*[Enwl-eng] Chemicals Used to Treat Drinking Water Linked to CancerRisk
0 views
Skip to first unread message
ENWLine
Mar 15, 2013, 2:35:11 PM3/15/13
to "ENWL-uni"
*Report Points to Cancer Risk From Chemicals Used to Treat Drinking Water*
By Bridget Huber on February 27, 2013
Chemicals used to treat drinking water for millions of Americans may
raise the risk of cancer and lead to other health hazards, according to
a report released today
<http://www.ewg.org/research/water-treatment-contaminants> by the
Environmental Working Group, an advocacy organization.
The group is urging the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to
reevaluate its standards for the byproducts created when water is
disinfected. The Environmental Working Group also is pushing officials
to clean up sources of public drinking water to reduce the need for
chemical treatment in the first place.
"By failing to protect source water, Congress, EPA and polluters leave
Americans with no choice but to treat it with chemical disinfectants and
then consume the residual chemicals generated by the treatment process,"
the report says.
Chlorine and other chemicals are added to public drinking water to kill
disease-causing bacteria and other microorganisms. But when they come
into contact with organic material such as fallen leaves, sewage or
livestock manure, reactions occur that create toxic byproducts.
Some of the resulting compounds are regulated, but most are not. "We're
talking about 600 known disinfection byproducts and probably many
hundreds more that haven't been identified," said Renee Sharp, a senior
scientist at the Environmental Working Group and a co-author of the report.
Researchers analyzed results from water quality tests done in 2011 at
201 large municipal water systems that serve more than 100 million
people in 43 states. They found trihalomethanes, a byproduct of
chlorination, in every system. The EPA calls some members of this class
of chemicals "probable human carcinogens" and studies have linked them
to bladder cancer, birth defects and miscarriages. However, only one
water treatment system exceeded the EPA's limits for the chemicals,
which was set at 80 parts per billion in 1998.
But the report argued that the EPA's limits are too lax, citing several
studies linking even lower levels of the chemicals to health problems.
For example, in 2011 a French research team analyzing data from three
countries found that men exposed to more than 50 parts per billion of
trihalomethanes [try-hal-o-MEH-thanes] had significantly increased
cancer risks.
In 2007, Taiwanese researchers found people who drank water with
trihalomethane concentrations of more than 21 parts per billion had
twice the odds of dying from bladder cancer than those who did not. In
2010, California environmental health regulators proposed a public
health goal for trihalomethanes of 0.8 parts per billion ---
one-hundredth of the federal standard. The goal, which would not be
legally binding, is in the process of being finalized.
But David Savitz, a professor of community health at Brown University
who has studied the issue, says the chemical byproducts created by
disinfection are only of "modest concern." He faulted the report's
authors for selectively focusing on studies that suggested evidence of
harm while ignoring ones that did not. "The general tone of this report
is alarmist and exaggerated," he said.
In response, Sharp said both the EPA and California health officials
have concluded that lowering the levels of trihalomethanes in drinking
water would cut the number of bladder cancer cases. "We are not the only
ones saying this," she said.
The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit research and advocacy
organization based in Washington, D.C., that is focused on public health
and the environment.
The EPA, which previously has considered lowering the limit for
trihalomethanes, declined to comment on the new report. In 2005, it
proposed a rule that would have lowered the limit to 40 parts per
billion, a move that it calculated would prevent nearly 1,300 cases of
bladder cancer and save the U.S. between $2.9 and $7.1 billion
annually. Instead of adopting the rule, however, the agency made what
the report called "marginal" improvements in its system for measuring
compliance with existing regulations. The EPA said these changes will
prevent 280 cases of bladder cancer annually.
Analysts also found that levels of trihalomethanes in public water
systems vary throughout the year, depending on factors including farming
cycles. The EPA, however, regulates the chemicals based on an annual
average, which means that spikes in the byproducts may go undetected.
This is of particular concern for pregnant women, said Sharp, since a
fetus could be exposed to higher levels of the chemicals during crucial
stages in development. "If you are thinking about pregnancy and the
possibility for miscarriage or birth defects or stillbirth or any number
of pregnancy or reproduction-related effects, then having short-term
spikes can really make a difference."
