AP Probe Finds Drugs in Drinking Water

[DeepModem Mom]

Source: LAT/AP

By JEFF DONN, MARTHA MENDOZA and JUSTIN PRITCHARD
Associated Press Writers

A vast array of pharmaceuticals -- including antibiotics, anti-convulsants, mood stabilizers and sex hormones -- have been found in the drinking water supplies of at least 41 million Americans, an Associated Press investigation shows.

To be sure, the concentrations of these pharmaceuticals are tiny, measured in quantities of parts per billion or trillion, far below the levels of a medical dose. Also, utilities insist their water is safe.

But the presence of so many prescription drugs -- and over-the-counter medicines like acetaminophen and ibuprofen -- in so much of our drinking water is heightening worries among scientists of long-term consequences to human health.

In the course of a five-month inquiry, the AP discovered that drugs have been detected in the drinking water supplies of 24 major metropolitan areas -- from Southern California to Northern New Jersey, from Detroit to Louisville, Ky.

Water providers rarely disclose results of pharmaceutical screenings, unless pressed, the AP found....

***

...while researchers do not yet understand the exact risks from decades of persistent exposure to random combinations of low levels of pharmaceuticals, recent studies -- which have gone virtually unnoticed by the general public -- have found alarming effects on human cells and wildlife....

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/wire/ats-ap_top10mar09,0,2800063,print.story

[Liberal Veteran]

1. Hey, if you buy into that homeopathic stuff, that means free medicine!

:D

[Ian David]

56. Actually, that would make it anti-medicine. But it's not homeopathic unless it's gone.

The "vibrational memory" left behind by a substance that is NO LONGER in water that USED TO contain it.

So, to cure poison ivy, you supposedly put something in water that causes itching (like poison ivy), remove the substance, and the water supposedly will contain the "vibrational memory" (aka "sympathetic magic") of the poison ivy (that is no longer there) and cure you.

If you assume that Tylenol cures headaches, then a "homeopathic solution" of Tylenol would CAUSE headaches.

But if the ACTUAL Tylenol (and not the imaginary foolish idea of a vibrational memory of it) is in the water, then it's not homeopathic, because nobody has ever been able to measure homeopathic anything to claim their $1 Million James Randi Prize.

[blm]

2. Teresa Heinz-Kerry has spoken about this AND the cosmetic industry chemicals that are absorbed

into our bodies.

This entire issue doesn't get nearly enough attention. The fascists use the newsmedia to attack those who DO try to TELL the PEOPLE.

[Kittycat]

29. Speaking of cosmetic industry...

Would you happen to know of brands to use/avoid? I know many WAH & new companies are pushing this mineral thing, but I'm wondering if it's okay to use.

[blm]

30. Ask that question in Kerry forum. There are a few enviros there who can point you exactly where

you want to go. They have had this discussion with Teresa recently.

[gauguin57]

81. I was so bummed when The Body Shop got bought by (animal-tester) L'Oreal.

Cuz I used to do Body Shop stuff cuz I knew they weren't animal tested. But now, who knows. And the Body Shop founder died, so her opinion is no longer even in the mix.

Don't know about those minerals ... a friend uses them regularly, and seems no worse for the wear.

[kirby]

3. It is so diluted...

That I wonder if this is really anything to this except scary 'sounding'. I mean there are other things that are poison water but it is so diluted, it does not matter.

I mean think of all those Sharks and Whales who take a crap in the ocean.

[Mrs. Overall]

4. With a response like that, I think you have a future as an administrator in the EPA or FDA:

That's the kind of no-nonsense-smarts that this administration loves!

[librechik]

5. give the kid a break; he probably hasn't found the

:sarcasm: smilie yet.

[RC]

12. No-nonsense or no sense smarts?

[Donnachaidh]

6. to some with sensitivities to those drugs

It can be a huge problem. And just how long have we been drinking *diluted* pharmaceuticals?

Sounds like Mr. Dilution should work for Limppaunch. Let's marginalize yet another health issue so no one pays attention. :sarcasm:

[bluesmail]

8. well I like having a choice.

[Liberal Veteran]

9. It homeopathy, I tell you!

[Trillo]

18. Try searching for Nonmonotonic Dose-Response

http://www.ourstolenfuture.org/newscience/lowdose/nonmonotonic.htm

[kirby]

28. Thanks...

for posting one response with some educational material rather than all the other responses that assume because I question/am curious about something, I must be a Bush lackey.

