SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Homeowners who rely on private wells as their drinking water source can be vulnerable to bacteria, nitrates, and other contaminants that have known human health risks. Because they are not connected to a public drinking water supply, the homeowners are responsible for ensuring that their own drinking water is safe.
Similar to concerns that public drinking water treatment plants face, groundwater wells may be impacted by another group of contaminants—and they might be part of your daily use!
Ingredients in personal care items, over-the-counter and drink products are introduced into domestic wastewater streams and can persist through treatment technologies. "This causes trace-levels of these chemicals to be found in the environment," says Heather Gall. "Recently developed analytical technologies are now advanced enough for us to detect these compounds in water at increasingly low levels." Gall is an assistant professor at Pennsylvania State University who studies contaminants of emerging concern in surface and groundwater.
A fully-functioning septic system releases the effluent slowly into a septic field. The soil, roots, and soil microbes biodegrade pollutants in the water before it gets back into groundwater. However, in the U.S., 10-20% of septic tanks function poorly. This can increase the chance of these contaminants getting to groundwater, especially those that biodegrade slowly in the environment. After that, they can enter a downgradient household's well water.
The presence of medicines in drinking water raise public health concerns. Impacted water may have harmful effects when consumed, but whether the levels present in private wells are high enough to pose a threat is an understudied area of research.
So, Gall partnered with the Pennsylvania Master Well Owner Network. Twenty-six homeowners volunteered to collect water samples from their private wells. "Since our project engaged private well owners, we wanted to focus on compounds they may be familiar with," says Gall.
Gall's team chose to test water samples for four common antibiotics, two over-the-counter anti-inflammatory drugs, and one common stimulant. Each reacts differently with soil in the septic field in different ways. These chemicals can bind physically to soil particles. They also can react with soil, soil microbes, and other compounds in the septic field. It's a virtual chemistry experiment when active pharmaceutical ingredients reach the septic tank.
Gall found that medicines' ability to get to groundwater was mostly controlled by two factors: sorption potential and biodegradability.
Sorption refers to the likelihood of the medicine attaching to another substance like soil or water. Medicines with low sorption are not likely to attach to soil in the septic field. That makes them more likely to move quickly through the soil profile and reach groundwater. The medicine most likely to reach groundwater was ofloxacin. This antibiotic was the most frequently detected medicine in the groundwater samples. Naproxen, an anti-inflammatory drug, had the highest sorption, and was most likely to stay in the septic field. This could be the reason it was not detected in any of the groundwater samples of the study.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 25 2019, @10:23AM (1 child)
Sucralose, the artificial sweetener sold under brand name Splenda, has also been showing up in increasing quantities in U.S. water sources.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21879743 [nih.gov]
Supposedly, it is broken down by bacteria, but it is not happening in the wild to the expected degree and there is little research as to why or its effects as concentrations increase.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 25 2019, @06:25PM
Oh, I know the answer to that one....bacteria have more discerning palates than your typical guzzler of products containing the shit, and, to me, Sucralose is pretty fucking foul tasting. (anyone done studies as to the long term effects of Sucralose exposure on gut bacteria yet?)
Here in the UK, the health fascists in their 2000 AD inspired anti-sugar crusade have forced most of the soft drinks manufacturers into adulterating their products with this crap to keep their products retail prices the same, as by the imposed 'sugar tax' their original full-on liquid toothrot formulae would have been priced higher.
Thankfully, there are still hold-outs who produce traditional soft drinks, including, funnily enough, Coke, so those of us who can't stand the taste of these sugar substitutes can, and will pay for the privilege of not being poisoned by that shit (cue the links to 'but..but..sugar is really really evil' sites in 3...2...1...)
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Bot on Thursday July 25 2019, @10:34AM (8 children)
-citizen
-what
-you pay for water?
-no
-you own a well?
-yes
-that's very independent of you
-thanks
-that's not a compliment. here, a ton of regulations for your well
-why
-because pollutants
-but could you make polluters pollute less instead of taxing me to check the well
-no
-why
-because the point of pollution is to keep our nose in your well. remember, it's all...
-... about control
Account abandoned.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday July 25 2019, @12:25PM
Have you been drinking nitrated well water again? That explains a lot. Here, try this one downstream of a big carbamazepine plume; it should help immensely.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday July 25 2019, @01:50PM (4 children)
Where did pollutants come into this?
