ABOUT
Smart discussion of the latest science and news on toxins in your food, water, and air, and what government agencies should be doing to protect public health. Enviroblog is a project of EWG Action Fund. (More. . .)
FEED
An EWG podcast for environmental health news on the go.
TIPS
Did we miss something? Email Amanda.
BLOGROLL
STAY CONNECTED
Get our monthly eNewsletter, action alerts, & environmental tips. [Privacy policy, About EWG]
Pepsi to label Aquafina tap water
Project Bottled Water:
Help build our database
FEATURED
BPA in your body: How to minimize your exposure
Caution: These 7 household items may feminize baby boys
BPA in infant formula: This is not a call to panic
7 ways to reduce your exposure to PBDEs
Ask EWG
Is there eco-friendly jewelry?
Are stainless steel water bottles safe?
Is mineral-based makeup safer?
SEARCH
Category Archive
August 28, 2007
Ask EWG: What can I do about fluoride in my water?
Question:I recently read a report in which EWG recommended using carbon filtration to filter tap water for drinking. The report pointed out that carbon filtering is less expensive than reverse osmosis filtration, but it didn't mention that carbon filtration does not remove artificially added fluoride from the water. I know that EWG is concerned with the health effects of fluoride, especially for children and pregnant women. Was this an oversight?
Answer: It's true that EWG opposes water fluoridation. Let’s take a look at the problem and what you can do to protect yourself and your family.
Water fluoridation is a public health problem.
Fluoride is often added to municipal water to reduce tooth-decay in children, but when consumed in water it actually has very little effect on dental health. The chemical is most effective when applied directly to teeth in toothpaste or mouth-rinse.A growing body of evidence demonstrates the known and potential health consequences of fluoridated water:
- permanent fluoride spotting on teeth (called dental fluorosis) is common and generally innocuous
- A 2006 National Research Council review indicated that long-term exposure to fluoride in water increases bone fracture rates.
- The same review concluded that fluoride might also affect thyroid, immune, and endocrine systems.
- Perhaps of greatest concern is a 2006 peer-reviewed study by four Harvard scientists and medical doctors indicating a correlation between fluoride exposure and increased incidence of osteosarcoma -- a dangerous bone cancer -- in boys.
So what’s the solution?
Let’s be perfectly clear: the best solution to this public health problem is for local governments to stop fluoridating their water. You can find out if your local water utility adds fluoride by calling or visiting them online. If they do, be sure to express your concerns about the negative health impacts of fluoridation.In the meantime…
While we recommend that everyone avoid fluoridated tap water whenever they can, the main concern is for pregnant women and bottle-fed infants. Babies are more sensitive to fluoride's effects, and the American Dental Association recommends that their formula not be made with fluoridated water. For those who are able, breast-feeding is the best option for infants. A mother's body filters fluoride out of breast milk.Activated carbon pitcher filters, refrigerator filters, and tap-mounted filters reduce levels of many kinds of common tap water contaminants (including harmful chlorine byproducts), but not fluoride. Reducing those contaminants as well as fluoride requires a reverse osmosis filter. The price tag on reverse osmosis systems has come down significantly in the past year, but they still cost anywhere from $200 to more than $1000.
While we generally don't recommend that people drink bottled water, it is another option in communities with fluoridated tap water for parents who need to add water to their babies' powdered or concentrated formula. Jugs of bottled water without added fluoride can be found in most grocery stores, but be careful -- the cost can quickly add up to that of an in-home fluoride filter (and the bottled water industry has a significant impact on the environment, as well).
Above all, remember:
Pregnant women and babies need plenty of fluid. If the alternatives above aren't available to you, it's always better to stay hydrated by drinking your local tap water (or using it in formula) than to risk dehydration.At EWG, we're working for national standards that will ensure that the best, safest tap water is available everywhere. You can learn more about the safety of your tap water at our National Tap Water Quality Database.
Got a question for our researchers? Send it in! We'll select one (or a few) for next month's edition of Ask EWG.
Want Ask EWG sent to your inbox? Sign up for our monthly bulletin.
