RFK Jr. Probes Health Dangers Of Offshore Wind Turbines
While offshore wind farms’ effect on marine life has garnered much attention, the human element has been largely neglected.Filmmaker and mother Jessica Solce was frustrated by the difficulty of finding healthy, all-natural products for herself and her family. To make it easier, she created the Solarium, which curates trusted, third-party-tested foods, clothing, beauty products, and more — all free of seed oils, endocrine disruptors, carcinogens, and other harmful additives.
In this occasional column, she shares recommendations and research she's picked up during her ongoing education in health and wellness.
Your refrigerator is filled with unprocessed, natural foods. Your medicine cabinet is free of toxic pharmaceuticals. Your faucets dispense filtered, chemical-free drinking water.
In other words, you've optimized your family's home life for health. But what about the home itself?
Pillows, sheets, and furniture also contain toxic flame retardants, a grimly appropriate name given their tendency to reduce IQ and cause developmental delays.
Sadly and shockingly, virtually all houses harbor seemingly innocuous products and materials that silently poison us, day in and day out.
Take your bed, for example.
You spend a third of your life sleeping, so get a good mattress. This is solid advice. It also happens to be incomplete. A restful night's sleep shouldn't mean eight to 10 hours inhaling microdoses of toxic, flame-retardant forever chemicals.
But that's exactly what you get with much modern bedding.
And the situation in other rooms is generally no better.
To go through all of what may be poisoning us in our homes would require an article of epic proportions; it would also be overwhelmingly depressing for me to write and for you to read.
I encourage you to do more research and to consider the specifics of your own situation. In the meantime, for the sake of both of our sanities, I’ll limit myself to outlining the major offenders — as well as what to replace them with.
My hope is that I can give you a good start in ensuring your home is a haven for healing, not a den of disease.
RELATED: Grass-fed steaks, unprocessed salt, and more chemical-free picks from the Solarium

Spend any time on health-oriented social media, and it feels as if every week brings news of some new toxic product ready to kill you, from paint and plastics to petroleum-based perfumes.
So when we first set out to evict the enemy from our abode, we quickly realize the hydra-esque task we've taken on. No sooner have you rooted him out of one hiding place than you discover him popping up in two more.
As someone who's navigated this kind of purge myself (inspiring me to create an online marketplace of healthy products to help you do the same), I strongly advise against a scorched earth, “No Impact Man” approach.
Rather, you should employ a method of gradual change where you make small, conscious swaps for healthier alternatives. Trust me, it’s easier on your wallet and your mental well-being.
That said, the aforementioned 2009 documentary is an eye-opening watch. “No Impact Man” is the story of a New York City family — journalist Colin Beavan, his wife, Michelle, and their toddler, Isabella — undertaking an experiment to live for one year, while making as little impact on the environment as possible.
One scene in particular floored me: when Michelle throws away all of her makeup and bathroom and beauty products.
It wasn't that she voluntarily parted ways with her precious and pricey creams and unguents but the sheer amount of them she'd managed to stockpile in their small Manhattan apartment.
Imagine how much more the bathroom of the average American house in the suburbs holds. Unfathomable amounts of money spent on unfathomable amounts of toxic junk.
As thought-provoking as "No Impact Man" is, I'd advise against going to such extremes, at least at first. Above all, you want to make sure this is something you can sustain.
In my experience, that becomes easier the more you learn how to spot these home-borne toxins — and the more you understand the potential damage they can do once they get into your lungs, bloodstream, and cells and mitochondria. Removing them from your life will not feel like a burden but a no-brainer necessity.
Here are some simple first steps to get you started.
Even without getting rid of anything, this age-old method of improving ventilation and air exchange can have a major impact on the health of your home.
A 2020 review of 37 separate environmental studies found that elevated indoor carbon dioxide levels associated with poor ventilation impaired high-level decision-making and reduced cognitive speed, especially on complex tasks.
As mentioned, where you rest your head at night is very important. We sleep an average of 2,700 hours a year, or 114 days out of 365. And it's not just your mattress you need to worry about.
Pillows, sheets, and furniture also contain toxic flame retardants, a grimly appropriate name given their tendency to reduce IQ and cause developmental delays.
