Follow this blog:
RSS

Arsenic: The biggest contamination problem in our drinking water

By | May 25, 2011, 2:00 AM PDT

Woods Hole, Mass. — At a lecture here yesterday given to a group of Logan Science Journalism Program fellows, Marine Biological Laboratory Chief Academic and Science Officer and toxicology expert Dr. Joshua Hamilton talked about the risks of arsenic in our drinking water.

“No other toxin the world has as long a list of diseases associated with it,” said Hamilton, whose lab at MBL first discovered that arsenic is a potent endocrine disruptor and a powerful suppressor of innate immunity.

Arsenic, a naturally occurring chemical and the 20th most abundant element in the universe, is odorless, colorless and tasteless in water. It has been used as a drug for more than 2,500 years, Hamilton said.

Rasputin used to eat arsenic because he felt it would make him stronger and protect him if he ever got poisoned,” he said. The white powder was used to color items like drapes and clothing, and women even used it in cosmetics as a whitening agent. But today, we know that arsenic–just like any substance, if the dose is high enough–can be poisonous.

Hamilton said today, more than 25 million Americans are drinking excess arsenic from private wells—which are not regulated by cities, states or the federal government. He said chronic human exposure to inorganic arsenic at sub-acute doses has been linked to increased risk of cancers (especially lung, skin and bladder), Type 2 diabetes, vascular and cardiovascular disease, and reproductive, developmental and neurological problems.

New Hampshire has one of the worst arsenic problems, and Hamilton said studies there have shown a connection between drinking excess arsenic and a two-to-three-fold increase of skin and bladder cancers.

“It’s the biggest water contamination problem,” Hamilton said. “It dwarfs the effect of all other water chemical combined—in New Hampshire and I’d say nationally.”

Other states with public water supplies that come from ground water and have arsenic problems include areas in New Mexico, Arizona, Texas, Colorado and California, but those supplies are regulated by the EPA (the EPA has set the arsenic standard for drinking water at 10 parts per billion). “It’s the private wells where people just don’t know what they’re drinking,” Hamilton said. He said most water supplies in the U.S. come from surface water, in which there is virtually no arsenic.

In studies with mice, Hamilton said that mice on arsenic that are exposed to the H1N1 flu will never recover from the flu (because their immunity is suppressed), and that arsenic also decreases their success in mating.

One of the biggest arsenic studies over the last few decades has occurred in Chile, where a town switched to an arsenic-laden water supply, unbeknownst to them. “They drank this for 12 years and then in 1970 they figured it out and switched water supplies again,” Hamilton said. “So there was this 12-year-period where they were exposed to arsenic.” Studies have been conducted between this town and a neighboring town (with no arsenic). In the town with the excess arsenic, studies have shown a moderate increase in a variety of diseases and a significant increase in bronchiectasis, a chronic lung disease.

Other studies have occurred in Bangladesh, where tube wells were put into service as a way to manage the cholera problem (from surface water). The use of water from the wells led to a massive population exposure to excess arsenic in the drinking water. Hamilton also said much of the exposure to arsenic there comes from rice fields, which are irrigated with water from the same wells.

The good news, Hamilton said, is that arsenic doesn’t accumulate in our bodies. “If you’re exposed to it episodically, it’s not a big deal,” he said. “What it takes is drinking it every day.” He said it accumulates at high doses temporarily and can be found in a person’s hair and nails. He said in places like New Hampshire, it’s more of an outreach problem than a science problem. If the wells are found to have high levels of arsenic, the water can be filtered with a reverse osmosis systems. “The message,” he said, “is test your well.”

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

Melanie D.G. Kaplan

About Melanie D.G. Kaplan

Melanie D.G. Kaplan is a contributing writer for SmartPlanet.

Melanie D.G. Kaplan

Melanie D.G. Kaplan

Contributing Writer

Melanie D.G. Kaplan is a regular contributor to The Washington Post and WebMD and has written for The New York Times, National Geographic Traveler and People. She holds degrees from Syracuse University and Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism. She is based in Washington, D.C.

Follow her on Twitter.

Melanie D.G. Kaplan

Melanie D.G. Kaplan

In addition to working as a journalist, Melanie keeps the dog food fund flush with occasional consulting jobs. In the unusual event that her writing mentions a company or organization for which she has provided editorial services, she will disclose that fact. She will do the same should she cover any companies in which she holds investments.

She writes for SmartPlanet and is not an employee of CBS.