[tpsbmam]

43. Ignore the nastiness -- it's not worth your BP.....

The other thing to consider are things like antibiotics and their increasing ineffectiveness due to over-prescription and bacteria mutations. So what is constant injection of low-level antibiotics doing to us? Or doing to the bacteria that are living in the water with it? Is it possible that the antibiotics in the water are causing the bacteria to mutate and over time become immune to the antibiotics, creating yet more antibiotic-resistant bacteria? It could happen even at low levels -- all of that stuff coexists before and after processing. Lots to think about with this revelation.

[bushmeister0]

45. Doctors proscribing antibiotics for the common cold doesn't help either.

When I used to work in Aventura, Florida, the facelift captial of the world, I used to always overhear conversations between our entitled clientel at the Borders where I worked about how this one or that one had a cold and they got their doctor to write them a script for antibiotics. Presumably, the doctor knew a cold is a virsus and therefore the antibiotics would have no effect, but they wanted to make bank so they just went ahead anyway.

Not only were they taking advantage of their rich patients, but they were also endangering everyone else.

My God, most MDs are no better than witch doctors dressed in clean white coats.

[VermeerLives]

50. LOL!

"no better than witch doctors dressed in clean white coats."

Goodness, it's a good thing I wasn't drinking anything when I read that or I'd be replacing my keyboard!! Good one!

[AngryAmish]

68. A friend of mine is a nurse practitioner

Some months ago she moved from a administrative job to a clinical job. She is very well aware of the problems of antibiotic abuse and the dangers therein from infectious agents. She swore she would not hand them out for colds and flu.

Six months of dealing with patients have broken her. People demand them and think they are going to die without them. Folks do not understand the differences between viruses and bacteria. It is hard to consider the social pressure there is to prescribe antibiotics like candy. For the person prescribing there is no upside to denying the prescription. Antibiotic resistance is a classic example of an externality.

Likewise, people do not understand large numbers. If something is present in parts per billion or trillion then for all intents and purposes it cannot effect people or the environment. This is the scary medical story of the day.

[Megahurtz]

22. You are gross.

[JerseygirlCT]

26. But what's the cumulative effect?

How about the effect on babies, for whom even a dilute amount might be dangerous?

[aasleka]

52. Well, ask yourself why the EPA has changed the standards for

treating raw water, they dumped chlorine and it only causes cancer in like 1 out of 56 million.

[bluesmail]

7. I knew it, I just knew it.

[L0oniX]

10. Makes you wonder what else is in any water used in comercial drinks...

like tea, soda, juice, etc.

[1monster]

11. That's one reason my family drinks distilled water....

[tpsbmam]

44. We do too -- and our dogs drink distilled as well.....

I'm not putting unknown substances in any of our systems!

[Harry Monroe]

58. My dog drinks out of the toilet...

...no matter how many times I offer that mutt Perrier!!!

[tpsbmam]

66. My dogs would NEVER drink out of the toilet......

They can't reach it. ;) We use a water cooler -- one has so many health problems, I started the practice because of her and realized I was more comfortable with it all around. I started drinking distilled water about 10 years ago, why shouldn't they get it?

[AngryAmish]

71. You drink water? Like outta the toilet?

[1monster]

74. No. I drink and cook with water like out of a distilled water bottle. W.C. Fields

would have been happy to drink water had he known it could be distilled like his favorite beverages.

[AngryAmish]

75. WC Fields drinks toilet water?

[1monster]

78. Unless I'm mistaken, he doesn't drink ANYTHING.

He's dead.

[Forrest Greene]

13. "Also, utilities insist their water is safe."

Ah! Well, ok then. Never mind.

[flashl]

14. Phew.. Now our towns can say it was in the drinking water ...

Teaspoon of urine can drug test an entire city

WASHINGTON - Researchers have figured out how to give an entire community a drug test using just a teaspoon of wastewater from a city’s sewer plant.

The test wouldn’t be used to finger any single person as a drug user. But it would help federal law enforcement and other agencies track the spread of dangerous drugs, like methamphetamines, across the country.

[lildreamer316]

15. ..and I think this explains why some say Americans are "sheeple" or "lazy" or "stupid".