They can also cause metabolic problems like obesity and insulin resistance, while endocrine disruptors they contain cause thyroid problems, infertility, hormone disregulation, and hormone-related cancers. Nasty stuff.
Because kids tend to put their hands on everything and everything in their mouths, they're even more prone to ingesting these retardants. Especially when they're in the pajamas they wear!
One retardant ingredient is formaldehyde. You know ... embalming fluid. Many of us are sleeping on literal deathbeds.
So what can we do?! For pillows and comforters, find goose down or wool. One excellent option for pillows is the wonderful U.S. company the Woolshire. Avocado is a great source for mattresses. You can find 100% cotton and/or linen at a wide range of prices, from made-in-America luxury brands to Target's in-house bedding line.
Nothing like lighting a scented candle or two to make a home feel clean and inviting. Just make sure you know what you're burning
While marketed as "natural," many soy candles contain synthetic fragrance oils and chemical additives that release harmful pollutants. A pair of recent studies found that scented candles emit formaldehyde, benzene, and other carcinogens, with risks to lung and nasal cancers, respiratory harm, and cognitive decline.
The aforementioned chemicals are known as volatile organic compounds, or VOCs, not because they are organic in the farmer’s market sense but because of their specific chemical properties.
“Volatile” refers to their ability to turn into gas at room temperature, “organic” refers to their carbon bases, and “compounds” means they’re highly complex — all to mean these things are absolutely not fit for human consumption or contact. If they are in your home, they can “off gas” into your air without being heated or physically disturbed.
In addition, the European Commission’s Scientific Committee confirms that fragrance ingredients are among the leading causes of allergic contact dermatitis (allergies, eczema, rashes) in Europe. Another study confirms that regular indoor scented candle burning “can expose us to dangerous levels of organic pollutants” and ultra-fine particles.
These harmful VOCs are not inherent in the unburned wax but formed as byproducts of incomplete combustion when the candle is burned; the additives, wicks (sometimes made of lead!), and added fragrances and dyes increase the levels of VOCs. Synthetic scents can also trigger asthma, allergic reactions, and breathing problems.
A 100% unadulterated beeswax candle with a cotton or paper wick and no added dyes or fragrance is the way to go.
This is the cleanest candle possible: not 100% free of VOCs but with significantly lower emissions. It's also completely unprocessed — made of wax that comes straight from the beehive.
Along with the lovely natural scent, beeswax candles may also produce negative ions that help settle positively charged particles like dust, pollen, mold spores, and some airborne toxins.
"Why can’t I just get some air fresheners from Walmart?" Don’t bother. They emit a cocktail of carcinogenic VOCs and phthalates (endocrine-disrupting semi-VOCs). If you have these in your home or in the car, this is step one: Get rid of them pronto.
Once you stop using chemical air fresheners, you’ll start noticing how foul and unnatural they actually smell. As luck would have it, we now have a nice, natural option thanks to the small French company &Eden.
The scents you put on your body can be just as harmful, especially considering that you absorb them directly through your skin as well as through your lungs. When you are ready to make the swap, consider these cleaner, nature-based soaps and fragrances.
The convenience of artificial light comes with a major cost: the disruption of our body’s innate circadian signaling and repair processes.
Moreover, our bodies our designed to absorb the entirety of the sunlight spectrum, from infrared to visible to ultraviolet. But our ubiquitous screens isolate and maximize our exposure to certain parts of the spectrum. The computers, phones, and tablets we use indoors continually bathe us in unnatural amounts of blue light.
One way to mitigate this constant onslaught is by wearing yellow-tinted blue-light-blocking glasses while at the computer.
You can also change your lightbulbs to more closely resemble full spectrum sunlight. I did this first in my bedroom, creating a warm, amber glow like candlelight. I highly recommend it.
There are emerging tech solutions as well. The Daylight Computer can be used outside without glare issues and eliminates the blue light problem by harnessing ambient light or using red light for a backlight. Its display resembles conventional E Ink displays but with a faster refresh rate.
If you want to learn a whole lot more about blue light, you can read my three-part series about its effects on your body.
Say goodbye to the likes of Mr. Clean, Lysol, and Formula 409. They all come with excess baggage: quaternary ammonium compounds, or "quats" (antimicrobials that can cause skin and respiratory irritation), synthetic fragrances, preservatives, and ethanolamines.