Health concerns have prompted some public water systems to switch from
chlorine to chloramines, compounds made from chlorine and ammonia gases.
This substitution, however, may usher in other problems.
For example, Environmental Working Group researchers cited EPA data
reporting that drinking water treated with chloramines had the highest
levels of an unregulated and potentially highly toxic class of chemicals
called idoacids. Chloramine also forms nitrosamine compounds, which are
related to chemicals "reasonably anticipated" to be human carcinogens,
according to the federal National Toxicology Program.
The Environmental Working Group recommends all people drinking tap water
to use carbon filtration systems and released a guide for consumers.
Savitz, in contrast, said, "It's really an individual judgment."
But Sharp said the real solution is reducing pollution farther upstream.
"The answer is truly to have cleaner source water and put more resources
into cleaning up source water to begin with."
Bridget Huber is a staff writer at FairWarning.
http://www.fairwarning.org/2013/02/report-points-to-cancer-risks-from-disinfectants-used-to-treat-drinking-water/
*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this
material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational
purposes only. ***
From: "Yahoo Newsgroups" <vasi...@ramapo.edu>
Sent: Sunday, March 03, 2013 7:20 PM
Subject: News: Chemicals Used to Treat Drinking Water Linked to Cancer Risk
------------- * ENWL * ------------
Ecological North West Line * St. Petersburg, Russia
Independent Environmental Net Service: http://www.bellona.ru/enwl/
Russian: ENWL(discussions), ENWL-inf(FSU information), ENWL-misc(any topics)
English: ENWL-eng (world information)
en...@lew.spb.org, enwl...@lew.spb.org, en...@lew.spb.org, en...@lew.spb.org
Subscription, Moderator: vf...@lew.spb.org or en...@enw.net.ru
Archive: http://enwl.bellona.ru/pipermail/
and http://groups.google.com/group/enwl/
SEE ALSO: http://www.bellona.org (English)and http://www.bellona.ru
(Russian)
RSS: http://groups.google.ru/group/enwl/feeds?hl=ru
(C) Please refer to exclusive articles of ENWL
-------------------------------------
ONLY if your address is subscribed:
Enwl-eng mailing list
Enwl...@enwl.bellona.ru
http://enwl.bellona.ru/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/enwl-eng
By Bridget Huber on February 27, 2013
Chemicals used to treat drinking water for millions of Americans may
raise the risk of cancer and lead to other health hazards, according to
a report released today
<http://www.ewg.org/research/water-treatment-contaminants> by the
Environmental Working Group, an advocacy organization.
The group is urging the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to
reevaluate its standards for the byproducts created when water is
disinfected. The Environmental Working Group also is pushing officials
to clean up sources of public drinking water to reduce the need for
chemical treatment in the first place.
"By failing to protect source water, Congress, EPA and polluters leave
Americans with no choice but to treat it with chemical disinfectants and
then consume the residual chemicals generated by the treatment process,"
the report says.
Chlorine and other chemicals are added to public drinking water to kill
disease-causing bacteria and other microorganisms. But when they come
into contact with organic material such as fallen leaves, sewage or
livestock manure, reactions occur that create toxic byproducts.
Some of the resulting compounds are regulated, but most are not. "We're
talking about 600 known disinfection byproducts and probably many
hundreds more that haven't been identified," said Renee Sharp, a senior
scientist at the Environmental Working Group and a co-author of the report.
Researchers analyzed results from water quality tests done in 2011 at
201 large municipal water systems that serve more than 100 million
people in 43 states. They found trihalomethanes, a byproduct of
chlorination, in every system. The EPA calls some members of this class
of chemicals "probable human carcinogens" and studies have linked them
to bladder cancer, birth defects and miscarriages. However, only one
water treatment system exceeded the EPA's limits for the chemicals,
which was set at 80 parts per billion in 1998.
But the report argued that the EPA's limits are too lax, citing several
studies linking even lower levels of the chemicals to health problems.
For example, in 2011 a French research team analyzing data from three
countries found that men exposed to more than 50 parts per billion of
trihalomethanes [try-hal-o-MEH-thanes] had significantly increased
cancer risks.