Maybe, perhaps, it's because we've been DRUGGED.
Ya think??

[Robb]

16. As your attorney, I advise you to drink more water. /nt

[ConcernedCanuk]

17. So, if they tap into your sewer line - YOU'RE BUSTED?

.
.
.

From phone conversations, e-mails, now your sewer.

Man - that Homeland Security will have you covered from one end to the other!

Whenever you do drugs

Visit a neighbor you don't particularly like

Use the privy before you leave

[formercia]

19. Doesn't that make you wonder

how many people that water has been through before you drank it?


A nice thought for the rest of the day.

Like the Astronauts used to say: Today's pee is tomorrow's Tang.

[OhioChick]

20. Ugh n/t

[Megahurtz]

21. "AP probe finds drugs in drinking water"

At Yahoo News---

>>>>>>" A vast array of pharmaceuticals — including antibiotics, anti-convulsants, mood stabilizers and sex hormones — have been found in the drinking water supplies of at least 41 million Americans, an Associated Press investigation shows.

To be sure, the concentrations of these pharmaceuticals are tiny, measured in quantities of parts per billion or trillion, far below the levels of a medical dose. Also, utilities insist their water is safe.

But the presence of so many prescription drugs — and over-the-counter medicines like acetaminophen and ibuprofen — in so much of our drinking water is heightening worries among scientists of long-term consequences to human health.

In the course of a five-month inquiry, the AP discovered that drugs have been detected in the drinking water supplies of 24 major metropolitan areas — from Southern California to Northern New Jersey, from Detroit to Louisville, Ky.

Water providers rarely disclose results of pharmaceutical screenings, unless pressed, the AP found. For example, the head of a group representing major California suppliers said the public "doesn't know how to interpret the information" and might be unduly alarmed.

How do the drugs get into the water?

People take pills. Their bodies absorb some of the medication, but the rest of it passes through and is flushed down the toilet. The wastewater is treated before it is discharged into reservoirs, rivers or lakes. Then, some of the water is cleansed again at drinking water treatment plants and piped to consumers. But most treatments do not remove all drug residue.

And while researchers do not yet understand the exact risks from decades of persistent exposure to random combinations of low levels of pharmaceuticals, recent studies — which have gone virtually unnoticed by the general public — have found alarming effects on human cells and wildlife.

"We recognize it is a growing concern and we're taking it very seriously," said Benjamin H. Grumbles, assistant administrator for water at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Members of the AP National Investigative Team reviewed hundreds of scientific reports, analyzed federal drinking water databases, visited environmental study sites and treatment plants and interviewed more than 230 officials, academics and scientists. They also surveyed the nation's 50 largest cities and a dozen other major water providers, as well as smaller community water providers in all 50 states.

Here are some of the key test results obtained by the AP:

_Officials in Philadelphia said testing there discovered 56 pharmaceuticals or byproducts in treated drinking water, including medicines for pain, infection, high cholesterol, asthma, epilepsy, mental illness and heart problems. Sixty-three pharmaceuticals or byproducts were found in the city's watersheds.

_Anti-epileptic and anti-anxiety medications were detected in a portion of the treated drinking water for 18.5 million people in Southern California.

_Researchers at the U.S. Geological Survey analyzed a Passaic Valley Water Commission drinking water treatment plant, which serves 850,000 people in Northern New Jersey, and found a metabolized angina medicine and the mood-stabilizing carbamazepine in drinking water.

_A sex hormone was detected in San Francisco's drinking water.

_The drinking water for Washington, D.C., and surrounding areas tested positive for six pharmaceuticals.

_Three medications, including an antibiotic, were found in drinking water supplied to Tucson, Ariz.

The situation is undoubtedly worse than suggested by the positive test results in the major population centers documented by the AP.

The federal government doesn't require any testing and hasn't set safety limits for drugs in water. Of the 62 major water providers contacted, the drinking water for only 28 was tested. Among the 34 that haven't: Houston, Chicago, Miami, Baltimore, Phoenix, Boston and New York City's Department of Environmental Protection, which delivers water to 9 million people.

Some providers screen only for one or two pharmaceuticals, leaving open the possibility that others are present.