RELATED: Trump EPA takes aim at forever chemicals

In addition, common cleaning products often contain endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) that can impair fertility in both sexes. The phthalates found in many synthetic fragrances have been strongly linked to reduced sperm quality, lower testosterone, and altered ovarian function.
Instead, make your own all-purpose cleaner with vinegar, water, essential oils, and a glass spray bottle. You can also experiment with different combinations of baking soda, hydrogen peroxide, isopropyl alcohol, and lemon juice.
Other fertility disruptors that may be lurking in your home include:
Pesticides, particularly organophosphates and glyphosate, have been associated with reduced fertility, hormone disruption, and increased miscarriage risk. Which leads us to our next step ...
According to NASA’s famous Clean Air Study, certain houseplants do more than just look good — they can help filter common indoor air pollutants often released by furniture, cleaning products, and household materials.
This is technically true, but ventilation is still more effective; it would take a huge number of plants to make a difference in home air quality.
Then again, I do think that cohabitating with plants benefits us in less quantifiable ways, such as fostering a healthy sense of connection to nature.
Just be aware of the soil you use — inside and outside the home. Conventional soils are filled with synthetic pesticides like herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides as well as synthetic fertilizers that alter soil biology, killing nutrients and introducing heavy metals (arsenic, lead, cadmium) into your gardens and eventually into your body.
Kids play outside, roll in the grass, and jump into leaf piles. They also come into close contact with pets who do the same. This soup of pesticides gets on their skin and is inhaled, raising their risks for blue baby syndrome, colorectal cancer, birth defects and sexual deformities, neurodevelopmental harm in children, and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.
A 2015 Harvard School of Public Health study determined a 26% increased risk of leukemia in children exposed to herbicide. Indoor insecticide exposure showed a 47% higher risk of leukemia and a 43% higher risk of lymphoma. Even parental exposure before conception can raise cancer risk.
Most of us have heard of Roundup, the notorious herbicide that's cost Monsanto billions in legal settlements with people who claim it gave them cancer.
Despite this, the EPA continues to approve the use of Roundup, which kills weeds while sparing crops genetically engineered to resist it. The problem is that weeds tend to develop their own resistance.
The common solution is to add 2,4-D, a pesticide I'd never heard of before researching this article. Despite mounting evidence that 2,4-D is at least as harmful as Roundup, the EPA approved the use of this combination in 2014.
This is all the more reason to prioritize buying pesticide-free, organic, and regenerative soils for your indoor and outdoor plants. It's also important to stick to meats and vegetables raised on such soil. What our food sources eat and consume, we consume, entering us into a cycle of life and vitality or death and degeneration.
The Trump administration appears serious about ridding American drinking water of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, also known as "forever chemicals," and penalizing polluters.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin announced on Monday that his agency will be taking a suite of actions to address PFAS.
"We are tackling PFAS from all of EPA's program offices, advancing research and testing, stopping PFAS from getting into drinking water systems, holding polluters accountable, and providing certainty for passive receivers," Zeldin said in a statement. "This is just a start of the work we will do on PFAS to ensure Americans have the cleanest air, land, and water."
PFAS is a group of roughly 15,000 synthetic chemicals that have been in consumer products since the 1940s. The EPA noted on its website that PFAS "can be present in our water, soil, air, and food as well as in materials found in our homes or workplaces."
A 2015 report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention revealed that PFAS were found in the blood of approximately 97% of Americans. A 2023 study released from the U.S. Geological Survey indicated PFAS were found in at least 45% of the country's tap water.
Citing the current peer-reviewed scientific literature, the EPA indicated that exposure to PFAS could lead to:
According to the National Institute of Environmental Health Science, studies have also found possible links between PFAS and diminished immune systems, increased risk of childhood obesity, and increased risk of Type 2 diabetes in women.
The EPA has now committed to "strengthening the science, fulfilling statutory obligations and enhancing communication, and building partnerships."
'It's encouraging to see the support of the Trump EPA to express their concerns about PFAS.'
The agency will apparently take 21 actions to address PFAS contamination, such as:
John Rumpler, clean water director and senior attorney at the Environment America Research and Policy Center, expressed optimism Monday about the agency's proposed actions.
