Six years after it was first revealed that Chemours and its predecessor, Dupont, had been dumping dangerous chemicals into the Cape Fear River for decades, a new study by North Carolina State University scientists has found elevated levels of PFAS in the blood of pet dogs and horses within a few miles of the factory.
Community activists in Gray’s Creek initiated the study after observing a stream of similar cancers and unexplained health problems for their pets, many of which drank contaminated well water. The study included residences as close to a mile and as much as 18 miles from the Chemours plant.
Researchers at the Center for Environmental and Health Effects of PFAS at N.C. State tested 31 dogs and 32 horses from the Gray’s Creek community. The study was part of a state-funded project that also found concerning levels of PFAS in aquatic animals. Last week, the N.C. Department of Health and Human Services warned that people should limit their consumption of fish caught in the Lower Cape Fear River because of contamination.
The pets were tested in 2021. Overall, the NCSU scientists concluded that the pets were a good proxy for gaging the extent that humans have been exposed to the chemicals, especially children.
PFAS exposure in humans is associated with a roster of health issues, including increased cholesterol levels, liver damage, thyroid disease, kidney cancer, testicular cancer, decreased fertility, decreased immune response, and developmental issues in infants and children.
Many people living in Gray’s Creek and other places in the Cape Fear River basin are still asking for clean and reliable sources of water, as the forever chemicals from years of toxic waste remain saturated in their everyday environment and won’t break down inside their bodies.
“It’s like we’re one big toxic waste dump here in North Carolina,” Debra Stevens-Stewart, who lives about 3 miles from the Chemours plant, told CityView. “We got the coal ash problem. We have now this PFAS, which extends all the way from Fayetteville down to Wilmington. Scott Belcher’s study showed that fish and alligators are positive for the PFAS.”
Organizers say progress on legally mandated water filtration systems has been arduous and hampered by poor communication.
“I think people are more frustrated now than they’ve ever been,” said Jamie White, who lives about 4 miles from the plant.
White is a key organizer of Gray’s Creek Residents United Against PFAS.
“They’re not getting the things that they need,” White said. “There’s so many people out there that qualify for these systems, even with the new (PFAS) limits, and they’re not getting them. They can’t put them in fast enough.”
A spokesperson for Chemours denied long wait times, saying filtration systems are put in “within a few days” of when a resident is deemed eligible. The spokesperson did not answer a request for comment on the number of households still waiting for the court-ordered filtration systems to be installed.
As for pets, researchers did not find definitive proof that PFAS are causing the health problems that owners have reported for years. But the lead author of the study, Kylie Rock, said the pattern of exposure researchers observed in dogs and horses raises concerns for the “long-term health and survivorship of the animals.”
Neighbors’ concerns
Anecdotal evidence from Gray’s Creek residents, meanwhile, tells a more horrifying story about the true cost of these enduring chemicals. Several neighbors’ pets have suffered from similar, PFAS-related illnesses: lipomas (fatty tumors); kidney and pancreatic problems; arthritis; and skin disorders, among other diseases.
In 2018, Stevens-Steward had a pet pig that died from testicular cancer, which is associated with forever chemical exposure in humans. That’s when she started advocating for domestic animals to be tested for PFAS along with wild animals.
“I kept bringing up at the public forums that, what is this doing? And also, I’d seen in the wildlife a decrease in things like crawdads — little things that would be sensitive to environmental pollutants, disappear,” Stevens-Stewart said.
To advocate for testing pets, she collaborated with Mike Watters, an Army veteran trained to gather intelligence abroad and fellow organizer for Gray’s Creek Residents United Against PFAS. From there, they were able to approach congressional representatives who helped secure research funding.
Watters, who lives just over a mile from the plant, had three huskies who died from “very similar issues” — pancreatic cancer and lipomas — that have been linked to PFAS exposure in past studies. He said the dogs began to suffer health problems not long after they moved to the area.
“Within a year and a half of moving there, we had to put all three dogs on pancreatic enzymes,” Watters said.
One of the huskies, Zeus, was “absolutely filled” with fatty tumors before he died, he said.
“We had probably 16 or 17 of them removed because they were pushing on organs and causing discomfort,” he said.
Watters believes that his dogs’ health problems are mirrored in pets throughout the neighborhood.
“Likewise, when you go out and you talk to a lot of the community, you see fatty tumors,” Watters said. “Different types of cancer is abundant across the whole area — Cedar Creek and Gray’s Creek area. It doesn’t surprise me now because I knew the vegetations, like pine trees, we knew that they were capturing the PFAS contamination in the air. When rainfall would come through, it would wash to the ground.”