The AP's investigation also indicates that watersheds, the natural sources of most of the nation's water supply, also are contaminated. Tests were conducted in the watersheds of 35 of the 62 major providers surveyed by the AP, and pharmaceuticals were detected in 28.

Yet officials in six of those 28 metropolitan areas said they did not go on to test their drinking water — Fairfax, Va.; Montgomery County in Maryland; Omaha, Neb.; Oklahoma City; Santa Clara, Calif., and New York City.

The New York state health department and the USGS tested the source of the city's water, upstate. They found trace concentrations of heart medicine, infection fighters, estrogen, anti-convulsants, a mood stabilizer and a tranquilizer.

City water officials declined repeated requests for an interview. In a statement, they insisted that "New York City's drinking water continues to meet all federal and state regulations regarding drinking water quality in the watershed and the distribution system" — regulations that do not address trace pharmaceuticals.

In several cases, officials at municipal or regional water providers told the AP that pharmaceuticals had not been detected, but the AP obtained the results of tests conducted by independent researchers that showed otherwise. For example, water department officials in New Orleans said their water had not been tested for pharmaceuticals, but a Tulane University researcher and his students have published a study that found the pain reliever naproxen, the sex hormone estrone and the anti-cholesterol drug byproduct clofibric acid in treated drinking water.

Of the 28 major metropolitan areas where tests were performed on drinking water supplies, only Albuquerque; Austin, Texas; and Virginia Beach, Va.; said tests were negative. The drinking water in Dallas has been tested, but officials are awaiting results. Arlington, Texas, acknowledged that traces of a pharmaceutical were detected in its drinking water but cited post-9/11 security concerns in refusing to identify the drug.

The AP also contacted 52 small water providers — one in each state, and two each in Missouri and Texas — that serve communities with populations around 25,000. All but one said their drinking water had not been screened for pharmaceuticals; officials in Emporia, Kan., refused to answer AP's questions, also citing post-9/11 issues.

Rural consumers who draw water from their own wells aren't in the clear either, experts say.

The Stroud Water Research Center, in Avondale, Pa., has measured water samples from New York City's upstate watershed for caffeine, a common contaminant that scientists often look for as a possible signal for the presence of other pharmaceuticals. Though more caffeine was detected at suburban sites, researcher Anthony Aufdenkampe was struck by the relatively high levels even in less populated areas.

He suspects it escapes from failed septic tanks, maybe with other drugs. "Septic systems are essentially small treatment plants that are essentially unmanaged and therefore tend to fail," Aufdenkampe said.

Even users of bottled water and home filtration systems don't necessarily avoid exposure. Bottlers, some of which simply repackage tap water, do not typically treat or test for pharmaceuticals, according to the industry's main trade group. The same goes for the makers of home filtration systems.

Contamination is not confined to the United States. More than 100 different pharmaceuticals have been detected in lakes, rivers, reservoirs and streams throughout the world. Studies have detected pharmaceuticals in waters throughout Asia, Australia, Canada and Europe — even in Swiss lakes and the North Sea.

For example, in Canada, a study of 20 Ontario drinking water treatment plants by a national research institute found nine different drugs in water samples. Japanese health officials in December called for human health impact studies after detecting prescription drugs in drinking water at seven different sites.

In the United States, the problem isn't confined to surface waters. Pharmaceuticals also permeate aquifers deep underground, source of 40 percent of the nation's water supply. Federal scientists who drew water in 24 states from aquifers near contaminant sources such as landfills and animal feed lots found minuscule levels of hormones, antibiotics and other drugs.

Perhaps it's because Americans have been taking drugs — and flushing them unmetabolized or unused — in growing amounts. Over the past five years, the number of U.S. prescriptions rose 12 percent to a record 3.7 billion, while nonprescription drug purchases held steady around 3.3 billion, according to IMS Health and The Nielsen Co.

"People think that if they take a medication, their body absorbs it and it disappears, but of course that's not the case," said EPA scientist Christian Daughton, one of the first to draw attention to the issue of pharmaceuticals in water in the United States.

Some drugs, including widely used cholesterol fighters, tranquilizers and anti-epileptic medications, resist modern drinking water and wastewater treatment processes. Plus, the EPA says there are no sewage treatment systems specifically engineered to remove pharmaceuticals.

One technology, reverse osmosis, removes virtually all pharmaceutical contaminants but is very expensive for large-scale use and leaves several gallons of polluted water for every one that is made drinkable.

