• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Study/Research finds more drugs than anybody realized in our US drinking water

Oldgamer

Diamond Member
Color me surprised. Maybe this explains why so many people have mental problems?

------------------------

water.jpg


Doctors prescribe hydrocodone for pain. They recommend ranitidine for acid reflux, a diuretic called hydrochlorothiazide for congestive heart failure.

But you don’t need a prescription to get these drugs in tiny doses. They're found already in our nation's water supply — and, according to an upcoming national study, the largest done so far, in higher amounts than drug companies anticipated.

We know how the drugs get there: Our bodies release them when we urinate or flush old drugs down the toilet. And it’s well known by now that pharmaceuticals are affecting fish, frogs and — small amounts of estrogen cause male fish to develop eggs, for instance. But the impact on human health is unclear. Although research on pharmaceuticals in the water supply began almost a decade ago, no one seems to know which compounds need to be removed or how to remove them from the water safely. And no one seems to know which government agency should step forward and take action.

“All of these drugs out there on the market are going to be discharged into the environment and we don’t know what the effects are, because there’s no requirement to do an assessment on the front end,” said Nick Schroeck, executive director of the Great Lakes Environmental Law Center in Detroit.

“We’re not trying to scare anyone, but we need to know what these chemical compounds will do to the environment and what are the long-term effects for humans. No one seems to know.”

The new study, which will be released in January in the journal Environmental Pollution, was obtained by The New Republic. Conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency, it is the largest study of water coming out of wastewater treatment plants.

It looked at samples from 50 large-size wastewater treatment plants nationwide and tested for 56 drugs including oxycodone, high-blood pressure medications, and over-the-counter drugs like Tylenol and ibuprofen. More than half the samples tested positive for at least 25 of the drugs monitored, the study said. High blood pressure medications appeared in the highest concentrations and most frequently.

“We were surprised to find that many drugs occurring across all the wastewater plants,” said Mitchell Kostich, the EPA research biologist who led the study. “We were also surprised to see so many drugs of a particular class — the high blood pressure medications appear at those levels across the board.”

One reason for the higher numbers is better technology, which can trace drugs at smaller amounts. But it’s also because we’re taking more drugs than ever, from over-the-counter medications for headaches to prescription medications for depression, acid reflux and high blood pressure. According to a Mayo Clinic study released in June, nearly 70% of Americans take one prescription drug, up from 48% in 2007-2008.

Health officials say these compounds in water pose a low risk to humans. But they also said that there are no good models to predict the effect this cocktail of low-level medications would have on human or aquatic life. Right now, there are no federal or state regulations requiring drinking water or wastewater plants to monitor pharmaceutical compounds in water.

“Who would have thought that those trace amounts would be having that impact on fish?” said Raanan Bloom, senior environmental officer for the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, the FDA division that oversees most medications and reviews new applications. “We didn’t expect that to happen at those concentrations.”

When a pharmaceutical company applies for new drug approval, it has to submit an estimate of how much that drug will end up in the environment. They use a model based on how many people they estimate will take the drug, how it will pass through the body, and how it degrades in water. If the estimate is over 1 part per billion (ppb) the FDA can ask for a more thorough evaluation of how that drug will affect aquatic life.

On July 7, 2010, two environmental groups — the National Resources Defense Council and the Great Lakes Environmental Law Center — filed a citizen’s petition asking the FDA to ask for a more thorough evaluation for all new drug applications, no matter what the estimate.

Last February, the FDA denied the petition. In its reply, the agency said the groups did not account for the significant dilution that occurs after compounds leave a wastewater treatment plant. The agency also said it could ask for more complete assessments for certain classes of drugs that present “extraordinary circumstances” to do serious harm to the environment.

Although eight of the drugs in the EPA study came in at maximum levels above that 1 ppb “brightline,” FDA officials said it would be a challenge to go back and ask the pharmaceutical companies to re-evaluate.

Shane Snyder is co-director at the Arizona Laboratory for Emerging Contaminants at the University of Arizona and has been working on pharmaceuticals in the water supply for more than a decade.

So far, there have not been any studies showing effects on human health. It is particularly difficult to study the effects on the most vulnerable populations: pregnant women and the elderly. But Snyder is frustrated that nothing has been done about the drugs that have already been found to be definitely problematic for aquatic life.

“Look at estrogen and endocrine disruptors — here’s a case where there is compelling evidence that it has an effect on aquatic life and still nothing has been done,” said Snyder.

Snyder said it would not be that difficult to figure out how to remove the compounds from the water, but it might be costly and the byproducts might be worse than the original contaminants.

“If you put in ozone or advance oxidization to take out a compound, when you oxidize chemicals it becomes something different,” he said. “So while it’s no longer a statin it’s now some byproduct. It’s now very common to make water more toxic after treatment than it was before treatment.”

Andrew Sawyers, the current EPA administrator for water, declined to be interviewed for this article. An EPA spokesman said the Office of Water was not yet prepared to comment on the report.

So what’s next? More studies. The FDA says it is working on human health studies. And Kostich, the head of the EPA's study, said he planned to focus next on the impact of the hypertension medication on aquatic life.

"It’s hard to know where to start,” he said. “How do you take the blood pressure of a fish?"

Schroeck, of the Great Lakes Environmental Center, said he’d like to see future studies focus on that low-level mixture.

“The scary thing for me is not one particular drug, although do I want to be drinking Viagra in my water? No,” said Shroeck.

