily Sutton samples water in the Haw Rivershed. (Photography by Liz McLaughlin)

Blocking legislation

Bennett said in the weinar that the EPA needs to define PFAS broadly, regulate them as a class and then ban all non-essential uses. 

“Unless you can define something, you can’t regulate it,” says Bennett. “We don’t need PFAS in our mascara. That’s a convenience, not a necessity.”

It’s not for lack of trying. In the new report for Food & Water Watch, Balbuena analyzes the attempts at regulation. Between 2021 and 2022, more than  70 bills that addressed PFAS were introduced to the US Congress. But the industry has so much influence, says Balbuena, that lobbying on behalf of PFAS has been very effective at keeping legislation at bay. Only four of the bills mentioning PFAS between 2019 and 2022 ever became law.

Lobbyists against PFAS regulation represent major PFAS manufacturers, oil and petroleum companies and the American Chemistry Council. For example, for eight current and historic major PFAS manufacturers between 2019 and 2022, lobbying reports totaling $55.7 million included content on PFAS and related bills, among other issues. 

These lobbyists target bills that would regulate PFAS, such as the PFAS Action Act, introduced in both 2019 and 2021. The report looked at eight PFAS manufacturers and noted that those companies employed 28 lobbyists to fight against the bill in 2019.

Additionally, Food & Water Watch found that in the US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works—the same committee that failed to pass the PFAS Action Act—PFAS manufacturers contributed funds to the campaigns of two-thirds of the committee members. Committee members also received financial support from oil and gas companies and from the American Chemistry Council, all of which have an interest in PFAS remaining unregulated.

“There’s a lot of things here that tell us just how much influence the industry has with its money,” says Balbuena.

PFAS work on the ground

Across the country, communities are becoming more aware of PFAS and taking steps to address contamination. Several states, including Vermont and Michigan, have sued PFAS manufacturers. Many states have also passed their own regulations, in lieu of federal standards. River and waterkeepers across the country, as well as other advocacy groups, keep an eye on local communities, staying vigilant.

As it flows downstream, the Haw River eventually joins the Cape Fear River and carries on until it empties into the Atlantic Ocean near the southern tip of the state. The Cape Fear River basin supplies drinking water for nearly one million people. 

The Cape Fear River in Wilmington, NC. (Photo: Shutterstock)

In 2017, Wilmington’s StarNews broke the story about contamination from a PFAS called GenX in the Cape Fear River from the company Chemours.

“That was kind of the beginning of all of our knowledge-seeking on what GenX is, number one, and what PFAS is and what it means to us,” says Dana Sargent, executive director at Cape Fear River Watch.

Sargent has been heavily involved in PFAS work. Since there are no official regulations for PFAS in public drinking water systems in North Carolina, CFRW and the Southern Environmental Law Center sued Chemours and the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality. This resulted in a consent order among the three entities. Under the consent order, Chemours has to find standards for the more than 250 types of PFAS coming from its plant. It’s a long and slow process, but, she says, the impact is hugely important.

The best-case scenario, says Sargent, is a world where we no longer produce PFAS. But the amount of money the chemical industry makes off of PFAS prevents meaningful steps toward alternatives.

“We need to find a better way,” says Sargent. “We need to do better science, to stop putting PFAS out into the environment, because we know once it’s out there, it doesn’t go away.”

Read the full report: You can read Food & Water Watch’s full report here.

The post Toxic PFAS are Everywhere, and Remain Largely Unregulated appeared first on Modern Farmer.

“When faced with that immensity of a problem, you’ve got to really focus on, ‘Well, what can I control?’” said Natalie Balbuena, researcher with Food & Water Watch, in a recent webinar. “There are a lot of key tools that I think begin with awareness.”

You can take steps to limit your PFAS exposure, even in your home. (Photography by Shutterstock)

Educate yourself and your community

Although it sounds simple, educating yourself about PFAS can lead to real change. Dana Sargent, executive director of Cape Fear River Watch, has been working with community members to test home wells for PFAS. These conversations can be devastating, she says, when people with sickness in their families find out that the water they’ve been drinking is contaminated. For a lot of people who learn about their exposure, the next step is telling other people they know.

“A lot of these folks that have come to know about this are sharing with their neighbors,” says Sargent. “And that is vitally important, because education is the first step towards policy change.”

Case in point: There have been a lot of restrictions on who qualifies to get their well water tested in North Carolina. Sargent has been pushing for a pullback on these restrictions, and as more community members learned about the issue, they began contacting the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) as well to voice their concerns. 