Another issue: There's evidence that adding chlorine, a common process in conventional drinking water treatment plants, makes some pharmaceuticals more toxic.

Human waste isn't the only source of contamination. Cattle, for example, are given ear implants that provide a slow release of trenbolone, an anabolic steroid used by some bodybuilders, which causes cattle to bulk up. But not all the trenbolone circulating in a steer is metabolized. A German study showed 10 percent of the steroid passed right through the animals.

Water sampled downstream of a Nebraska feedlot had steroid levels four times as high as the water taken upstream. Male fathead minnows living in that downstream area had low testosterone levels and small heads.

Other veterinary drugs also play a role. Pets are now treated for arthritis, cancer, heart disease, diabetes, allergies, dementia, and even obesity — sometimes with the same drugs as humans. The inflation-adjusted value of veterinary drugs rose by 8 percent, to $5.2 billion, over the past five years, according to an analysis of data from the Animal Health Institute.

Ask the pharmaceutical industry whether the contamination of water supplies is a problem, and officials will tell you no. "Based on what we now know, I would say we find there's little or no risk from pharmaceuticals in the environment to human health," said microbiologist Thomas White, a consultant for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.

But at a conference last summer, Mary Buzby — director of environmental technology for drug maker Merck & Co. Inc. — said: "There's no doubt about it, pharmaceuticals are being detected in the environment and there is genuine concern that these compounds, in the small concentrations that they're at, could be causing impacts to human health or to aquatic organisms."

Recent laboratory research has found that small amounts of medication have affected human embryonic kidney cells, human blood cells and human breast cancer cells. The cancer cells proliferated too quickly; the kidney cells grew too slowly; and the blood cells showed biological activity associated with inflammation.

Also, pharmaceuticals in waterways are damaging wildlife across the nation and around the globe, research shows. Notably, male fish are being feminized, creating egg yolk proteins, a process usually restricted to females. Pharmaceuticals also are affecting sentinel species at the foundation of the pyramid of life — such as earth worms in the wild and zooplankton in the laboratory, studies show.

Some scientists stress that the research is extremely limited, and there are too many unknowns. They say, though, that the documented health problems in wildlife are disconcerting.

"It brings a question to people's minds that if the fish were affected ... might there be a potential problem for humans?" EPA research biologist Vickie Wilson told the AP. "It could be that the fish are just exquisitely sensitive because of their physiology or something. We haven't gotten far enough along."

With limited research funds, said Shane Snyder, research and development project manager at the Southern Nevada Water Authority, a greater emphasis should be put on studying the effects of drugs in water.

"I think it's a shame that so much money is going into monitoring to figure out if these things are out there, and so little is being spent on human health," said Snyder. "They need to just accept that these things are everywhere — every chemical and pharmaceutical could be there. It's time for the EPA to step up to the plate and make a statement about the need to study effects, both human and environmental."

To the degree that the EPA is focused on the issue, it appears to be looking at detection. Grumbles acknowledged that just late last year the agency developed three new methods to "detect and quantify pharmaceuticals" in wastewater. "We realize that we have a limited amount of data on the concentrations," he said. "We're going to be able to learn a lot more."

While Grumbles said the EPA had analyzed 287 pharmaceuticals for possible inclusion on a draft list of candidates for regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act, he said only one, nitroglycerin, was on the list. Nitroglycerin can be used as a drug for heart problems, but the key reason it's being considered is its widespread use in making explosives.

So much is unknown. Many independent scientists are skeptical that trace concentrations will ultimately prove to be harmful to humans. Confidence about human safety is based largely on studies that poison lab animals with much higher amounts.

There's growing concern in the scientific community, meanwhile, that certain drugs — or combinations of drugs — may harm humans over decades because water, unlike most specific foods, is consumed in sizable amounts every day.

Our bodies may shrug off a relatively big one-time dose, yet suffer from a smaller amount delivered continuously over a half century, perhaps subtly stirring allergies or nerve damage. Pregnant women, the elderly and the very ill might be more sensitive.

Many concerns about chronic low-level exposure focus on certain drug classes: chemotherapy that can act as a powerful poison; hormones that can hamper reproduction or development; medicines for depression and epilepsy that can damage the brain or change behavior; antibiotics that can allow human germs to mutate into more dangerous forms; pain relievers and blood-pressure diuretics.

