Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

What If Your Tap Water Is Not Safe to Drink?

By Elizabeth Royte, Huffington Post. Posted August 19, 2008.


In the U.S., 89.3 percent of tap water is deemed safe, but what if you're one of the 29 million people whose water missed the mark?

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Elizabeth Royte

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

It's easy to be disdainful of bottled water if you've got no problem with tap. I live in a city with excellent municipal water. I've got lead-free pipes, a nice reusable bottle (which I almost always remember to bring with me), and I have no qualms about refilling it from public spigots or sinks. But not everyone is so lucky, and despite the airtight arguments against bottled water- it costs thousands of times more than tap, it often tastes no different, and it has a significant carbon footprint -- it isn't so easy for everyone to quit the habit.

And that's the dirty little secret behind the bottled-water wars. Not all tap water is perfect. It may meet all federal and state requirements but smell like rotten eggs or a swimming pool. The Environmental Protection Agency calls many taste and odor problems an "aesthetic," not health, issue, in which case a decent filter may solve the problem. But what if your water contains high levels of carcinogenic disinfection byproducts, which can result when organic matter mixes with chlorine? What if you live near an industrial plant or an army base that's contaminated your groundwater? It's happened around Binghamton, Minneapolis, Las Vegas, and dozens of cities around the nation. A countertop filter isn't going to protect you from perchlorate, perfluorochemicals, or trichloroethene.

The fact is, 89.3 percent of the nation's community water systems met or exceeded federal standards in 2007 (down from 92 percent in 2006). It sounds good, but that still leaves more than 29 million people drinking water that missed the mark on either health or reporting standards. (Utilities that fail to report test results to the feds may be trying to hide something considered unhealthy.) Who are the unlucky millions? According to the Environmental Protection Agency, they live in small communities that lack the funding to take good care of their water. Utility managers deal the hand they're dealt, in terms of source water, but the ones with more financial resources inevitably play a better hand.

For those with sub-par tap water, does a retreat to the bottle make sense? Hardly. First, bottled water isn't necessarily more healthful than tap. The Food and Drug Administration allows in bottled water basically the same levels of contaminants the EPA allows in tap water (no naturally occurring water is absolutely pure). Contaminants that go unregulated by the EPA -- such as perchlorate or MTBE, a gasoline additive - also go unregulated by the FDA. While utility customers can learn the results of testing from annual reports, bottlers aren't required to reveal the results of either their self-testing or their far less frequent independent inspections. As an EPA employee told me, with bottled water "it's a crapshoot what you're getting." Another difference: bottled water is tested at the plant, not after it's been sitting in plastic for up to two years. Chemicals from bottles have been shown to leach into water over time.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: water, bottled water, tap water

Elizabeth Royte is the author of Bottlemania: How Water Went On Sale and Why We Bought It and Garbage Land: On the Secret Trail of Trash.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Just Watch out!
Posted by: Godfather89 on Aug 19, 2008 7:07 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look out for the fluoride in the water supply, that's what we should be cautious of.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Just Watch out! Posted by: Zoea123
» RE: Just Watch out! Posted by: scienceisnotconsensus
» RE: Just Watch out! Posted by: scienceisnotconsensus
make-it-stop
Posted by: make-it-stop on Aug 20, 2008 9:40 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I will glady go back to tap-water when they stop fluoridating our water

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"deemed Safe" by who?!!!!
Posted by: Phred42 on Aug 21, 2008 5:54 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Bush appointed FDA? Probably a bunch of republican grooms from Brownie's stables.

Heck of a job.

Oh yeah - I feel safe NOW!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

www.fluoridealert.org
Posted by: plantland on Aug 23, 2008 6:52 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Alternet readers owe it to themselves to learn about the various ailments associated with fluoridated water. Some people, who may be especially sensitive to fluoride, can have dermatological reactions, or even get fibromyalgia from it. Instead of being tested for fluoride sensitivity, or being told how to avoid or reduce their exposure, many sufferers are prescribed drugs partially made of fluoride, increasing their exposure and reaction to it.

Universal heath insurance coverage can not protect one's health if you are being poisoned, either by drinking a lot of water due to medical conditions (diabetes insipidus, impaired kidneys)or from staying hydrated,(working or exercising outdoors. Using tap water is used to mix infant formula can even impair IQ.

Some smarter places - Honolulu, Portland,OR, Newark, NJ, and Juneau ,AK, could not be persuaded to add this contaminent to otherwise safe drinking water. Maybe Newark physicians remembered a 1990 NJ study on osteocarcinoma in teenage boys which found an increased risk to boys who had lived in fluoridated areas.

