Pantagraph.com Weather forecast, local radar and more
NewsSunday, March 23, 2008 9:02 PM CDT
Drugs found in drinking water, affecting wildlife and humans
Advertisement

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. | AP interactive | Area residents have less to fear | Drugs in water could impact human cells

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 drugs have been detected in the drinking water supplies of 24 major metropolitan areas across the country.

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. Unused drugs also are flushed. 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.

Investigation’s key findings

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.

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

Chicago’s provider untested

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.

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

The 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.

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.

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.

Small communities?

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. No Central Illinois communities were contacted.

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

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.

Effect on the human body

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.

So much is unknown. Many independent scientists are skeptical that trace concentrations will ultimately prove to be harmful to humans. There’s growing concern in the scientific community, though, 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.

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.”

The AP National Investigative Team can be reached at investigate@ap.org

Take a look
The Ashokan Reservoir, part of New York City's water supply, is seen in Shokan, N.Y., Wednesday, Dec. 19, 2007. (AP Photo/Mike Groll)
Video
Most commented stories
Browse online archives
Recent issues:
Reader comments on this story - 6 total

Note: All views and opinions expressed in reader comments are solely those of the individual submitting the comment, and not those of the Pantagraph or its staff.

disabled&disgruntled wrote on Mar 27, 2008 12:40 PM:

" Great article! however;be careful about what you publish, the feds floundering in red ink may try to abolish Medicaire Part D and encourage us all to just drink more water. "

johnd wrote on Mar 25, 2008 3:41 PM:

" What worries me is all the body waste were drinking!Yuck! "

OGS wrote on Mar 23, 2008 1:33 PM:

" One of the key (false) arguements for the anti-smoking activists to help pass no smoking legislation is that there are no safe levels of second hand smoke." Interesting, huh? No safe levels of something you can see and easily avoid, but no concern from the national health organizations to protect us from what we all believe we are being protected from. Pharmaceuticals in our drinking water. Hmmm. Who would-a thunk it? Smoking bans are a scam, what they don't tell us is real! "

BUCKEYE wrote on Mar 23, 2008 12:59 PM:

" They need to check the water at City Hall . "

matt wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:26 AM:

" it might be too small to affect us, but what about the wildlife we eat? "

The original JD wrote on Mar 22, 2008 7:56 PM:

" It is not just the amounts of chemicals in the waters, but how the combination of them affects people. Minuscule doses of chemicals which has little to no effect on humans can result in really unexpected responses when combined. Studies like this are designed to reassure people by omitting key parts of information, and just emphasizing the minuscule everything is. "

Add your own comments

Please read the rules before posting comments.

You must be logged in to leave comments.
If you don't have a member ID, please register.

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login?
(requires cookies)
  Forgot Your Password?