In 2007, Taiwanese researchers found people who drank water with
trihalomethane concentrations of more than 21 parts per billion had
twice the odds of dying from bladder cancer than those who did not. In
2010, California environmental health regulators proposed a public
health goal for trihalomethanes of 0.8 parts per billion ---
one-hundredth of the federal standard. The goal, which would not be
legally binding, is in the process of being finalized.
But David Savitz, a professor of community health at Brown University
who has studied the issue, says the chemical byproducts created by
disinfection are only of "modest concern." He faulted the report's
authors for selectively focusing on studies that suggested evidence of
harm while ignoring ones that did not. "The general tone of this report
is alarmist and exaggerated," he said.
In response, Sharp said both the EPA and California health officials
have concluded that lowering the levels of trihalomethanes in drinking
water would cut the number of bladder cancer cases. "We are not the only
ones saying this," she said.
The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit research and advocacy
organization based in Washington, D.C., that is focused on public health
and the environment.
The EPA, which previously has considered lowering the limit for
trihalomethanes, declined to comment on the new report. In 2005, it
proposed a rule that would have lowered the limit to 40 parts per
billion, a move that it calculated would prevent nearly 1,300 cases of
bladder cancer and save the U.S. between $2.9 and $7.1 billion
annually. Instead of adopting the rule, however, the agency made what
the report called "marginal" improvements in its system for measuring
compliance with existing regulations. The EPA said these changes will
prevent 280 cases of bladder cancer annually.
Analysts also found that levels of trihalomethanes in public water
systems vary throughout the year, depending on factors including farming
cycles. The EPA, however, regulates the chemicals based on an annual
average, which means that spikes in the byproducts may go undetected.
This is of particular concern for pregnant women, said Sharp, since a
fetus could be exposed to higher levels of the chemicals during crucial
stages in development. "If you are thinking about pregnancy and the
possibility for miscarriage or birth defects or stillbirth or any number
of pregnancy or reproduction-related effects, then having short-term
spikes can really make a difference."
Health concerns have prompted some public water systems to switch from
chlorine to chloramines, compounds made from chlorine and ammonia gases.
This substitution, however, may usher in other problems.
For example, Environmental Working Group researchers cited EPA data
reporting that drinking water treated with chloramines had the highest
levels of an unregulated and potentially highly toxic class of chemicals
called idoacids. Chloramine also forms nitrosamine compounds, which are
related to chemicals "reasonably anticipated" to be human carcinogens,
according to the federal National Toxicology Program.
The Environmental Working Group recommends all people drinking tap water
to use carbon filtration systems and released a guide for consumers.
Savitz, in contrast, said, "It's really an individual judgment."
But Sharp said the real solution is reducing pollution farther upstream.
"The answer is truly to have cleaner source water and put more resources
into cleaning up source water to begin with."
Bridget Huber is a staff writer at FairWarning.
http://www.fairwarning.org/2013/02/report-points-to-cancer-risks-from-disinfectants-used-to-treat-drinking-water/
*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this
material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational
purposes only. ***
From: "Yahoo Newsgroups" <vasi...@ramapo.edu>
Sent: Sunday, March 03, 2013 7:20 PM
Subject: News: Chemicals Used to Treat Drinking Water Linked to Cancer Risk
------------- * ENWL * ------------
Ecological North West Line * St. Petersburg, Russia
Independent Environmental Net Service: http://www.bellona.ru/enwl/
Russian: ENWL(discussions), ENWL-inf(FSU information), ENWL-misc(any topics)
English: ENWL-eng (world information)
en...@lew.spb.org, enwl...@lew.spb.org, en...@lew.spb.org, en...@lew.spb.org
Subscription, Moderator: vf...@lew.spb.org or en...@enw.net.ru
Archive: http://enwl.bellona.ru/pipermail/
and http://groups.google.com/group/enwl/
SEE ALSO: http://www.bellona.org (English)and http://www.bellona.ru
(Russian)
RSS: http://groups.google.ru/group/enwl/feeds?hl=ru
(C) Please refer to exclusive articles of ENWL
-------------------------------------
ONLY if your address is subscribed:
Enwl-eng mailing list
Enwl...@enwl.bellona.ru
http://enwl.bellona.ru/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/enwl-eng
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages