Stoiber and her colleagues at EWG keep an eye on the consumer-grade water filtration systems available in the US. The organization’s tests have found that common pitcher filters from brands such as Brita and Berkey do not all remove PFAS equally well. But some do an excellent job, based on EWG’s tests, including the pitcher filter system made by Epic Water Filters, a US-based firm.

“I would say PFAS is by far the number one contaminant that we’re getting feedback for our customers being worried about,” says Joel Stevens, cofounder of Epic Water Filters. The filters his company makes for its water pitchers include a carbon block. “Thousands upon thousands of layers of carbon fibers that are wrapped around a block,” he explains. As the water trickles through those fibers, the carbon takes off PFAS and other contaminants, including chlorine and lead.

In about three months’ time, the company will launch a new pitcher filter that can also take out heavy metals and fluoride. Fluoride is added to water in some areas in order to improve dental health, though some people would prefer not to drink it because of a potential link between fluoride and adverse neurological effects. Scientific analysis suggests that the risk from tap water in countries such as the US, however, is extremely low.

While there are some very effective water filter products on the market, says Stoiber, many people still throw spent filters in the trash, which means they ultimately end up at landfill sites where the PFAS can leach out into the environment again.

Customers of Epic Water Filters can return their spent filters to the company. “The filters are then sent to a special recycling center where the plastic is recycled and the internal filters are incinerated,” says Stevens in a follow-up email.

Stoiber’s research suggests that some forms of incineration of PFAS materials can release harmful compounds into the environment. “We still don’t have good disposal recommendations for spent treatment media,” she says. It is possible to break PFAS compounds down, though, at extremely high temperatures, even as high as 1,500 degrees Celsius (2,730 F). Some researchers are currently exploring how chemical additives such as granular activated carbon could reduce the amount of heat required to break down PFAS compounds.

There’s another problem with current approaches to PFAS. “Community-level drinking water treatment is what’s needed at this point, because the costs shouldn’t fall on the individual,” says Stoiber. “It shouldn’t be unfair, who has a filter, who doesn’t, who gets exposed.”

While some US drinking water facilities are now installing large-scale PFAS filtration technology, such as in Tampa, Florida, the cost of doing this across the nation could spiral into the billions, according to some analyses. While Stoiber says the most effective strategy for avoiding PFAS contamination is not to use these chemicals in the first place, countless companies still do, and it could be a long time before they disappear entirely from consumer products, if that ever happens.

For now, there is a risk that the Trump administration could weaken the new US water regulations that demand the removal of some PFAS molecules from tap water supplies, says Stoiber. “We are fighting to protect the drinking water laws that were just passed,” she says. “I think all eyes are on that.”