By Teena Halbig


A student named Corey Hall phoned me a few months ago.  He and Mazie Walthall wanted to do a Science Project on Floyds Fork Creek. We chatted briefly about Floyds Fork.  When Corey heard me say I had read about hormones and antibiotics being found in steams in a couple of other states in 2005, he immediately wanted to look into this.

Both students attended a Floyds Fork Environmental Association (FFEA) meeting.  They were introduced as students from Christian Academy in Jefferson County in Middletown, Ky.

They spoke to us about their interest to undertake hormone sampling.

It took them awhile to find a source for the test kit.  Now they were ready to go take samples!  This was the most fun for them – getting near the creek and seeing how beautiful the Floyds Fork area is.

Beforehand, we lined out where the samples would be taken.  It was amazing that the samples mostly contained 17 b Estradiol.  Also there was a high value above and an even higher below the Jeffersontown Wastewater Treatment.  This finding is significant.

Looking at the literature, hormones are not only being found in streams, but in drinking water in some other states.  No one knows the long term effect on humans, but sex-altered fish and other anomalies are being seen.

Corey and Mazie were ecstatic when they won 1st Place for Team Science Project recently.  Now they are preparing to perform additional testing for the Regional Competition at the University of Louisville and hope to go to the national and final competition!  February 6, they presented their project and this important finding at our FFEA meeting.  WDRB-TV Fox 41 covered the meeting and aired the student’s findings at 10pm Feb. 6. It is wonderful to see youth be motivated and undertake this study!  It makes one wonder, what else is in our streams that no one is testing for?


Sandy Gruzesky, Acting Director

KentuckyDivision of Water

14 Reilly Road

Frankfort, Ky.40601


Dear Acting Director Sandy Gruzesky,         

            Recently, a Science Project undertaken by high school students looked for Hormones in our waterways.  FFEA was contacted initially to assist.  Last night, their findings were presented at our meeting.

            It is important for FFEA to report to the Kentucky Division of Water that the hormone, 17 b Estradiol was detected in the samples.  The significant finding was ABOVE and even HIGHER results found BELOW the Jeffersontown Wastewater Treatment Plant.

            The students duplicated their results and retested at intervals: whereas the original test sample was 100 foot downstream of the Jeffersontown WWTP, they re-sampled at intervals of 10’, 50’, 60’, 80’, 90’ 100’.  All samples detected the hormone being present. 

            We believe this is a significant finding in Kentucky and want to ask the Kentucky Division of Water to investigate 17 b Estradiol further by performing KDOW sampling of these streams for surface and groundwater.  Since other studies done in other states report finding this hormone associated with wastewater treatment plants, FFEA also asks the KDOW to look at this “emerging contaminant of concern, or micro-pollutant”* of 17 b Estradiol.  This can mean our groundwater is also contaminated with hormones.  I’m sure you are aware people in Jefferson County still do not have piped in water and some are drinking spring/well water while others use cistern water (concrete is not impermeable).  FFEA believes it is important for government to investigate further by looking at both surface and groundwater in our waterways.  This sampling occurred in the 2 streams of Floyds Fork Creek and Lower Chenoweth Run Creek.

The human health effects are not known at this time but other states are reporting problems like this downstream of sewage treatment plants and “strange ‘intersex’ fish with male and female features.”  (Reference EPA-funded University of Colorado study of Boulder Creek in 2005).  The KDOW should look at this due to the effects on aquatic life and potential for human health effects.

Note: one article noted that “Evidence is that syntheticestrogens are more stable and are not removed by typical wastewater treatment processes.  Advanced processes using membrane filters are effective but are commonly not used...” (Reference: Mark LeChevallier, microbiology researcher in New Jersey; CCL Family Foundations, May-June 1999)

            Also how to deal with 17 b Estradiol is in an article from the Netherlands Nov. 24, 2005 in the Journal : Reviews in Environmental Science and Biotechnology, ISSN 1569-1705 (print) 1572-9826 (online, Volume 4, Number 4/November, 2005 pages 275-311.  The abstract says “….17b –Estradiol (E2), Estrone and Ethynylestradiol discharged from sewage treatment plants into surface waters, are seen as a threat effecting aquatic life by its estrogenic character.”  The article notes 17 B Estradiol, the other two compounds are “present in inffluents and effluents in the ng/l range, methods for detection deserve special attention.  Most important processes that play a role in the removal of estrogens are: adsorption, aerobic degradation, anaerobic degradation, anoxic biodegradation and photolytic degradation.”  The abstract also noted these 3 compounds show a higher affinity to sorb to sludge compared to other tested adsorption materials like sediment.  Aerobic degradation is far the most efficient in removing these compounds, but adsorption seems to play a significant role in retaining the estrogens inside full-scale STP’s.” 

            The finding of the hormones was put into the KDOW hearing record of the Middletown Industrial Park private package plant recently (Jan. 17, 2008).  Both this facility and the Jeffersontown WWTP are in karst areas so the potential for groundwater to be affected is present.

           Work by a group of scientists examined minnows in 3 streams flowing into Nebraska’s Elkhorn River and their findings showed “significant alterations in the reproductive biology” of fish immediately downstream from a large Nebraska cattle feedlot”. (Reference: Science Daily ,“Scientist Discovers Cattle Hormones That Leak into Streams And Alter Fish Reproduction (Dec. 22, 2003).

Also hormones are being detected in municipal water supplies.  Water treatment consists of micro filtration or ultra filtration, reverse osmosis, and ultraviolet with advanced oxidation. (Reference:  Onsite Water Treatment*, The Journal for Decentralized Wastewater Treatment Solutions, May/June 2007.

            Please advise if  KDOW will be able to look at this issue and do some sampling. 