Maybe you consider drugs to be pollutants? So who would be the polluters? People taking drugs? Or people who take drugs and then urinate?
The reason they want to keep their nose in your well is because:
1. It looks like they are 'doing something' about the problem.
2. It's easier than actually trying to do something about the problem.
Nothing more. Nothing less.
Your post is prima facie evidence that your well contains pharmaceuticals and therefore MUST be regulated.
How many pharmaceuticals are in rain water I wonder?
Every performance optimization is a grate wait lifted from my shoulders.
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Thursday July 25 2019, @03:27PM (3 children)
Umm, definition of pollutant [merriam-webster.com]: "something that pollutes." Relevant definition of pollute [merriam-webster.com]: "2.a. to make physically impure or unclean; b. to contaminate (an environment) especially with man-made waste."
Yes.
Yes.
I have a feeling those are not the answers to your (likely rhetorical) questions that you were expecting. I'm not sure what your point was here. Individuals can pollute just as much as corporations. Pollution does not have to be intentional or with knowledge that it might cause harm, as we've seen in many, many historical incidents when corporations assumed pollution would "dissipate" or would be harmless.
Yes, people taking drugs are causing pollution. It is a serious problem. Yet another reason perhaps to cut down on unnecessary use of widespread drugs like antibiotics in situations where they are unwarranted (i.e., most situations they are currently used for). Other drugs may not be optional, in which case we need to find other solutions to the serious pollution danger they cause.
Next question?
(And no, I don't agree with GP's paranoia that the government is deliberately polluting water to regulate wells. But I don't understand your argumentation strategy either.)
(Score: 5, Interesting) by AthanasiusKircher on Thursday July 25 2019, @03:39PM
Also, I would note from previous reading on the subject that it's not just people urinating out drugs that is causing problems with antibiotics in water supplies. Antibiotics are massively overused in the food industry, for example, to keep livestock healthy (even when they're not sick, or as an alternative to providing more sanitary/reasonable conditions for livestock to grow) and to promote growth, etc. In 2011, 80% of antibiotics [wikipedia.org] sold in the U.S. were sold to livestock producers. The majority of those drugs were antibiotics also "medically important" for human use.
Repeated attempts at government regulation have failed (likely due to lobbying from the pharma industry coupled with the food industry, etc.). The FDA has had a directive in place in the last few years attempting to address the issue, but sales of antibiotics to livestock producers have only declined 33%, implying that the majority of antibiotics used in the U.S. are NOT being used by humans, nor urinated out by them.
This is a serious regulatory issue, even beyond humans. And yes, while I disagree with the paranoia of OP, it's a serious problem our government is failing to take serious action on.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday July 25 2019, @06:16PM
I think it turns on the definition of drugs as pollutants. I understand the dictionary definition you provides. So technically, drugs are pollutants. As are many other ordinary things.
> But I don't understand your argumentation strategy either.
The idea that the government should regulate safety. If drugs are pollutants, and various pollutants are getting into well water, then that is something which people should be concerned about. Especially if they are unaware they are drinking it.
I'm all for trying to stop it at the source rather than at the drinking well. (government nose in my well) But not if people are being unknowingly endangered.
So about drugs. You're unlikely to stop people from taking them. Probably the solution is better sewage treatment. But again, as I argue it is easier for a politician to look like they are doing something to pick on people with wells rather than spend money on better sewage treatment.
I'm all for stopping over use and unnecessary use of antibiotics. Very much so. But use is not overuse necessarily. As an example, I occasionally use narcotic pain killers. For over a decade now. I don't over use them. I avoid them. None the less, they are a reality for me. Similarly sometimes people need antibiotics. I've had them myself from time to time.
I take your point, and agree, about finding solutions to serious pollution dangers.
I don't buy the government should never put its nose in my business, I can do whatever I want, to whomever I want with impunity.
Every performance optimization is a grate wait lifted from my shoulders.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Friday July 26 2019, @12:13PM
> the government is deliberately polluting water to regulate wells
nah the government is about pushing an agenda and fighting the other side while pretending to have a different agenda. Who makes and undoes politicians? media. Who owns media?
Account abandoned.