Recycing goals and pure water are not mutually exclusive. Alternet should stop accepting water articles from writers who have not bothered to bone up on who is making big bucks selling industrial waste as an "additive".

More of LA and San Diego are now being fluoridated, despite the danger to those with kidney disease and to diabetics and pre-diabetics. Since the Huffington Post presumably has some Southern California readership, it is hard to understand how a writer such as Royce could miss this.

Why do Alternet editors swallow the establishment propaganda on water fluoridation?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

They're called "trihalomethanes" ?
Posted by: stellabloo on Aug 23, 2008 8:22 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"But what if your water contains high levels of carcinogenic disinfection byproducts, which can result when organic matter mixes with chlorine?"

To clarify a few points:

Trihalomethanes (THMs) are likely present when your water smells noticeably of chlorine. The effects of showering in this water are still unknown, but as always, the phone is still your first choice of weapon. The mandatory Cl2 residual is typically .2-1.2 ppm and higher levels mean higher THMs.

Countertop pitchers are not an fix-all but they do remove THMs and 'trace' volatile organic compounds with activated carbon, the same stuff the big environmental companies use. The molecules adsorb onto the surface of the carbon. Remember to change your filter regularly - bacteria can breed in here too.

Activated carbon (also available as in-line cartridges) will not remove metals or nitrates (fertilizer run-off). Countertop distillation units are available. Again, many water systems do test for these common parameters.

Your greatest risk would be a shallow well located near previous or existing industrial sites such gas stations, or near polluted surface waters. Bacteria can migrate to shallow wells and reproduce. Your local health inspector should be able to help with e. coli testing. Distillation or small in-line UV units can be used for disinfection. Sulphur-producing bacteria are only hugely annoying and expensive to treat, but can be treated.

Rotting underground tanks are the big problem and you may, as the unsuspecting homeowner, be stuck with the cost of cleanup. A project I worked on last summer uncovered a in-ground waste oil pit 60 ft in diameter at an old railway depot dating back to the steam locomotives era. Lined with logs - maybe? I almost died from exposure to the goo. That's what I'm talking about.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: They're called "trihalomethanes" ? Posted by: stacyfergurson
The facts ma'am
Posted by: Zoea123 on Sep 2, 2008 4:10 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Everyone of these posted comments bespeakes of an ignorance about water treatment that is endemic to this country. People know nothing of the vast resources that go into making sure your tapwater meets federal safe water drinking standards.

I am a water treatment plant operator. I go through a rigorous licensure test that requires a Bachelors degree in one of the sciences as well as years of on the job training.

Issues about THMs and Fluoride are addressed by the regulatory framework. There is regular testing of systems for compliance and the regulations become more stringent year upon year.

The fact is you can go to any community in this country and be assured the tapwater you are consuming is safe-try that in India, or China, or any other non western country.

So all of you with your uninformed concerns need to travel outside the States and thank the deities you live in the Good ol' USA. Most of all educate yourselves. You sound like a bunch of left wing wackos.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The facts ma'am Posted by: Libsrule
» Copper and lead .... Posted by: stellabloo
» RE: The facts ma'am Posted by: rruppen
» How about these facts? Posted by: Raj
» Oh My!!!! Posted by: Beepath
» RE: The facts ma'am Posted by: mikebppa
CDC lacks integrity on fluoridation
Posted by: nyscof on Sep 2, 2008 5:23 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
70% of public water supplies are unfit to drink because silicofluorides are purposely added which are collected from phosphate fertilizer manufacturer's smokestacks and dumped unpurified into the drinking water. These fluoride chemicals are allowed to contain trace amounts of lead, arsenic, mercury and other toxins. See:

nsf.org/business/water_distribution/pdf/NSF_Fact_Sheet.pdf


The US Centers for Disease Control lacks scientific integrity about fluoridation. They have become fluoridation cheerleaders. The CDC is not the fluoridation experts Americans believe they are.

They dole out platitudes about fluoridation but not the science.

The CDC doesn't do original research but relies instead on systematic fluoride reviews conducted in this and other countries such as the 2006 National Research Council fluoride report.

However, the CDC's Oral Health Division, made up mostly of dentists, apparently aren't actually reading them.

A 2006 National Research Council fluoride report revealed many health risks, including potential damage to the bones, brain and thyroid gland. The panel concluded that drinking fluoridated water can pose risks to those with thyroid or kidney disorders, diabetics, high water drinkers and infants and recommended that the US EPA lower their safe drinking water standard .