"Some of the initiatives announced by EPA could begin to advance Administrator Lee Zeldin's stated objective: 'to ensure Americans have the cleanest air, land, and water,'" stated Rumpler. "These include setting at least some limits on how much PFAS certain industries can release into our waterways, and using our nation's toxic substances law to restrict the use of these chemicals — hopefully in the strong manner that several states have already done."
"On face value, it's encouraging to see the support of the Trump EPA to express their concerns about PFAS," Linda Birnbaum, an American toxicologist who formerly served as director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, told Inside Climate News. "The question is always, what are the devils in the details."
Environmental and health experts are not the only ones cautiously hopeful about the EPA's next steps.
The American Chemistry Council, an industry trade association for chemical companies, said in a statement obtained by Chemical and Engineering News, "While we need to learn more about the details of EPA's announcement, we have consistently advocated for a comprehensive approach to managing PFAS, including for the designation of a point person to coordinate across differing programs and agencies."
"We support strong, science-based regulations for PFAS chemistries that take into account the differences between them, continue to allow for the many products that they enable, and drive domestic manufacturing," added the ACC.
Although the EPA now appears to be largely picking up where the first Trump administration left off with its 2019 PFAS action plan — which called for improving methods and tools for managing PFAS risk, as well as greater enforcement — some notable efforts on this front were made by the Biden administration.
The agency established national, legally enforceable limits last year on PFAS in public drinking water in April 2024. The final EPA rule gave public water systems three years to complete initial monitoring for PFAS contamination. Those who discovered PFAS at levels in excess of federal standards were afforded another five years to reduce the amount.
Despite having years to comply with the April 2024 rule, water utilities and chemical producers filed suit, claiming the government was exceeding its authority in trying to remove dangerous chemicals from municipal water systems.
The New York Times reported that the Trump administration faces a May 12 deadline to decide whether it wants to mount a legal defense of the water standards.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
RFK Jr. was just confirmed as Donald Trump’s secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, and according to the data he’s reported on, it couldn’t come at a better time.
“Americans' overall health is in a grievous condition,” RFK said during his confirmation hearing. “Over 70% of adults and a third of children are overweight or obese. Diabetes is 10 times more prevalent than it was during the 1960s. Cancer among young people is rising by 1% or 2% a year.”
“Autoimmune diseases, neurodevelopmental disorders, Alzheimer's, asthma, ADHD, depression, addiction, and a host of other physical and mental health conditions are all on the rise. Some of them exponentially,” he continued.
Sara Gonzales of “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered” couldn’t be happier that RFK was confirmed, but she can’t help but wonder how we got to this point — especially considering that America spends almost twice the average of other countries on health care.
“We’re spending twice the global average, but we’re not amongst the healthiest countries,” Gonzales says. “If you want to look at the top five healthiest countries, you’ve got Singapore, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Israel. And then the U.S., not at the sixth, the 74th. That’s abysmal.”
One of the reasons, Gonzales believes, is because our government agencies don’t actually have our best interest at heart.
“The FDA repeatedly failed to take timely action on a wide range of safety and health issues the agency has been aware of for several years. ... Look at what is in our food and how sick it's making us. You look at fast food. If you look at the same menu items in this country and then abroad, sometimes they’re twice as salty, twice the sodium levels, double the sodium levels in the United States as they are abroad,” she continues.
“Excessive sodium consumption is linked to thousands of premature deaths in the U.S.,” she says. “You look at all of this, and you know that the FDA took so long to recommend and adopt lower sodium levels in packaged and prepared foods.”
“The American Heart Association concluded that if the food and restaurant industries would have adopted the lower sodium levels presented in the FDA’s proposed two-year and 10-year targets on the schedule, nearly 265,000 lives could have been saved between 2017 and 2031,” she continues, adding, “You know, something about our government poisoning its own citizens just riles me up.”
To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Fitness trackers and smart watches have become a staple of modern life, with well over 100 million Americans using these devices to monitor their health.
More recently, they’ve gained popularity with children, many of whom will no doubt head back to school after the holiday sporting their very own unsightly high-tech wristwear.
Researchers have uncovered vulnerabilities that allow unauthorized users to track children's movements or even communicate with them directly.
But while the health benefits are touted, the risks — both visible and hidden — are mounting.