White did not participate in the study — she said she was “chicken” to learn what might be lurking in her pets’ blood — but also lost dogs from fatty tumors.
“We had two dogs that had cancer, and our vet told us they were the fatty cells, the fatty cancer, and that it wouldn’t affect them in any way,” White said. “Then they died a year later.”
Scrutiny of study results
Despite the problems reported by pet owners, the lead author of the study said the research team found the animals to be healthy overall, though she noted that blood results suggested underlying problems in some of the animals.
“We had a bunch of questions that we asked owners about the health and well-being of the animals and, generally speaking, they were in good health,” Rock said. “But we did note that when we ran some of the blood chemistry analyses that there were certain biomarkers that did come up that were indicative of changes to kidney and liver function.”
Community organizers who participated in the study were doubtful about the researchers’ conclusions that the animals they tested were healthy.
“See, if you talk to the people, they will tell you that’s completely opposite of what they say,” Watters said. “Yes, they appear to be in good health, but when I’ve had 15 lipomas removed from a dog, I’ve had two different cancers removed from Loki’s butt, and all of them were on pancreatic enzymes because of something wrong with their systems. … I don’t fully concur with that.”
Stevens-Stewart was also skeptical of the assumption that the pets were in good overall health when they were tested. She said her horse, Whisper, suffered from unexplained breathing problems and a cough that went on through the night.
White said she was “shocked” the researchers found the animals to be in good health when they tested them, “only because of the number of animals that have died from the cancers.”
It’s not clear whether other pets had health conditions that the owners told the researchers about, as the pets’ test results and health summaries have not been circulated in the community.
Since the study, organizers have said many of the neighborhood pets developed additional health problems or died, including Watters’ remaining two huskies. Stevens-Steward said her dog’s health has worsened dramatically since the study, and her horse has had health problems emerge since then. Her dog Missy now suffers from seizures and has a bad skin condition.
“Now, it looks like she’s aged, like, 10 years and her skin is really bad,” Stevens-Stewart said.
She hopes there will be another opportunity to retest pets who had their blood drawn in 2021.
“I think they need to do a follow-up with the owners to find out how the animals are doing,” Stevens-Steward said. “What do they look like now? Two years from the study, they still have the PFAS in their blood, especially the horses that continue to drink the water.”
Others encouraged to speak up
Stevens-Stewart said part of the problem is a lack of widespread participation in community activism on the issue.
“A lot of people think things are taking too long or are too slow, but they don’t come out and make themselves heard,” Stevens-Stewart said. “It’s like I say — you can be a silent statistic, or you can voice your concerns.”
Watters is also frustrated by the level of public engagement in recent protests and meetings. He says that although people want information, they prefer to access it remotely through platforms like Zoom or Facebook. In earlier meetings, he said, hundreds of people would attend in-person or online, but now only a fraction of that number shows up.
“People will talk; people will discuss it. It’s just finding them, because there’s a core group within our group that will talk,” Watters said. “The rest of the people just want to ride on the coattails of those that are fighting for them, which is kind of frustrating.”
White said organizers need help getting information to the public.
“We can’t be the only mouth,” White said. “They hear our mouth — and granted, ours are quite loud — but we can’t be the only ones. We kind of need everybody to help with the fight.”
Conclusion
While scientists can’t say for sure that PFAS are causing the unexplained health problems in pets, community leaders describe being inundated with environmental pollution. They know all too well the risks of being exposed to the harmful chemicals, but they try to adapt to their new environment the best they can. Watters, for example, has built an insulated greenhouse that filters toxic chemicals from the air and uses raised garden beds with clean soil.
Relocating is simply not a feasible or attractive option for some residents whose lives are grounded in a place they imagined would be their happily-ever-after future.
“And people say, ‘Well, why don’t you just move? OK, yeah, that’s great. If I walk away, who’s going to buy the house knowing how high contamination it has. And can I in good conscience screw somebody over?” Watters said. “Because I believe in karma. So now, I’m two years from retirement, I move and I’m starting all over with a brand-new mortgage. They absolutely destroyed my entire retirement dream.”
Stevens-Stewart, who has lived in Gray’s Creek since 1980, has considered moving, but it’s an overwhelming prospect and easier said than done, she said.
“I think I might want to relocate somewhere. But I’ve got all these animals. I’ve got maybe 30 cats, three dogs, 12 rabbits and some chickens that I’m raising in a coop,” Stevens-Stewart said. “This is home. I can’t think of any place else I’d rather go.”
Contact local government reporter Evey Weisblat at eweisblat@cityviewnc.com.
