 |
|
|
|
|
Contents of this page
Click on the title of interest -- or simply scroll down to read all sections
Five Hidden Dangers Of Your Morning Shower
Water And Your Child's Health
Cancer & Chlorine
Bottled Water: Pure Drink or Pure Hype?
Five Hidden Dangers Of Your Morning Shower
U.S. News & World Report - July 29, 1991 "Is Your Water Safe - The Dangerous State of Your Water"
---continued---
 Go to top of page
Headquarters: 110 Maryland Avenue NE, Suite 511 - Washington, DC 20002
California office: 1604 Solano Avenue - Berkeley, California 94707
Water and Your Child's Health
by George Glasser and Andreas Schuld of the Children's Environmental Health Network
"The US has seen a worrisome increase in certain childhood diseases, and researchers are working hard to determine whether this increase is linked to environmental exposures. The incidence of two types of childhood cancers has risen significantly over the past 15 years: acute lymphocytic leukemia is up 10% and brain tumors are up more than 30%.
In 1997, President Clinton issued an Executive Order addressing protection of children from environmental health risks. The Safe Drinking Water Act of 1996 requires consideration of infants and children in risk assessments used to determine acceptable levels of environmental contaminants in drinking water.
In 1996, Administrator Browner issued a report entitled Environmental Health Threats to Children and set a Children's Agenda for EPA calling for consideration of children's risks in all Agency actions and a greater emphasis on research to support children's risk assessments."
Some progressive researchers are calling for recognition of children's risks from exposure to environmental contaminants. A child's system is very different to that of an adult. A child's system is continually developing. The ratio of child intake rate to child body size is greater than that for adults for some routes, including the skin.
EPA states: Physiological differences influence the amount of chemical that is absorbed into the body. Children have a greater surface area to body weight ratio than adults which may lead to increased dermal absorption. There are several interconnected factors that may contribute to increased vulnerability for children, depending on the toxic substance under consideration and the age of the child.
Children's tissues, organs, and biological systems are still developing, with several stages of rapid growth and development occurring from infancy to adolescence. This rapid development and immaturity of body organs and systems predisposes children to potentially more severe consequences within certain age ranges and windows of vulnerability.
Another factor that can influence a child's vulnerability is that circulatory flow rates are generally higher in children, which may increase a child's susceptibility to toxic effects. A child is not an adult, but most toxicological data are based on occupational exposures for adults. A main route of exposure to toxicants in municipal water for children is the skin.
Studies done by H.S. Brown, Ph.D., D.R. Bishop, MPH, and C.A. Rowan, MSPH in the early 1980s showed that anaverage of 64% of the total dose of waterborne contaminants is absorbed through the skin. Also, studies by Dr. Julian Andelman, Professor of Water Chemistry, University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, found less chemical exposure from drinking contaminated water than using it to wash the clothes or take a shower (American Journal of Public Health, May 1984).
Parents interviewed about their children's bath times state that their young children may stay in a bath from forty-five minutes to two hours. The exposure to waterborne contaminants in tap water can include a multitude of chemicals depending on the water source and chemicals added to the water at the treatment plant.
While most of the adverse effects from the chemicals are well documented, i.e., occupational exposures and/or oral exposures geared to adults, however, children's dermal, inhalation or oral exposures are not considered.
Researchers say that ingestion, inhalation, and dermal absorption are similar, and all routes must be used to calculate the total risk when making policy decisions regarding the quality of the municipal water. However, with the exception of chlorine, these dermal and inhalation exposure factors are not taken into account with other water treatment chemicals.
Surprisingly, ingestion is not the most efficient way to deliver toxicants into the system. Dermal exposure and inhalation of the contaminants are absorbed directly into the blood stream. Of the three modes of exposure, dermal exposures are the most efficient: virtually 100% of the contaminants are absorbed into the system.
One EPA scientist said, "For instance, a shower cubicle can be considered an 'exposure chamber'. Exposure to volatile contaminants absorbed via the lung would be about double the same amount from drinking water. In the bath, underarms, scrotal and vaginal areas as well as the groin absorb far greater amounts than in the normal unwashed forearm test."