A recent study from the University of Notre Dame revealed a rather shocking truth: These devices are loaded with toxic chemicals. Many fitness tracker bands contain per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, commonly known as "forever chemicals" due to their near-indestructible nature.
Expensive bands, ironically marketed for quality, often have the highest levels of these harmful substances.
PFAS are aptly named "forever chemicals" because of their nearly indestructible chemical structure, which prevents them from breaking down in the environment. These chemicals build up in soil, water, and even the human body over time.
Exposure to PFAS has been linked to various health issues, including cancer, hormonal disruptions, developmental delays in children, and weakened immune systems.
Among the most troubling effects is the potential for hormonal disruption, particularly in men, where PFAS exposure has been associated with plummeting testosterone levels. Given that testosterone plays a critical role in male health — affecting everything from energy levels to muscle mass and mental well-being — this trend is deeply concerning.
For wearable devices, the problem lies in dermal absorption — the process by which these chemicals seep into the skin during prolonged contact. Since wearables are often worn for hours, if not around the clock, the skin acts as a direct pathway for these harmful substances to enter the body.
The study found that the pricier the band, the greater the risk.
Bands costing over $15 were more likely to have high concentrations of PFAS. Expensive watchbands, often made of fluoroelastomers, a synthetic rubber, had some of the highest levels of PFHxA. In fact, some samples contained PFAS concentrations exceeding 1,000 parts per billion — unprecedented levels compared to most consumer products tested.
To put this in perspective, PFAS levels in drinking water are considered concerning at just four parts per trillion, a fraction of what was found in these fitness bands. This means the chemical concentrations in some bands are astronomically higher than what is considered safe in other contexts.
Lower-cost bands were not entirely free of risk, but generally contained much lower levels of fluorine, the telltale marker for PFAS.
The danger of PFAS in wearables isn’t merely hypothetical. Previous research indicates that PFAS can transfer through the skin, particularly when the skin is warm or sweaty — common conditions when wearing a fitness tracker during exercise.
Add to this the growing use of these devices by children, whose developing bodies are more susceptible to chemical exposure, and the problem becomes even more concerning.
Exposure to these chemicals can interfere with growth, disrupt puberty, and alter critical hormonal pathways, potentially leading to long-term health problems. The fact that children often wear these devices for extended periods compounds the risk, turning what might seem like a harmless gadget into a hidden health threat. Given that these chemicals accumulate over time, the risks compound with prolonged exposure.
But the dangers don’t stop at chemical exposure. These wearables are also a data goldmine, generating vast amounts of personal information.
From your heart rate to your precise location, these devices collect and transmit data constantly. Questions about who has access to this information — and how it’s used — are pressing. Fitness apps and manufacturers often share data with third parties, ranging from advertisers to data brokers.
In some cases, governments and law enforcement agencies can request access. Transparency is lacking, leaving consumers in the dark about how their data might be monetized, analyzed, and abused.
Another alarming risk is the potential for misuse of location data. Devices often upload workout routes to public platforms, ostensibly to help users track their progress or compete with others.
However, this visibility creates vulnerabilities. Predators or cybercriminals can analyze patterns to determine when and where someone is likely to be. A notable case in 2018 exposed U.S. military bases through fitness tracker data shared publicly, demonstrating how these devices can inadvertently reveal sensitive information.
The risks are magnified for children.
Parents buy GPS-enabled smartwatches to ensure safety, but many such devices are riddled with security flaws. Researchers have uncovered vulnerabilities that allow unauthorized users to track children's movements or even communicate with them directly.
Such lapses in security expose children to potential exploitation. These concerns are not speculative; incidents of smart toys and trackers being hacked have already been documented.
Smart watches are not your friends; they’re sleek, seductive little time bombs.
They're part CIA operative, part cyanide. Quite literally, they’re poisonous data exploiters strapped to your wrist.
The best thing you can do is take that watch off and toss it in the trash. At the very least, stop wearing it around the clock.
And if you have kids, keep these devices far away from them. Children don’t need fitness trackers; they need to run, play, and grow without being exposed to harmful chemicals and invasive surveillance. They might not thank you now, but when they’re old enough to understand the risks, they probably will.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) filed a lawsuit Wednesday against corporate giants 3M, DuPont, and Corteva — the corporate remnant of a 2015 DuPont spin-off — for allegedly misleading consumers over the course of multiple decades about the safety of certain products containing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or "forever chemicals."