“It’s potentially hundreds or thousands of compounds interacting with each other and how that affects aquatic life and human health.”

“It’s great that we keep coming up with new and interesting drugs, but we have to look at what the potential impacts are,” he continued. “It’s almost too late to try and put the genie back in the bottle.”

Link to news source
 
Does drinking distilled water help you avoid these chemicals? Or are they part of the distillation process?
 
Does drinking distilled water help you avoid these chemicals? Or are they part of the distillation process?

I've been distilling water at home since 2001 for all drinking and cooking. It does absolutely get rid of all that crap in the water, just pure H2O.
 
Nothing new here

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/poisonedwaters/

Our government simply "pretends" and always plays catch up. But to their credit, US is doing a better job than most.

It's almost too late? It's WAY too late.

Companies are simply not being held responsible for the damage they do to our waters and environment.

It's not going to change either.
I'm sure they're taking some responsibility: Advise upper management to avoid drinking the water sourced in their area of influence.

A local company solved their toxic waste disposal problems some years ago: They already owned a lot of land surrounding the facility, and it was fenced it in, so they'd just dump their liquid toxins on it at night.
Sure, birth defects in the area were elevated considerably above normal, but at least the company didn't have to pay for proper waste disposal. That would have been really devastating for some people.




It looked at samples from 50 large-size wastewater treatment plants nationwide and tested for 56 drugs including oxycodone, high-blood pressure medications, and over-the-counter drugs like Tylenol and ibuprofen. More than half the samples tested positive for at least 25 of the drugs monitored, the study said. High blood pressure medications appeared in the highest concentrations and most frequently.
Time to set up a fractional distillation plant and reclaim some of that.

"What illegal pharmaceuticals? You mean this simple substance that was obtained from legally-obtained tap water? My good sir, I had no idea that such a material could be purchased at a pharmacy. I thought it was a naturally-occurring compound. So, what can I hook you up with today?"
 
I just drank a gallon of tap water and god damn to I feel gosdaj sjlkhf bcxnmxxx vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
 
What is the percentage of these wastewater treatment plants that send their processed water back into their local drinking water supply?

I would think a study on water drinking sources would be more applicable.
 
Reverse Osmosis filters and distillation filters are the only ways to get most of that stuff out. Neither are cheap...

Distilling water is probably the best method, but it requires energy or a lot of time (solar still). The other consideration is properly cleaning equipment so the end product is safe to drink. A lot of people argue that distilled water is actually more likely to have impurities leach into it.
 
What is the percentage of these wastewater treatment plants that send their processed water back into their local drinking water supply?

I would think a study on water drinking sources would be more applicable.

I'm sure a lot of them in large metropolian areas do simply becuase of cost. It's cheaper to treat it if you already have it in a tank than to remove salt from seawater.

Altanta is an example of a sprawling city that has outgrown its water supply. Lake Lanier was almost empty a few years ago. New York, of course is just playing the numbers game. If everyone flushed their toilet at once, there'd be no water pressure. 😛 (and it's basically NYC and the EPA that we can blame for all these low-flow shower heads, 1.6 gpf toilets, and super HE washers that don't even get our clothes wet....)
 
I'm sure a lot of them in large metropolian areas do simply becuase of cost. It's cheaper to treat it if you already have it in a tank than to remove salt from seawater.

Altanta is an example of a sprawling city that has outgrown its water supply. Lake Lanier was almost empty a few years ago. New York, of course is just playing the numbers game. If everyone flushed their toilet at once, there'd be no water pressure. 😛 (and it's basically NYC and the EPA that we can blame for all these low-flow shower heads, 1.6 gpf toilets, and super HE washers that don't even get our clothes wet....)

My Toto low flow toilet flushes better than my older non-low flow toilets. And my HE washer does a better job of cleaning my clothes than my older non-HE washing machine.

Thankfully, in MA, waste water isn't reused for drinking water.
 
I don't see the problem here?? So you're saying all I need to do reduce my fever, get rid of my aches and pains, AND help avoid heart failure is to just drink some local tap water?? Count me in!!!
 
The real culprit is human liver function. Too high a percentage of the drugs we take are excreted unchanged. MDMA is as high as 65% unchanged when it leaves the body, which is why I made sure to capture my urine during "Together As One" at the LA Sports Arena in 2001......
 
My Toto low flow toilet flushes better than my older non-low flow toilets. And my HE washer does a better job of cleaning my clothes than my older non-HE washing machine.

Thankfully, in MA, waste water isn't reused for drinking water.
Don't kidd yourself. You get all the Moose piss that trickles down from Canada and Maine.

And the Seinfeld episode begs to differ. Remember Jerry and Kramer's hair after the lowflow shower heads?
 
I don't see the problem here?? So you're saying all I need to do reduce my fever, get rid of my aches and pains, AND help avoid heart failure is to just drink some local tap water?? Count me in!!!
Side effects may include but not limited to, fever, runny nose, headaches, cramps, extreme flatulence, death of your first born. If your heart stops beating immediately stop drinking the water and contact your doctor. Women who are pregnant or may become pregnant should not drink the water.
 
Don't kidd yourself. You get all the Moose piss that trickles down from Canada and Maine.

And the Seinfeld episode begs to differ. Remember Jerry and Kramer's hair after the lowflow shower heads?

Actually, no. But keep on being ignorant. Yes, Seinfield represents all low-flow shower heads.
 
Back
Top