The EPA acknowledges potential household risks for exposure from water contaminated with low levels of pesticides and other contaminants. In exploring the factors that affect health risk from exposure to toxic chemicals, it must be remembered that children are a unique sub-population. Children may be more susceptible to the toxic effects of these chemicals than are adults.
Our children are especially at risk. Their growing bodies are more vulnerable to harm from hazards in the environment. Small amounts of water pollution that may have little or no impact on a healthy adult, can make children, especially newborns, seriously ill. Children's longer lives also make them more vulnerable to slow-acting hazards, like many contaminants found in water supplies.
World Health Organization: Inhalation and dermal absorption/Water contaminants: The contribution of drinking-water to daily exposure includes direct ingestion as well as some indirect routes, such as inhalation of volatile substances and dermal contact during bathing or showering.
"Skin has been widely recognized as a primary entry route and direct target for chemicals and chemical mixtures. Dermal contact with mixtures is the real-world exposure scenario; however, laboratory research is often done with single chemicals, assuming negligible interactions among components of a mixture."
Office of Drinking Water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1989: "The EPA often has grappled with the issues surrounding the toxicity of chemical mixtures including trihalomethanes (THMs). In evaluating the toxicity of chemical mixtures, the EPA's immediate concern is whether the individual HA values and MCLGs are protecting public health when multiple contaminants are present in drinking water.
The municipal water your child drinks, bathes and plays in is a complex chemical mixture of contaminants and chemical additives. The toxicity of tap water depends on the quality of the source water and the water treatment chemicals added.
Although the reality of children's vulnerability to exposures to environmental toxicants has been acknowledged, little is happening.
Children don't vote and the parents are kept ignorant by the government, scientists and the media. It seems that only a few voices express concern, but those voices are virtually smothered by the sound of money changing hands.
Go to top of page
 http://www.internethealthlibrary.com/Environmental-Health/Chlorine-and-cancer.htm
Cancer & Chlorine
Is the chlorine in our drinking water acting as catalyst triggering tumor development both in atherosclerosis and cancer? The addition of chlorine to our drinking water started in the late 1890's and had wide acceptance in the United States by 1920. Joseph Price, M. D, wrote a fascinating book in the late 1960's, entitled Coronaries Cholesterol. Chlorine, Dr Price believes, is the primary and essential cause of atherosclerosis is chlorine. "Nothing can negate the incontrovertible fact the basic cause of atherosclerosis and resulting entities, such as heart attacks and most common forms of stokes is chlorine in processed drinking water." (1)
This conclusion is based on experiments using chlorine in the drinking water of chickens. The results: 95% of the chickens given chlorine added to distilled water developed atherosclerosis within a few months.
Atherosclerosis, heart attacks and the resulting problems of hardening of the arteries and plaque formation is really the last step in a series of biochemical malfunctions. Price points out it takes ten to twenty years before symptoms in humans become evident In many ways, this is reminiscent of cancer which can take twenty to thirty years to develop.
Can chlorine be linked to cancer too? In the chlorination process itself, chlorine combines with natural organic matter decaying vegetation to form potent cancer causing trihalomethanes (THM's) or haloforms. Trihalomethanes collectively include such carcinogens as chloroforms, bromoforms carbon tectachloride, bischlorothane and others. The amount of THM's in our drinking water is theoretically regulated by the EPA. Although the maximum amount allowed by law is 100 ppb, a 1976 study showed 31 of 112 municipal water systems exceeded this limit. (2)
According to some studies by 1975, the number of chemical contaminants found in finished drinking water exceeded 300.(3) In 1984 over 700 chemicals had been found in our drinking water The EPA has targeted 129 as posing the greatest threat to our health. Currently the EPA enforces federal standards for 34 drinking water contaminants. In July, 1990 they proposed adding 23 new ones and expects this list increasing to 85 in 1992. (4)
Another report claims the picture is much worse. According to Troubled Waters on Tap "over 2100 contaminants have been detected in U. S. drinking water since 1974 with 190 known or suspected to cause adverse health effects at certain concentration levels. In total, 97 carcinogens and suspected carcinogens, 82 mutagens and suspected mutagens, 28 acute and chronic toxic contaminants and 23 tumor promoters have been detected in U. S. drinking water since 1974. The remaining 90% of the organic matter present in drinking water has not been identified by testing to-date."