How conventional hog farms pass the baton of antibiotic resistance
Researchers at the University of Illinois have concluded that antibiotic resistance created by the nearly ubiquitous use of antibiotics on large-scale hog farms is being transferred between organisms like it's a "relay race." Resistant bacteria end up in groundwater, which makes up 97 percent of drinking water in rural areas.
Here's how it works:
- Pigs at huge conventional farms are routinely fed and injected with the antibiotic tetracycline to treat and prevent illness.
- Bacteria in the animals' digestive tracks and manure evolve genetic resistance to the drug. These super bugs are found in high quantities in manure lagoons (the giant ponds of waste that hog farms use as storage).
- Leaking lagoons -- especially those built before the law required them to be lined -- allow bacteria to migrate to ground water.
- Finally, bacteria carrying the gene for tetracycline resistance pass it off to other organisms like some kind of sci-fi Olympic torch.
"If the genes are there," says lead researcher R.I. Mackie, "potentially they could get into the right organism at the right time and confer resistance to an antibiotic that's being used to treat disease."
Read more at TerraDaily
The abstract
Enter The Meatrix
August 15, 2007
Are D.C. residents being scammed on water quality?
D.C.'s Water and Sewer Authority put out a warning this month that unsolicited tap water testing kits were being left at the doors of residents in at least one neighborhood. Those who filled the plastic bottle provided received a follow-up call from a telemarketer looking to sell a $2,000 reverse-osmosis water treatment system. According to the Examiner, the telemarketer claimed that the water tested high for chlorine or lead.
Want to know why this ticks me off? The company, which does not supply a name or contact information, is exploiting resident's well-founded concerns about their drinking water to sell a product. Not only that, but acceptable under-sink reverse osmosis systems are available for a tenth of that price!
But an anonymous commenter on the Examiner article claimed to be involved with the company behind the scam, and said it was no scam at all:
we are a private owned company that is world wide and has been in business for over 65 years. And for your information we do test the water for impurities and contaminents. what the city and state admit to people is the water is "within federal standards" but fail to state that the chlorine put in the water to kill germs is just as harmful to ones health as everything else in the city water.
Well, maybe not just as harmful; after all, chlorine and chloramines are added to the water to kill potentially deadly pathogens. But they do produce toxic byproducts, the health effects of which are in some instances not well known. Other byproducts are classified by the EPA as possible human carcinogens.
WASA was quick to point out that D.C.'s public water "is in full compliance with federal Safe Drinking Water Act regulations for health and safety," but when EWG had water samples from across the city tested this spring, "More than 40 percent of the tap water samples contained chemical byproducts of water treatment above annual federal health limits." WASA also recommends that you call them if you're concerned about your water. I second that. Call them, please.
The bottom line: a scam is a scam, and any time you're exploiting people's fears to sell something... as far as I'm concerned, that's a scam. But D.C.'s water leaves a lot to be desired, and EWG recommends carbon filtering the water (with a pitcher or faucet-mount filter) before drinking it.
July 27, 2007
Pepsi to label Aquafina tap water
Ahh . . . there's nothing quite like a cold refreshing bottle of $2 tap water.
In a surprising decision to call a spade a spade, Pepsi has agreed to change the label on its Aquafina bottled water to list its source: public reservoirs. From the Reuters article:
"If this helps clarify the fact that the water originates from public sources, then it's a reasonable thing to do," said Michelle Naughton, a Pepsi-Cola North America spokeswoman.
The label will read "Public Water Source", which is really just a vague way of saying "Tap Water." Coca-Cola's Dasani is also purified tap water.
I highly doubt that the new labeling will even put a dent in Pepsi's bottled water profits, but it's a step in the right direction, and proof at least that complaints about the environmental disaster that is bottled water are reaching the right ears.
Looking for a great reusable water bottle? Ask EWG has you covered. For more on the water fight, check out Think Outside the Bottle.
March 19, 2007
Project Bottled Water:
Help build our database
EWG is about to embark on a new study about bottled water--where it comes from, how it's "purified," and if it's even worth the expense. A big part of this project is just compiling the data, so we need your help to gather information from the labels of whatever bottled water you have at hand.
In order to help, we'd like for you to tell us:
- What brand?
- Where did you purchase it?
- How much did you pay?
- What type of container?