This new research has prompted over 1,800 professionals to call for an end to fluoridation worldwide .

In fact, because of the NRC report, the CDC recommends that fluoridated water NOT be mixed into infant formula.

Also because of the NRC report, the National Kidney Foundation withdrew it's support of fluoridation and replaced it with this statement:

“Individuals with CKD [Chronic Kidney Disease] should be notified of the potential risk of fluoride exposure.”

Take action to end fluoridation here:
http://congress.FluorideAction.Net

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't believe,
Posted by: sirios on Sep 2, 2008 7:55 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
any local govt. reports about the safety of your water. Example- I used to live in a small town in iowa, 10,000 people. the farmers, as you might guess use an inordinate amount of fertilizers and pesticides, which leach into the well water. About 15 years ago there was a very high concentration of cancer in the town. the people asked the local govt. to investigate the monthly safety tests done on the town water supply. the report showed no abnormalities. The cancer outbreaks continued. then through some admission or otherwise it was discovered that the person testing the water had been taking bribes to falsify the records. The solution was to change the standards to allow for higher amounts of contaminates. If you think i am being a fear monger on this issue, you are correct.
ciao

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Water,water almost no where......
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Sep 2, 2008 8:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Some of us are old enough to have been in our 20's when Love Canal first came to our attention. That was a little corpie suburb that had poisoned water caused by the very industry that helped get the subdivision built.
We have vast areas of urban cities in Virginia
where the houses stand empty because they rest on a vein of asbestos and that can get into the water system,so tens of thousands had to be relocated.

I live in a fairly healthy state,Wisconsin,and there are truly a few areas where a well can be put in and you don't have to treat it in any way. But these areas are scarce indeed. But,truth be told, that's land up north. As we get further down to the more industrialized parst of the state the water become very different. Up north you can have a refreshing drink.farther south you can drink a gallon and your thirst is never quenched and the water tastes like metal.Some
say that taste is the legacy of above ground nuclear testing,it'll go away in about 10,000
years.
There is a do-able change we can make,and I believe we're up to the challange.

Firstly we need to do a better job on treating water to make it drinkable. Around most big cities and industrial towns is where we needd the greatest effort. It's a big job but if we use nature we'll do a better job than now.
We have to set aside acgeage to create artifical wetland/worm beds. Into these lands goes the water before drinking. The worms digest all the chemicals and crap we put into the water as well as the wierd microbes we've created with industrial waste. What we get from this is pruified water better than any treatment plant we could build. We can even do this with polluted soils. Worms clean the soills by absorbing contaminates. By utilizing the natural creatures that are meant to clean the soils and water we'll get better results for less money. We can make our water safe. We just need to restore the means Mother Earth uses to create fresh water and create artifical ones in areas where we've had the greastest inpact.

There is no terrorist,dictator or corrupt president thatis more of a threat than losing safe drinking water.
Write-In Jeffrey7 for President '08

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Lazy journalism
Posted by: suprmark on Sep 2, 2008 12:05 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm not sure why Ms. Royte writes that 10% of municipalities failing to meet standards means 10% of the population is facing poor tap water quality; population is not evenly distributed as she mentions later in the paragraph. She also seems confused as to how people with lower water quality deal with the issue; buying bottled water in bulk is much more economical than 500mL bottles, and water coolers are quite prevalent in areas where the water quality is questionable, for example China.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Tap or bottled: Neither is safe
Posted by: mikebppa on Sep 4, 2008 1:46 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For the last 30 years, I have made it a focus to pay attention to water. Typically a boring subject for almost all of us, it is relevant to your health and that of your family.

Tap water contains chlorine and most municipal systems use flouride. Both chemicals are carcinogenic. That means they cause CANCER!

Look around you today and assess all those you know and how many are dying of cancer. Consuming tap water will do this. And some bottled waters actually put flouride in the water. This is insanity.

I am a firm believer in distilled water, and for many reasons. Even further, I believe one should use a point of service distiller within their home or business. That way you control the process, and you are getting the purest form of water to consume.

I believe in it so strongly, that it is my contention that distilled water will prolong the average users life by ten years. Yes, you see, it is not just the chemicals the municipality intentionally puts in your water, but the fact is that the municipal systems cannot remove many chemicals that are harmful to humans, and thus all tap water, all well water, and all bottled water (with the exception of distilled), pose some form of risk over a lifetime of use.

I could write a book, but suffice to know, distilled water is the ONLY safe answer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Tap or bottled: Neither is safe Posted by: rideyourbike11