Just this December, NCDEQ announced that it is pulling back restrictions, allowing thousands more people to get their well water tested—a big win, says Sargent.

“Action does effect change,” says Sargent. “We’ve got to beat it with a frickin’ heavy hammer in this town and in this state, but it does work.”

The documentary The Devil We Know is one good place to start. It provides a thorough look into the history of PFAS and how it affects human communities. 

Utilize your buying power, if possible

There’s no doubt about it—being able to be selective about where you spend money is an economic privilege. Systemic factors like this make certain communities disproportionately impacted by PFAS contamination. This is a justice issue, because non-contaminated products should not be accessible only to the wealthy.

“This is definitely an environmental justice issue,” says Balbuena of Food & Water Watch, “primarily because it really connects to a lot of the historical injustices when it comes to placing low-income communities of color next to certain chemical-producing, plastic-producing [and] fracking sites and just having them exposed to all these toxins and then being left with not only paying for the development of those things but also a lot of health effects.”

For those who are financially able, the Center for Environmental Health provides a list of PFAS-free products including textiles, foodware and more. Another accessible list that includes cosmetics, baby products and furniture is available here.

Voicing priorities to companies is also effective, even if you can’t use your dollars in a certain way. It can change company behavior.

“There are companies starting to respond and you can start to get some PFAS-free products,” said Kyla Bennett, director of science policy for Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), in the Food & Water Watch webinar. Lowe’s took PFAS out of its indoor residential carpets. IKEA removed it from its processing. “I think those are some victories that we can take heart from.”

Limit plastics and other known dangers

Products containing PFAS won’t be labeled as such, and we do not yet have labeling requirements for products claiming to be free of PFAS. When it comes to products labeled PFAS-free, Bennett cautions that you have to be careful of greenwashing. Sometimes, one PFAS may be removed from a product just to be replaced with another. Look into the company’s verification process, if possible. 

Still, there are some things that you can assume contain PFAS. Bennett recommends avoiding #2 plastics as much as possible. This could be food containers, shampoo bottles and the like. Waterproof items, such as mascara and rain gear, can also be sources of exposure.

Another known danger is nonstick cookware. “Get rid of your Teflon pans,” says Sargent. “Obviously, if you get rid of it, you’re putting it into a landfill, it’s going to end up back in the system in some way. But like, don’t cook on that garbage.”

Know where your drinking water comes from

About 20 percent of exposure to PFAS comes through drinking water. One thing you can do, says Bennett, is look for certified filters to reduce PFAS loads in your home. Under the sink reverse osmosis is effective, but can be costly to the individual household. It also requires maintenance by the homeowner, which can make it difficult for renters.

“Reverse osmosis is very expensive,” says Emily Sutton, Haw Riverkeeper for the Haw River Assembly. “And that’s an environmental justice issue to say that only the wealthiest of us can have safe drinking water.” 

Knowing where your water comes from is important, says Sutton. Last year, in response to the PFAS contamination in the Haw River that was contaminating Pittsboro’s drinking water, the town installed a granular activated carbon filtration system. This effectively removes the majority of the PFAS from the town’s drinking water. 

The Haw Rivershed. (Photography by Emily Sutton)

Be vocal

The EPA recently withdrew its conditional consent for the chemical company Chemours to import waste containing PFAS to its North Carolina location, stating that the agency initially received inaccurate data from the company. Sargent believes the reversal is largely thanks to the fact that local residents have become such strong voices on this topic.

“We pushed back hard and they’re like, ‘We can’t do this to that community. They’re paying attention,’” says Sargent. “That’s huge.”

The post You’ve Already Been Exposed to Toxic PFAS. But You Can Take Steps to Minimize Future Exposure. appeared first on Modern Farmer.

Most consumers aren’t thinking about fraud in their food supply while pushing a cart around their local grocery story. But shady shenanigans, fakery, and outright fraud happen more than you might realize.

In this Modern Farmer feature series, we investigate the wide world of food fraud and fakery—and explore the technology poised to make supply chains more transparent.