For several decades, federal environmental officials and nonprofit watchdog environmental groups have focused on regulated contaminants — pesticides, lead, PCBs — which are present in higher concentrations and clearly pose a health risk.

However, some experts say medications may pose a unique danger because, unlike most pollutants, they were crafted to act on the human body.

"These are chemicals that are designed to have very specific effects at very low concentrations. That's what pharmaceuticals do. So when they get out to the environment, it should not be a shock to people that they have effects," says zoologist John Sumpter at Brunel University in London, who has studied trace hormones, heart medicine and other drugs.

And while drugs are tested to be safe for humans, the timeframe is usually over a matter of months, not a lifetime. Pharmaceuticals also can produce side effects and interact with other drugs at normal medical doses. That's why — aside from therapeutic doses of fluoride injected into potable water supplies — pharmaceuticals are prescribed to people who need them, not delivered to everyone in their drinking water.

"We know we are being exposed to other people's drugs through our drinking water, and that can't be good," says Dr. David Carpenter, who directs the Institute for Health and the Environment of the State University of New York at Albany."<<<<<<

We are fucked. Thanks Big Pharma. :sarcasm:

[DesertFlower]

23. safe?

so you have a little of this, a little of that. drinking water, hormones and chemicals in meat, mercury in fish, preservatives in food -- eventually it's going to effect our bodies.

ever wonder why 10 year old girls have breasts? hormones in meat.

15 years ago, funeral directors were saying that they didn't have to embalm bodies too quickly, because of the preservatives that were in the bodies.

[Demeter]

24. If the Water Is So Highly Drugged, Why Don't I Feel Better?

Seriously, the quantities have got to be way below anything like noticeable.

[piesRsquare]

25. This isn't news...

Articles have been written about this for at least 5 years.

Get an on-tap water filter. Aquasana is the best. Brita on-tap is the second-best. Cartridges last about 6 months.

Those pitcher-things don't do a whole lotta good...mind you, they do *something* (i.e., remove a good amount of lead), but the on-tap filters I mentioned above are much, much better.

For all you home-owners, Aquasana even has a "whole-house" filter that you attach to the water main, and it filters the water in the entire house. Cartridge lasts about a year.

http://aquasana.com

[halobeam]

63. The article states that filters, bottled water and wells too, may not escape this.

Do you know if Aquasana filters pharmaceuticals? If you do, I'd like to know.

[go west young man]

27. Don't worry... the Bush administration and our super responsible

congress are on top of things! Of course they won't let the pharmaceuticals dope us all into oblivion!:sarcasm: They are probably busy right now buying some stock in water filtration systems. Gotta make some money from that misfortune ya know! It's called capitalism.

[lovuian]

31. they have said that our water system was being used as

drugging people on a massive scale to keep them passive

this would be it

[depakid]

32. Note that it's not just from humans- but from cows (another of the 999 reasons not to eat beef)

Human waste isn't the only source of contamination.

Cattle, for example, are given ear implants that provide a slow release of trenbolone, an anabolic steroid used by some bodybuilders, which causes cattle to bulk up. But not all the trenbolone circulating in a steer is metabolized. A German study showed 10 percent of the steroid passed right through the animals.

[kestrel91316]

34. kestrel's quickie solution to THIS problem: BOYCOTT BEEF

[depakid]

36. with good reasons -but even so, what happens is this stuff gets into otherwise pristine watersheds

that ostensibly have no human "wastewater" additions. Cattle graze in mountainous areas -where, aside from degrading watersheds- they add their steroids (or their parasites).

As another poster noted: with hormones and their mimics, thee usual "dose = the poison" rule doesn't apply.

Graphed out, the relationship is non-monotonic, e.g. very small amounts over time cause the harm, whereas larger amounts have less toxic results, due to the body's own feedback mechanisms.

[galledgoblin]

54. very good point

if nothing gets us first, the supergerms we're breeding with our meat industry is going to devastate us.

[kestrel91316]

33. One more good reason for me to keep using my Brita pitcher

with its carbon filter.

[krabigirl]

76. Do you know if it filters out pharmaceuticals? I am wondering about this.

We have a Brita filter on our tap, but from reading the article, the pharmaceuticals are extremely difficult to filter out.