On the first day, Project Bottled Water netted over 1,000 labels in under four hours, and we've got about 3,000 now--that's more than halfway to our target of 5k in about four days. Nice work, folks! With your help, we'd like to get those 2,000 more by Thursday, March 22rd.
Also, if you'd like to use the button pictured above on your blog or website, use the following code:
<a href="http://www.ewg.org/issues/bottledwater/"><img src="http://www.ewg.org/temp/pbwbadge.gif" width="100" height="150" border="0" ></a>
October 23, 2006
Kid-powered water pumps
Several years ago, concerned by the time and energy South African women spent fetching water from distant, often polluted sources, Trevor Fields decided to do something. Fields teamed up with an inventor to produce the PlayPump—a children’s merry-go-round, that when spun, pumps water from below ground to an above-ground storage tank. Each PlayPump costs about $14,000, but operating costs are nil since the pumps are run by kidpower.
PlayPumps have been unique to South Africa, but now this brilliant and sustainable technology is spreading. Last month, First Lady Laura Bush announced a $16.4 million investment by the U.S. government, the Case Foundation and the MCJ Foundation to install PlayPumps throughout sub-Saharan Africa. Says Jane Case of the Case Foundation:
As Americans, we tend to take clean drinking water for granted, but in Africa it can be the difference between basic health and disease, between stability and poverty, and between life and death. Providing a clean water solution to an African community can open the doors of opportunity in so many areas – health, education, gender equality and economic development.
Continue reading "Kid-powered water pumps" »
October 6, 2006
UNICEF report: 2.6 billion people without sanitation
2.6 billion people who lack basic access to sanitation are located mainly in Africa and Asia, estimates UNICEF’s report.
An estimated 425 million children don’t have access to purified water, while over 980 million total don’t have sanitation.
So far, the UN is running short of achieving its millennium goals.
September 28, 2006
Religious groups in Canada declare war on bottled water
Water and the rights to it have fueled many debates in the past. Recently several churches in Canada have been advocating against consumption of bottled water, citing ethical, social, and theological reasons. The United Church, for example, has urged its almost 600,000 members to boycott bottled water because of their commitment to “supporting municipal water sources wherever they exist in the country, and strengthening those."
Cleaning up tap water supplies is a must for all countries. More information about tap water in the U.S. is available here.
August 24, 2006
Marketing Bottled Water: The Joke is on Us
Quoted in an article for the Japan Times, Tony Clarke of the Polaris Institute articulates the cyclical risk of our obsession with bottled water:
The bottled-water industry's marketing of 'safe, clean water' undermines citizen's confidence in public water systems, and paves the way for the water companies to take over underfunded local utilities. In return, public willingness to pay premium prices for bottled water enables water-service corporations to establish a top-dollar price.
Continue reading "Marketing Bottled Water: The Joke is on Us" »
August 7, 2006
"Ok, Ok--So I Hid My Industry Ties,
But Everybody's Doin' It!"
 |
Recently there's been plenty of debate within scientific, regulatory, and public health circles about the role of industry funding in scientific research and on government advisory panels--with robust arguments from each side. But almost everyone--including the FDA, the American Chemistry Council, and the Society of Toxicology agree on one point: full disclosure of professional associations and financial interests is the bare minimum necessary to safeguard the public interest. Well, according to The Scientist magazine, there's one "expert" out there who won't be swayed by prevailing morality. That man is Dennis Paustenbach, CEO of the risk assessment firm ChemRisk, and repeat-participant on EPA and NAS advisory panels. On his secretive role ghostwriting a landmark study which sidelined efforts to raise cromium-6 drinking water standards The Scientist reports:
Paustenbach, however, told The Scientist that ChemRisk scientists are not the only contributors who have been less than forthcoming. "If the Journal [of Occupational and Environmental Medicine] was using those [full-disclosure] rules over the last 10 years, I think they'd find dozens of papers to have inadequacies in disclosure."
Dr. Paustenbach must've had his fingers crossed when he pledged to uphold these tenets in the Society of Toxicology Code of Ethics:
Conduct their work with objectivity and themselves with integrity. Being honest and truthful in reporting and communicating their research.Abstain from professional judgments influenced by undisclosed conflict of interest, disclose any material conflicts of interest and avoid situations that imply a conflict of interest.