It’s Time to Stop Underestimating the Scope of Food Fraud

by Karen Constable

Food fraud affects much more than consumers know, and not just in high-cost foods like honey and whiskey. It occurs in all parts of the food chain, including commodities such as grains and oils, animal feeds, fruit and bulk ingredients. [Read more]

Using a Food’s Unique Fingerprint to Detect Fraud

by Emily Baron Cadloff

Every food has a unique, and invisible, chemical “fingerprint.”A researcher from Purdue University has discovered a quick and portable way to identify that fingerprint and sniff out food fraud on the go. [Read more]

In the Shopping Cart

by Lena Beck

Here are some common examples of food frauds and fakes you could come into contact with at grocery stores around the world. [Read more]

When Labels Lie

by Lena Beck

Food labels are loaded with words and images that convey meaning. Knowing the story of your food means sifting through the true, the false and everything in between. [Read more]

Can You Trust the Organic Food Label?

by Emily Baron Cadloff

“Organic” food is specifically certified and verified, but millions of dollars worth of fraud still occurs within the organic system. [Read more]

What’s in a Name? Food Labels, Explained

by Lena Beck

Food labels can be difficult to understand and interpret, so we’ve created a glossary of some common ones that you’ll see at the grocery store. [Read more]

Can the Blockchain Clear the Smoke for Cannabis?

by Naoki Nitta

Cannabis often has a hazy supply chain, but blockchain technology promises seed-to-sale transparency for growers and consumers. [Read more]

Series edited and illustrated by Rose Garrett 

The post Phonies, Fakes and Food Fraud appeared first on Modern Farmer.

In this Modern Farmer feature series, we dig into how climate is impacting California’s producers through the lens of five of the state’s most iconic food products: dairy, citrus, salmon, wine grapes, and almonds.

‘An Insane Amount of Water’: What Climate Change Means For California’s Biggest Dairy District

by Naoki Nitta

Tulare County is the largest dairy producer in California and the U.S. But as climate change exposes the region’s vulnerability, could the industry collapse under its own weight?

There’s No Cure for Citrus Greening. California Growers Have No Choice but to Keep Going
by Emily Baron Cadloff

The bacteria is fatal to citrus trees, and has decimated citrus groves in Florida and Texas. Now, California growers are holding the line to keep producing the vital crops.

California’s Salmon Are Teetering on the Brink

by Rose Garrett

The state’s prized salmon have a will to survive against the odds. Can we get out of their way?

Why California Wineries are Embracing Fire to Avoid Disaster

by Julie Tremaine

The California wine industry has been rocked by years of destructive wildfires. Now, it’s working to adapt before the next big one ignites.

Almonds are Under Threat. The Key to Saving Them Could Be in the Soil

by Emily Baron Cadloff

Rising temperatures, lack of water and encroaching development are creating tough conditions for the crucial California crop. Their continued viability could all depend on strengthening the lands on which they sit.

Series edited by Rose Garrett and Emily Baron Cadloff
Illustrations by Adam Ming

The post State of Abundance appeared first on Modern Farmer.

We hope you can revisit some of our favorite features of the year, and catch up on the stories you missed.

What’s In a (Food) Name?

From oat milk to vegan burgers, plant-based dairy and meat products are gaining traction—and sparking debate over their names. But are consumers actually confused about what they’re buying?

The Legacy of Campbell Soup’s Tomato Breeding Program

How the canned food company helped the Garden State become synonymous with luscious red tomatoes.

A Meditation on Slaughter

What raising and harvesting chickens taught me about killing in the service of living.

Yes, the Government Really Does Stash Billions of Pounds of Cheese in Missouri Caves

The USDA has kept cheese and other dairy products in cold-storage caves for decades. But their purpose has shifted over the years.

In U.S. Prisons, Seeds Are Prized Contraband for Prisoners Looking to Grow Their Own Food

With food inside prisons often dreary and repetitive, some incarcerated people are taking their diets into their own hands.

Could Edible Cactus Be the Next Big Specialty Crop?

Often treated as a weed, prickly pear cactus has a ton of potential. But first, producers need to create a market for the versatile crop in the US.\

Turn Your Backyard Into a Snack Yard With Edible Landscapes

Landscapers are making private and public spaces more useful and planting edible alternatives to traditional plants.

Keeping Chickens Taught Me How to Give a Cluck

Our family’s backyard chickens, acquired in the early days of the pandemic, have shown me how to slow down and rethink my moral principles.

Can Dryland Farming Help Growers Endure Increasing Heatwaves and Drought?

Indigenous practitioners around the world have farmed with only rainwater for millennia. But it’s unclear whether conventional agriculture, which relies heavily on irrigation, will learn any of their lessons.

In Awe of the Pawpaw

Meet the bartender-botanist committed to reviving this humble native fruit.

The post Ten Features to Revisit This Holiday Season appeared first on Modern Farmer.