If you liked this, don't miss...
14
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
0 Votes
+ -
Arsenic Contamination
Very interesting article. The Lindbergh Foundation is supporting a research project that will look at using low-cost microbial fuel cell technology to remove arsenic from drinking water in Rural China.
Posted by Kelley-Welf
25th May 2011
0 Votes
+ -
I live in New Hampshire
Drilled well going down 300 feet. We have the water tested every few years by the same outfit that supplies our filterbed that removes the mangenese from the water. Otherwise, all our whites would be Khaki browns.
Posted by Dr_Zinj
25th May 2011
0 Votes
+ -
Cancer Clusters in South Georgia
We have Cancer Clusters in So GA following Drought 2007/2008. Water table in aquifer dropped to lowest point in history July 17, 2008. Toxins from pesticides, manure, rivers, coal plants, landfills, etc entered & were concentrated in our aquifer. Some Arsenic was found in over 27% of water tested as of 1/31/11. Toxic Levels of Uranium were found in over 16% of water tested for Uranium. Study revealed that of those who responded to questionaire, only 5% had tested water. www.caringbridge.org/visit/benmcmahan State does not want to ALARM the public. We feel they need to WARN the public.
Posted by Ocilla, GA Mom
25th May 2011
0 Votes
+ -
Cancer Clusters in South Georgia
I noticed the last paragraph of your article said that the Arsenic can be filtered with a reverse osmosis system. That is not the case in this area. There is only one filter system recommended by the State Ext Agency to remove the Arsenic III that we are "sucking up" here. http://aesl.ces.uga.edu/publications/watercirc/ArsenicRemoval.pdf is the website that UGA posted for viewing of the special filter. We have to call 678-730-6500 or 770-487-1066 to purchase this filter that contains the medium needed for removing this type Arsenic. Hopefully, one day, newspapers across Georgia will have FRONT PAGE ARTICLES "warning" people of the hazards of drinking Arsenic and "encouraging" them to test their water sediment to see if they have, in fact, been sucking up Arsenic.
Posted by Ocilla, GA Mom
26th May 2011
0 Votes
+ -
While the modern environmental movement obsesses over a hypothetical CO2...
...threat, the real problem from coal-derived electricity is arsenic and mercury. Sad.
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
26th May 2011
-1 Votes
+ -
And the climate change denier movement gets hysterical...
over the possibility they might have to adjust their lifestyles a bit in order to preserve their grandchildren's quality of life. Double sad.
Posted by riverat1
27th May 2011
0 Votes
+ -
The difference is...
...that there is absolutely no question that arsenic and mercury from burning coal is actually caused by man and actually is detrimental to the environment. The came cannot be said for "climate science". What is sad is the amount of resources we spend chasing the hypothetical problems versus dealing with the real ones.
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
Updated - 28th May 2011
0 Votes
+ -
So your hypothesis is...
that climate science is just a bunch of garbage? That climate scientists are in it for the big bucks? Until you turn your hypothesis into an actual theory that explains what is happening with the climate better than the current theory I'll continue to listen to the people who actually study the science. I hope your grandchildren will be able to forgive us for the degraded world we pass on to them.
Posted by riverat1
31st May 2011
0 Votes
+ -
We've been through this too many times for me to bother responding...
...beyond the point and the fact that you conveniently failed to address: It doesn't take computer modeling based upon synthesized data and non-testable hypothesis to conclude that pollution, health and environmental effects related to the release of arsenic and mercury from the burning of coal are real and man caused. You cannot say the same of "climate science".
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
Updated - 1st Jun 2011
0 Votes
+ -
It doesn't take computer modelling ...
to determine that increasing the level of CO2 in the atmosphere will increase global temperatures. Svante Arrhenius noted that fact over 100 years ago. It doesn't take a computer model to know that if the temperatures increase that ice will melt and sea level will rise. It doesn't take a computer model to know that an increase in CO2 in the atmosphere will increase the acidity of the oceans and that will affect ocean life. All a computer model does is help speed up calculations that could be done by hand. What is this "synthesized data" you speak of? If you're talking about the adjustments that climate scientists make to temperature data then I challenge you to get the raw data and compare it to the adjusted data. You won't find that much of a difference, especially once you start aggregating it. The test of climate science is whether the future climate responds as climate scientists postulate it will. It just takes more time to verify than you're apparently willing to give it.
Posted by riverat1
1st Jun 2011
0 Votes
+ -
And yet, all of that still doesn't change the fact...
...that there is absolutely no dispute that burning coal disperses arsenic and mercury, and that arsenic and mercury makes people sick. The same cannot be said of "global warming", a phenomenon that would take place over time regardless of if we burned fossil fuels or not.

So while the elites whine about the doom we supposedly face from CO2, the Chinese, who are exempt from Kyoto proceed to expand their coal-fired electrical grid by the size of Britain's, every single year.

As for the "synthesized data", again I remind you exactly how you get a "hockey stick" graph with any dataset you use:

; Apply a VERY ARTIFICAL correction for decline!!
;
yrloc=[1400,findgen(19)*5.+1904]
valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,- 0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,$
2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ; fudge factor
if n_elements(yrloc) ne n_elements(valadj) then message,"Oooops!"
;
yearlyadj=interpol(valadj,yrloc,timey)
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
1st Jun 2011
0 Votes
+ -
Reply to "And yet, all of that..."
I'm replying to myself since apparently the maximum reply depth has been reached.

I'm not disputing your arguments about arsenic and mercury. But their effects are cumulative too and take place over time. Global warming is happening as we speak and the sooner we tackle it the less bad the end point will be. Of course one of the answers to both the arsenic/mercury issue and global warming is to quit burning coal to produce power.

China is also spending considerably more than the US on clean/renewable energy and is preparing for the future in ways the US is avoiding. We're not even trying to compete.

Regarding your synthesized data comment. Please show where that code was used to form reported results rather than just being used for testing purposes. I've written plenty of code in my life with comments like those and with artificial data for testing. If you can prove that the snippet you showed was used to actually produce the final results the maybe you have something.
Posted by riverat1
2nd Jun 2011
0 Votes
+ -
Arsenic testing in New Hampshire
Thank you for the excellent article. As a provider of Arsenic Testing and Treatment using reverse osmosis systems we often are faced with skeptical home owners who view our education and service as a means only to scare them into purchasing testing and/or a system. Articles like your as well as the research behind it help remind people that the threat is real but there are solutions to the problem that can protect them and their families.

We love living and working in New Hampshire and we take the privilege of keeping our friends and neighbors safe and healthy very seriously!.

Please keep up the great work`

Mark Widdison
President at US Water Consultants
www.uswaterconsultants.com
Note: Mark's response posted by Paul McGee
Posted by paulmcgee@...
Updated - 27th May 2011
0 Votes
+ -
arsenic
from metamorphic rock sources and KY AMer water dont test fo it
Posted by hankhallmeyer
10th Jun 2011
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!