no, they found PFAS in the hay, and they found PFAS in the milk. they INFERRED the PFAS got into the milk from the hay.
do you understand what direct, chain of contamination evidence requires? you would need to PROVE that PFAS in the soil are the same ones in the milk by demonstrating the absorption from the soil to the hay, from the hay to the cows, from the cows, to the milk. each step has to be controlled to eliminate every other possible source of contamination. PFAS are ubiquitous. they're in EVERYTHING. when was the milk tested, after it was packaged? PFAS could have come from the packaging, the processing, the milking machinesโฆ yada yada yada. do you get what i'm trying to tell you? they didn't do that. they show PFAS here and PFAS there, and ASSUME the direct transmission. they may be right, but it is NOT rigorous scientific proof, it's circumstantial evidence at best.