Compounds in these concentration could pose serious toxic effects, either alone or in combination with other chemicals found in drinking water. Overall, available scientific evidence continues to substantiate the link between consumption of toxins in drinking water and serious public health concerns. Studies have strengthened the association between ingestion of toxins and elevated cancer mortality risks".(5)
Studies in New Orleans, Louisiana; Eric County, New York, Washington County Maryland, Ohio County, Ohio reveal high levels of haloforms or THM's in drinking water The result – higher levels of cancer. (6) (7) (8) (9)
"The continued use of chlorine as the main drinking water disinfectant in the United States only adds to the organic chemical contamination of drinking water supplies. The current federal standard regulation of trihalomethanes do not adequately protect water consumers from the multitude of other organic chlorination by-products that have been shown in many studies to be mutagenic and toxic".(5)
"Chlorine is so dangerous" according to biologist/chemist Dr. Herbert Schwartz," that Is should be banned. Putting chlorine In the water is like starting a time bomb. Cancer, heart trouble, premature senility are conditions attributable to chlorine, treated water supplies. It is making us grow old before our time by producing symptoms of ageing such as hardening of the arteries. I believe if chlorine were now proposed for the first time to be used in drinking water it would be banned by the Food and Drug Administration."(10)
Many municipalities are experimenting with a variety of disinfectants to either take the place of chlorine or to be used in addition, as a way of cutting down on the amount of chlorine added to the water However these alternatives such as chlorine dioxide, bromine chloride, chloromines, etc., are just as dangerous as chlorine. We're replacing one toxic chemical with another.
How can chlorination be linked to heart disease and cancer? In Super Nutrition for Healthy Hearts Dr Richard Passwater shows how "the origin of heart disease is akin to the origin of cancer". Chlorination could very well be a key factor linking these two major diseases Chlorine creates THM's and haloforms. These potent chemical pollutants can trigger the production of excess free radicals in our bodies. Free radicals cause cell damage. Excess free radicals can cause normal smooth muscle cells in the arterial wall to go haywire, to mutate. The fibrous plaque consequently formed is essentially a benign tumor.(11) Unfortunately, this tumor is linked with the origin of heart disease.
If drinking water is chlorinated, don't drink it. Just this simple safeguard may save thousands from heart disease and cancer - the two major degenerative killers in the United States.
References:
1.- Price JM. Coronaries Cholesterol/Chlorine. NY: Pyramid, 1969.
2.- Maugh TH. New Study Links Chlorination and Cancer Science 1983; 211 (February 13): 694.
3.- Wilkins JR, Reiches NA, Kruse CW. Organic Chemical Contaminants in Drinking Water and Cancer AM. J. Epidemology 1979; 114: 179-190.
4.- U.S Water News. EPA Seeking to Expand Number of Drinking Water Contaminants to 34. August 1990: 8
5.- Conacher D. Troubled Waters on Tap Organic Chemicals in Public Drinking Water Systems and the Failure of Regulation. Wash D. C: Center for Study of Responsive Law, 1988: 114.
6.- Page T, Harris RH, Epstein SS. Drinking Water and Cancer Morality in Louisiana. Science 1976; 193: 55-57.
7.- Gottlieb DG, Osborne RH. Premiminary Report on Nationwide Study of Drinking Water and Cardiovascular Diseases. J. Environmental Pathology and Toxicology. 1980; 3: 65-76.
8.- Carlo GL, Mettlin CJ. Cancer Incidence and Trihalomethane Concentrations in a Public Water System. AM. J. Public Health 1980; 70 (May): 523-525
9.- Wilkins JR, Comstock GW. Source of Drinking Water at Home and Site-Specific Cancer Incidence in Washington County, Maryland. AM J. Epidemology. 1981; 114: 178-190.
10.- Donsbach KW, Walker M. Drinking Water. Huntingdon Beach, CA: Int'l Institute of Natural Health Sciences, 1981.
11.- Passwater R. Supernutrition for Healthy Hearts. NY: Jova 1978.
Click on
Bottled Water: Pure Drink or Pure Hype?
Natural Resources Defense Council
Click here for more
Go to top of page
 Go to next page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