Practice high standards of environmental and occupational health and safety for the benefit of themselves, their co-workers, their families, their communities, and society as a whole.
Past news coverage of ChemRisk misconduct.
July 17, 2006
The bottle-versus-the-tap debate
Today, The L.A. Times reveals that consumers spend 10 billion dollars annually on bottled water which undergoes a far less scrupulous testing regimen than big-city tap water systems. Municipalities are required to test for fecal coliform bacteria over 100 times per month and to make their results public, while bottled water facilities are only required to perform these tests once weekly and do not have to publicize their findings. This information--coupled with a June United Nations Environmental Program report finding an average of 46,000 pieces of plastic debris floating near the surface of every square mile of ocean--may be good encouragement to stick with tap water.
Sally Squires, author of the LA Times piece, suggests drinking your water--whether bottled or tap-- cold, for improved taste.
Oregon Mail Tribune: How pure is bottled water?
April 27, 2006
From the Onion:
EPA Didn't Know Anybody Was Still Drinking Water
WASHINGTON, DC- Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Stephen Johnson apologized during a press conference Tuesday for what critics called "flagrant oversight and neglect" in monitoring ground- and tap-water quality across the United States, claiming that his department was unaware that citizens were still consuming it. "I can honestly say we had no idea that anyone used faucet water anymore," Johnson said. "Bottled water, sure—I have some here on the lectern. But if there really are people out there still drinking tap water, all I can say is you're better off not knowing what's in there." Johnson added that official EPA policy is that Americans should stick to sports drinks.
April 13, 2006
MTBE: Joke's on Big Oil
The Albany Times-Union has a great, in-depth piece on MTBE lawsuits this week. Transcripts of Shell Oil execs thinking up clever acronyms for the toxic gasoline additive that's now in drinking water supplies across the nation have them in hot water in the courts -- and since Congress failed to pass legislation to protect polluters last year, companies could end up paying millions to clean up after themselves.EWG's MTBE work is here.
March 17, 2006
Mass. Sets Strong Standard for Rocket Fuel in Drinking Water
Massachusetts has proposed the nation's most protective limits and clean-up standards for the rocket fuel chemical perchlorate in drinking water. The standards are higher than EPA's, the military's or any others proposed by states. Massachusetts officials say they set the standard at just 2 ppb (parts per billion) to protect sensitive populations like babies, which can ingest the chemical through breast milk or formula made with contaminated water. Read more in the Cape Cod Times.Perchlorate can affect thyroid function, especially in children, who are at risk for developmental problems.
EWG's work on rocket fuel in drinking water and food is available here.
February 21, 2006
Farm Fraud?
AP reports that some Washington state farmers may have faked results in tests of a federal conservation program designed to reduce pesticide and fertilizer use. The farmers received tens of thousands of dollars in subsidies under the Conservation Security Program for using greener practices, but an audit of the program found that some individuals may have altered soil samples and given false information. Everything you never wanted to know about farm chemical runoff in your water supply is in our Tap Water Report.EWG supports shifting some commodity subsidy money to conservation programs, which are popular among farmers and have wide eligibility. To find out more, visit EWG's farm subsidy database or read about subsidies in the Evergreen state.
February 3, 2006
CDC Tests Show Rocket Fuel Levels May Be High in Food
A study of CDC employees designed to test new methods of looking for the rocket fuel chemical perchlorate in humans stumbled upon unusually high levels of perchlorate in its subjects. Since Atlanta's water has extremely low levels of the chemical, and all 62 subjects' urine tested higher than the water, CDC scientists suspect that perchlorate is getting into people through their diets at higher levels than previously believed.Perchlorate has been found in milk and lettuce. The EPA needs to know how much people are getting from food so safe levels can be set for drinking water. Perchlorate may affect the thyroid, brain and nervous system, especially in developing children.
The Riverside Press-Enterprise article is here, and EWG's work on rocket fuel is here.
December 6, 2005
Does 3M Run Minnesota Health Agency?
Local Coverage of the Hearing:
Pioneer Press
Star Tribune
Local NBC Affiliate
Minnesota Public Radio
All coverage of Scotchgard and Teflon Chemical Contamination