The suit claims that while profiting from the sale of materials under well-known brand names such as Scotchgard and Teflon, the companies knew that PFAS posed risks both to people's health and the environment.
"These companies knew for decades that PFAS chemicals could cause serious harm to human health yet continued to advertise them as safe for household use around families and children," Paxton said in a statement. "Texas is taking action to penalize these companies and hold them accountable for deceiving Texans into buying consumer products without vital information."
PFAS, a group of roughly 15,000 synthetic chemicals, have been used globally in clothing, food packaging, lubricants, cookware, firefighting foam, upholstery, and other consumer products since the 1950s.
A 2015 report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found PFAS in the blood of approximately 97% of Americans.
According to the National Institute of Environmental Health Science, studies have found possible links between forever chemicals and various adverse health outcomes including increased risk of certain cancers; diminished immune systems; increased risk of childhood obesity; decreased bone mineral density following exposure in adolescence; increased risk of Type 2 diabetes in women; and altered metabolism.
Citing the current peer-reviewed scientific literature, the Environmental Protection Agency indicated that exposure to PFAS could lead to decreased fertility; increased high blood pressure in pregnant women; developmental delays in children, "including low birth weight, accelerated puberty, bone variations, or behavioral changes"; increased risk of cancers such as prostate, kidney, and testicular cancers; hormonal destabilization; and increased cholesterol levels.
The lawsuit alleges that 3M and DuPont engaged in false, misleading, or deceptive acts in violation of the Deceptive Trade Practices Act by misrepresenting the nature of certain products and failing to disclose information about those products that would otherwise have scared consumers away.
'Defendants marketed products containing harmful PFAS chemicals for over 70 years and were aware of the harmful effects of PFAS chemicals for over 50 years.'
"PFAS are 'persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic,' and exposure in humans may be associated with diseases such as cancer and decreased vaccine response," the lawsuit states. "Defendants knew of these risks, knew they could not contain PFAS in their consumer products, and — as early as the 1970s — knew that their PFAS chemistry was already building up in the blood of most Americans."
The lawsuit is replete with examples of the companies encountering shocking facts about forever chemicals, then sweeping the damning information under the chemically treated proverbial rug.
According to the lawsuit, "Old DuPont," or E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company — which apparently knew PFAS were toxic to animals and humans as early as the 1960s — conducted a blood sampling study of pregnant or recently pregnant employees in 1981, discovering that two of the eight women who worked with Teflon had children with birth defects in their eyes or face. The company allegedly told its employees that "there is no known evidence that our employees have been exposed to [certain PFAS] levels that pose adverse health effects."
3M conducted studies on PFAS on monkeys and rats in the 1970s that yielded disturbing results. Despite finding that certain PFAS affected the liver and gastrointestinal tracts of test subjects, the company apparently chose not to reveal these harms to consumers.
The filing noted, "Defendants marketed products containing harmful PFAS chemicals for over 70 years and were aware of the harmful effects of PFAS chemicals for over 50 years. Despite this knowledge, Defendants continued to market PFAS products and chemicals in Texas and elsewhere as safe for consumer use, misrepresent their environmental and biological risks, and conceal risks of harm from the public."
The Dallas Morning News highlighted that this lawsuit follows both Connecticut's January lawsuit against 3M, DuPont, and dozens of other companies for allegedly contaminating its natural resources and a class-action lawsuit filed in August in Minnesota accusing 3M, DuPont, Corteva, and Chemours of covering up the health hazards of the forever chemicals used in their products.
Last year, 3M reached a $10.3 billion settlement with numerous cities and towns over claims that its PFAS contaminated drinking water.
3M and Corteva reportedly did not immediately respond to the Dallas Morning News' requests for comment.
Daniel Turner, a spokesman for DuPont, told The Hill that the company has never manufactured PFOA and PFOS, two types of PFAS chemicals. The Hill noted that in 2015 DuPont spun off its division that makes forever chemical-containing products.
"While we don't comment on litigation matters, we believe this complaint is without merit, and we look forward to vigorously defending our record of safety, health, and environmental stewardship," said Turner.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!