(Score: 3, Touché) by DeathMonkey on Thursday July 25 2019, @07:00PM (1 child)
Because guys like Bot are opposed to regulating businesses and they're in charge of two branches of the government right now.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Friday July 26 2019, @08:29AM
Nice straw bot we got here. It is funny that you put me on the spectrum of American politics which is faulty as any other. Free market does not exist so I cannot be for a deregulated one. Once you drop all laws the law of the stronger remains.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by aim on Thursday July 25 2019, @11:15AM (2 children)
How many times have we seen headlines about cocaine traces in streams e.g. around financial centers?
The issue has been known for a while. I find it rather surprising that only now are measures considered to upgrade sewage plants so as to at least reduce traces from medicines etc.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 25 2019, @12:34PM (1 child)
Gotta find that LSD sewage.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Thursday July 25 2019, @07:44PM
IIUC LSD degrades quickly in water, even without bacteria. I don't know whether what it degrades into is tasty to bacteria.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 25 2019, @11:30AM (4 children)
Fallout-style water purifiers to every household. I have seen lot of such devices in India many decades ago, as a kitchen appliance, typically of the big refrigerator size. Why are American commoners so technologically underdeveloped?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 25 2019, @11:55AM (3 children)
Lots of Americans have some sort of filtration device in their homes. From active charcoal pitchers or tap mounts, to steam distillers and reverse osmosis systems. Go to a home supply/hardware store and you can even find showerhead units. Or you can outsource it to an outside company and have distlilled or purified water delivered regularly in 5 gallon jugs for your water cooler.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Thursday July 25 2019, @07:46PM (2 children)
Most of those things won't touch the pharmaceuticals in the water. (The distillation ones would, but remember that distilled water is unhealthy until you add back a decent ionic balance.)
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday July 27 2019, @10:30AM (1 child)
There should be a number of ways to remineralize the distilled water: https://www.survivopedia.com/how-to-re-mineralize-water/ [survivopedia.com]
Ideally, you could integrate the additive directly into the distillation system for convenience.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Saturday July 27 2019, @04:29PM
The problem is remineralizing the water without adding back in the pollutants you were removing. I suppose the manufacturer could bake the minerals at a high enough temperature to destroy complex organics, but do they? Or you could bake the stuff that you extract, but that really ups the energy requirements. 451 Fahrenheit should be high enough, though, so it's not something beyond solar power and a fresnel lens.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by richtopia on Thursday July 25 2019, @12:32PM
I'm disappointed in the article not suggesting a resolution. Wells already have in-line filtration, but for the primary source of drinking water some people opt for RO or activated carbon. I suspect either of these methods are sufficient for keeping out drugs, but I'm unsure.
The article also didn't compare the results to municipal water sources. While I trust the treatment systems are more involved than a well user's, I also expect the water source is more typically surface water. If the mechanism for breakdown on these compounds is residence time in the ground, the municipal water will lack this step.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by jmichaelhudsondotnet on Thursday July 25 2019, @05:42PM
what goes around comes around, truer now than ever.
Yet another way for capitalism to externalize its costs. Drive everybody crazy with bells and whistles and permanent orange alert debt peonage like we're lab rats, drug us up, profit, realize all of the water is poisoned with a mystery concotion of all the drugs mixed together in random amounts, purchase reverse osmosis water with small percentage of the profits.
It makes me want to outlaw civilian space travel to make these parasites stew in their own handiwork.
Power does not corrupt, it attracts the worst people. The worst people can literally shit on your head, blame you for it, and then sleep like a baby. The entire purpose of modern governance is to prevent this situation and it seems like some people are forgetting this, so we are having a bad time.
And it's truly hilarious, we are fighting a drug war, banning ourselves from all of the positive benefits of drugs, demonizing drugs, and then dosing ourselves constantly with drugs in the most harmful least scientific ways, so that some people can think we are a city on a hill.
Or something. You know something is wrong when the general in Dr. Strangelove starts to sound like he's making a rational point.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 25 2019, @08:04PM
Lots of things go down the septic system.
They say to not eat tide pods, but what are well users doing? They're eating tide pods.
Also, poo juice.
(Score: 2) by Rivenaleem on Monday July 29 2019, @01:31PM
Remember folks, at the concentrations these are being found, they have very profound effects on consumers!