Studies Highlight Toxic Chemicals in Drinking Water

A study released this week highlights how 6 million Americans are living with drinking water that’s laced with toxic chemicals. Coupled with that report – another study that shows how those chemicals suppress the immune system – especially among children.

Something in the Drinking Water

The Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health published research in the journal Environmental Science and Technology Letters that delved into thousands of drinking water samples from across the nation. Researchers looked for certain chemicals – called “perfluorinated” chemicals – which are linked to cancer and other health problems. These are common household chemicals that have been in use for decades in food wrappers, clothing, and on carpets and nonstick pots and pans. Researchers noted where concentrations were highest, and what possible sources of contamination exist.

“We found that water supplies close to industrial production facilities, military fire training areas, airports certified to use firefighting foams that contain perfluorinated chemicals, and wastewater treatment plants were more likely to have detectable levels of perfluorinated chemicals,” said one of the study’s authors, Laurel Schaider, PhD, from the Silent Spring Institute.

Contaminated water supplies were found in 33 states but were most prevalent in 13 states serving 6 million people: California, New Jersey, North Carolina, Alabama, Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, New York, Georgia, Minnesota, Arizona, Massachusetts and Illinois.

But those numbers might not reflect reality, according to researchers.

In a press release, lead author Xindi Hu, a doctoral student in the Department of Environmental Health at Harvard Chan School and Environmental Science and Engineering at SEAS said: “The actual number of people exposed may be even higher than our study found, because government data for levels of these compounds in drinking water is lacking for almost a third of the U.S. population—about 100 million people.”

The Ohio Valley Legacy

Chemicals were also detectable in Kentucky as well as in Ohio and West Virginia where a decade ago, one of the first known areas of contamination was discovered.

In 2005 it came to light that the chemical company DuPont contaminated water sources in the Ohio Valley with a perfluorinated chemical called PFOA or c8. A lawsuit established a broad medical study of affected residents, which Schaider says paved the way for further science.

"Engineers have already estimated it's going to take 200 years of filtration to get [C8] out of the water," said Vienna resident, Dr. Paul Brooks.

“A lot of what we know about the human health effects of PFOA come from the Ohio River Valley and the C8 Study where over 30,000 community members were involved in a health study,” Schaider said, “and the results showed that there were 6 health effects that were linked to their PFOA exposure.”

Kidney and testicular cancer, pregnancy-induced hypertension, and thyroid disease are some of the maladies that were linked to exposure of PFOA.

In Vienna, West Virginia, residents like Paul Brooks, MD, have been living for decades with c8 levels in their drinking water above EPA’s long term exposure health advisory. When EPA announced the advisory this summer, construction began soon after to add filters to the water system. Brooks still doesn’t trust the water or the EPA’s advisory.

Brooks is a physician who helped set up the original C8 study in the area, drawing samples and taking health surveys from thousands of Ohio Valley residents.

“And with as much saturation as we have here in the environment,” Brooks said, “engineers have already estimated it’s going to take 200 years of filtration to get it out of the water.”

Brooks said health effects have been documented at levels lower than the EPA’s recommended standard. And for those with chronic exposure, he worries about the effects of bio-accumulating the chemical. Brooks uses an activated carbon filter in his home – which does filter out PFOA. Brooks says every drop of water in the region needs to be filtered.

A Long Term Study of Children’s Immune Responses

The second Harvard study released today builds on the C8 Study from the Ohio Valley, as well as a growing body of health research.

The study was led by Philippe Grandjean, MD, DMSc., who has become one of the foremost experts on health effects of these chemicals. His study looks at long term effects of perfluorinated chemicals on the immune systems of exposed children. He explains it takes years to pass the chemicals out of your system.

“They stay in the body for a long time,” Grandjean explained, “therefore it’s also plausible – while they harm the immune system today – they probably also will down the road. And that’s exactly what we found.”

Seven years ago the federal Environmental Protection Agency issued a health advisory for anyone with short term exposure to PFOA. Then in May, a long-term health advisory was announced. Towns across the country in states like Vermont, Alabama, Michigan and West Virginia are all adjusting water systems to meet the new suggested threshold. Grandjean said the EPA’s advisory is a step in the right direction, but more action is required.

“The new water limits will essentially maintain status quo or if worse comes to worse, actually increase levels that are typical for Americans” Grandjean said. “If you drink that a lot of that water that is permissible, many Americans are likely to increase their body burden.”

Reducing Your Exposure

One of the Harvard report’s authors, Laurel Schaider pointed out that drinking water is only one exposure path for these chemicals. She said filtering water is an important and effective way to protect yourself – but there are other thoughts to consider as well:

  • Avoid stain-resistant carpents and upholstery
  • Avoid “perfluor-“, “polyfluor-“, “PTFE” on labels
  • Select cast iron or enamel cookware
  • Eat more fresh foods to avoid fast food packaging
  • Minimize contact with fluorinated ski waxes
  • Ask yourself, do I need this product to have fluorinated chemicals?

Harvard/Syracuse Study: West Virginia Among Those to Benefit Most from Proposed Carbon Regulations

The Harvard School of Public Health together with Syracuse University released a study of potential air quality benefits based on the first-of-their-kind carbon dioxide emissions reduction proposal the Environmental Protection Agency revealed this month. According to researchers, West Virginia is among the state’s to benefit most from the proposed rules.

When President Obama announced a year ago that there would be a program to reduce carbon emissions from power plants, Syracuse University professor of civil and environmental engineering Charles Driscoll started compiling several different policy options that the EPA would likely pursue.  From there he worked to predict how such policies would compare considering co-benefits of reductions in power plant emissions.

“The overall objective is to reduce carbon emissions from power plants,” Driscoll said, “but associated with fossil fuel emissions, there are other air pollutants that are released such as sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, and nitrogen oxide, which contributes to ozone; and then some of these pollutants not only have health effects, but also have effects on ecosystems.”

Key Findings

  1. A strong carbon standard would decrease the emissions of multiple other pollutants that are harmful to people and the environment (e.g., SO2, NO x).
  2. As a result of lower emissions, states would experience improved air quality (e.g., fine particles) and less “atmospheric deposition” of pollution (e.g., acid rain). All states would see benefits, with the greatest average improvements in: OH, PA, MD, WV, IL, KY, MO, IN, CO, AL, AR, DE.
  3. A weaker standard limited to power plant retrofits “inside the fence line” would bring little if any additional air quality benefits for states.
  4. The results of our analysis suggest that the stronger the standards (in terms of both stringency and flexibility), the greater and more widespread the added benefits will be for people and the environment.

Health Benefits

In a 2014 report released by the American Lung Association, data indicates that while air pollution in West Virginia’s metropolitan areas has generally improved, there’s more ozone, or smog, in every country where it was measured. The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection corroborates that, indicating that especially in northern counties like Marshall and Brooke, sulfur dioxide continues to be a problem because of proximity to power plants and other large industrial sources.

Health risks associated with air pollution include not only respiratory problems, but also cardiovascular, neurological, and developmental, just to name a few. Driscoll’s report has mapped out how much and where pollution levels are most likely to improve.

“So depending on how the policy is implemented, there could be substantial benefits for air quality, and certainly West Virginia falls into that category; there would be large benefits for West Virginia,” Driscoll said.

The same researchers are also planning to release a subsequent report later this summer that aims to quantify specific health benefits as well as associated cost savings.

Exit mobile version