[Arctic Dave]

35. I wonder if this has

anything to do with the up swing in antibiotic resistant infections. If the microbe can become immune to the drugs while in the environment it would seem a recipe for a pandemic. Or maybe the bottling corps. are just using scare tactics to boost sales.

[k8conant]

37. I'll keep drinking my well water, thank you very much...

and only get the drugs I myself take.

[krkaufman]

38. 'Children of Men', anyone? n/t

[santamargarita]

49. That's why is a criminal offense to report water quality!

K&R Great film!

[zbdent]

39. Why do I get the feeling this is like the "legally wiretapping" of U.S. citizens?

First, the news was that Bushco was wiretapping U.S. Citizens. Bushco denied.

Various iterations, which culminated in the fact that they were illegally wiretapping U.S. citizens well before the stated reason for wiretapping - catching terrorists after 9/11/2001 ...

So, now there's evidence that the "drugs" are in the water ... but the govt. is admitting that it is in such low levels that it would never, eeeeeeeever affect you ...

I trust this government as far as I could overthrow it ...

[lavenderdiva]

40. I am having trouble with your link,..

when I click it, I get an article entitled 'Studies: Iraq costs US $12Billion per month'. Could you please provide an updated link?

[DeepModem Mom]

46. LAT HAS CHANGED LINK; NEW LINK HERE --

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hGsoyElv4ZL879LW6z2aZS0Pix7AD8VA14500

Thanks for bring this to my attention, lavenderdiva.

[lonestarnot]

60. I found the link above thanks. Maybe this is for enhancing the prison population?

We need more prisoners you know.

[lavenderdiva]

64. thank you!

:hi:

[Sam Ervin jret]

41. fixing your water at home is only part of the answer, our whole world is affected

remember the story about the birds and the bees.

The dying off of bee colonies from multiple factors, both environmental and viral can be explained by this one pollution problem.

I'm not saying that there is evidence of that now, but logic could push studies there.

Water containing too much poisonous and teratogenic material would affect the smaller animals more, and the generations of insects would show it before larger animals with longer life spans. Having one queen per colony would also multiply the problem. They are also showing signs of virus problems unseen before. This could easily be answered by an overexposure to antibiotics. It happens to people all the time. The bees have then suffered from total hive break down. No bees no pollination. No pollination. No plants. No plants... well you get the idea.

[OKthatsIT]

42. AND, all of it goes back into the environment....poor animals

If we really care about the Earth...we'd fous more on detoxifying the environment of chemicals.

Carbon credits are bullcrap. We should be going back to our old laws f the 70's, before Reagan and Bush DESTROYED AMERICAN SENSIBILIIIY in the 80's.

[DeepModem Mom]

47. ATTENTION: NEW LINK FOR THIS STORY HERE --

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hGsoyElv4ZL879LW6z2aZS0Pix7AD8VA14500

[bushmeister0]

48. Gives new meaning to the old question: what's in the water in DC?

The AP story says:

"The drinking water for Washington, D.C., and surrounding areas tested positive for six pharmaceuticals."

Really explains a lot of things coming out of Wahington these days. I wonder which six pharaceuticals were found? Something tells me Viagra is probably a leading contender, knowing most of those dirty old coots in the Senate.

[bdamomma]

51. this finding is truly disgusting, now they are drugging the american

people, poison food and poison water, these thugs have to pay for their crimes to humanity.

[Ian David]

53. Maybe only drinking rainwater and vodka isn't such a bad idea after all. n/t

[galledgoblin]

55. rainwater? depends...

might be chock full of the chemicals we pump into the air. mmm, coal!

[Ian David]

57. Yeah, we've fucked that up too, haven't we? n/t

[AngryAmish]

70. Mercury!

[lonestarnot]

59. Are ya high? That link is to "Spain's Socialist Win Re-Election!

Two many valiums in dat water!

[DeepModem Mom]

61. LOL! I'm glad you found the new link, lone! nt

[dweller]

62. Thank you Mother

Earth for my deep and abundant, cool and clean flowing well.


dp

[WinkyDink]

65. And I was told that purifying "isn't rocket science". Too bad we're using rocket scientists. LINK:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=2725456

And, IMHO, the ABC story is expurgated, leaving the "toilet water" part for a future news cycle, lest the public become outraged as well as very unhappy.

Oh, and the "Good Morning America" segment ended in chuckles from Diane Sawyer, all about how it's just too funny to consider how to dispose of our pills.

[DeepModem Mom]

67. Oh, boy. Thanks for adding that link, WinkyDink! nt

[onehandle]

69. This is why we have a SPRING water cooler in our kitchen.

We use it for all cooking and drinking. We even give it to our cats.

I just wish we could bathe in it. We have a whole house filtration system, but of course that is only so effective.

[Javaman]

72. So, hell, does this mean the seniors of this nation can now get their

perscription drugs for free, just by drinking the water?

moron* and his room full of dopes won't like this one little bit, not one little bit.

This just in:
Drinking water will now be charged for by the cup!!!

[Indy Lurker]

73. It seems really dilute

At 100 parts per billion, you would need to drink 500 billion milligrams to get a (1) 500 mg tablet.

That would be 500,000,000,000 mg = 500,000,000 grams = 500,000 kg

Since there are 3.8 kg per gallon of water were talking about 131,578 gallons.

At 1 gallon per day, (which is (8) 16 oz glasses of water) it would take 131,578 day or 360 years to drink enough water to consume (1) 500mg tablet.

And of course if it's only 100 parts per trillion, it would take 360,000 years of drinking a gallon a day to consume 500mg.

yep, very dilute.


ONEDIT: can someone check my math.

[Solon]

84. The amount may not matter...

There are plenty of water born bacteria that are dangerous to human health, and the infections are treated by many of these same antibiotics. Constant exposure of even a minuscule amount of these antibiotics, especially in the environments(like water) where they can reproduce means that this bacteria can evolve to resist or become immune from these drugs.

[krabigirl]

77. And it's not just in the U.S., it's everywhere. They even found it in Swiss lakes.

according to the AP article...wow.

[theophilus]

79. Well there is this to think about, too.

There are several things like this on the ol' Google:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/05/AR2006090501384.html

[Supersedeas]

80. remember the character in Dr. Strangelove

[Xithras]

82. Depends a bit on where you live. LA has a big problem with this. SF doesn't.

The difference is where the water is sourced from. LA pulls its water from the Sac Delta and the Colorado, both of which lie downstream from major metropolitan centers. Those centers treat their wastewater, dump it into the rivers, and let it flow downstream. LA pumps it out later, treats it again, and sends it to the taps.

SF, on the other hand, gets its water from high in the Sierra's above any metro areas. The only pollutants in their water supply come from the hordes of tourists who use the toilets around Tuolumne Meadows in Yosemite, and who urinate too close to the rivers in the Yosemite backcountry. Some pharmaceuticals can make it from there all the way into SF (especially those related to the BC pill), but the levels are much lower than in other cities, because the actual pollution is from a relatively small source. A city like Stockton pumps more waste into the upstream water source for LA in a single day than the Yosemite tourists dump into SF's water supply in a whole year (of course, if you flush in Yosemite Valley, the wastewater eventually makes it into the Merced River, which ends up in LA, not SF, so the whole system is really biased against LA).

My drinking water comes out of a 40' well that sits 250 feet from a river. That river is downstream from two towns, and the water in my aquifier comes straight from the river, so I don't want to know what's in it. I have a whole house charged carbon filtration system, but that's the only thing standing between me and untreated river water. I love living in the countryside, but this is one of the disadvantages of doing so.

[Dogmudgeon]

83. So many molecules, so few receptors ...

... or is that the other way around?

And to think that in tea early 1960s, the big scare story was the threat of the Viet Cong or some other Commies putting LSD in our water supply!

--p!
Hey! Who tainted my sludge with the purified water?

[Robeson]

85. I have no doubt, our President will get right on this....

...:sarcasm:

[undergroundpanther]

86. This has been known for a long time

Here's an article from 1991!
http://www.ehponline.org/docs/2000/108-10/forum.html
http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20000401/fob1.asp
http://www.uswaternews.com/archives/arcquality/5pharpass11.html
http://www.uswaternews.com/archives/arcquality/4antiagen9.html

And the results are hidden from us
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-03-10-cities-water_N.htm
Prescription meds are found in sharks,june 2007.
http://www.uswaternews.com/archives/arcquality/7sciesayx6.html