Teena Halbig Co-Chair FFEA

6505 Echo trailLouisville, KY. 40299


Note: A response from the state toxocologist was received and will be scanned and

posted here. Response said som testing would occur in the near future.


Sandy Gruzesky,

DirectorKentucky Division of Water

100 Fair Oaks Lane Frankfort, Ky.40601  



Dear Director Sandy Gruzesky, 

            Approximately a year and 4 months has lapsed since our inquiry about hormone testing. A copy of that 2-7-08 correspondence is attached. Kindly provide an update to let us know what testing is being done by Kentucky Division of Water, etc.  Also if groundwater is being tested. 

            FFEA looks forward to hearing from you soon. 


Teena Halbig VP FFEA

6505 Echo TrailLouisville, KY 40299

502 267-6883   teenahal@aol.com  

By: Associated Press

Posted: 3/6/08 

LAKE MEAD,Nev.  On this brisk, glittering morning, a flat-bottomed boat glides across the massive reservoir that  providesLas Vegas its drinking water. An ominous rumble growls beneath the craft as its two long, electrified claws extend into the depths. Moments later, dozens of stunned fish float to the surface. Federal scientists scoop them up and transfer them into 50-quart Coleman ice chests for transport to a makeshift lab on the dusty lakeshore. Within the hour, the researchers will club the seven-pound common carps to death, draw their blood, snip out their gonads and pack them in aluminum foil and dry ice. The specimens will be flown across the country to laboratories where aquatic toxicologists are studying what happens to fish that live in water contaminated with at least 13 different medications - from over-the-counter pain killers to prescription antibiotics and mood stabilizers. More often than not these days, the laboratory tests bring unwelcome results. A five-month Associated Press investigation has determinedthat trace amounts of many of the pharmaceuticals we take to stay healthy are seeping into drinking water supplies, and a growing body of research indicates that this could harm humans. But people aren't the only ones who consume that water. There is more and more evidence that some animals that live in or drink from streams and lakes are seriously affected. Pharmaceuticals in the water are being blamed for severe reproductive problems in many types of fish: The endangered razorback sucker and male fathead minnow have been found with lower sperm counts anddamaged sperm; some walleyes and male carp have become what are called feminized fish, producing egg yolk proteins typically made only by females. Meanwhile, female fish have developed male genital organs. Also, there are skewed sex ratios in some aquatic populations, and sexually abnormal bass that produce cells for both sperm and eggs. There are problems with other wildlife as well: kidney failure in vultures, impaired reproduction in mussels, inhibited growth in algae. "We have no reason to think that this is a unique situation," says Erik Orsak, an environmental contaminants specialist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, pulling off rubber gloves splattered with fish blood atLake Mead. "We find pretty much anywhere we look, these compounds are ubiquitous." For example:

In a broad study still under way, fish collected in waterways near or inChicago;West Chester,Pa.;Orlando; Dallas; andPhoenix have tested positive for an array of pharmaceuticals - analgesics, antibiotics, antidepressants, antihistamines, anti-hypertension drugs and anti-seizure medications.

That research follows a 2003 study in northernTexas, where every bluegill, black crappie and channel catfish researchers caught living downstream of a wastewater treatment plant tested positive for the active ingredients in two widely used antidepressants - one of the first times the residues of such drugs were detected in wildlife.

In several recent studies of soil fertilized with livestock manure or with the sludge product from wastewater treatment plants, American scientists found earthworms had accumulated those same compounds, while vegetables including corn, lettuce and potatoes  had absorbed antibiotics. "These results raise potential human health concerns," wrote researchers.

Blood and liver samples of bull sharks inFlorida's Caloosahatchee River, a nursery area for juvenile bullsharks and home to six wastewater treatment plants, are being tested for the presence of an array of medications this winter. Of the first ten sharks sampled, nine tested positive for the active ingredient in an antidepressant.

And in Colorado's Boulder Creek, 50 of the 60 white suckers collected downstream ofBoulder's wastewater treatment plant were female, compared to about half of them upstream. Elsewhere in the world - from the icy streams of England to the wild game reserves ofSouth Africa - snails, fish, even antelope, are showing signs of possible pharmaceutical contamination. For example, fish and prawn in China exposed to treated wastewater had shortened life spans, Pacific oysters off the coast of Singapore had inhibited growth, and in Norway, Atlantic salmon exposed to levels of estrogen similar to those found in theNorth Sea had severe reproductive problems. More than 100 different pharmaceuticals have been detected in surface waters throughout the world. "It's inescapable," said Sudeep Chandra, an assistant professor atUniversity ofNevada,Reno who studies inland waters and aquatic life. "There's enough global information now to confirm these contaminants are affecting organisms and wildlife." While some researchers have captured wildlife and tested it for pharmaceuticals, many more have brought wildlife into their laboratories and exposed them to traces of human pharmaceuticals at levels similar to those found in water, aquatic plants and animals. The results have been troubling. Freshwater mussels exposed to tiny amounts of an antidepressant's active ingredient released premature larvae, giving the next generation lower odds of survival; in a separate lab study, the antidepressant also stunted reproduction in tiny fresh water mud snails. When researchers slid hydras - a tiny polyp that under a microscope looks like a slender jellyfish - into water tainted with minute amounts of pharmaceuticals, their mouths, feet and tentacles stopped growing. While the hydras are minuscule, the implications are grave: Chronic exposure to trace levels of commonly found pharmaceuticals can damage a species at the foundation of a food pyramid. Tiny zooplankton, another sentinel species, died off in the lab when they were exposed to extremely small amounts of a common drug used to treat humans suffering from internal worms and other digesting parasites. In a landmark, seven-year study published last year, researchers turned an entire pristine Canadian lake into their laboratory, deliberately dripping the active ingredient in birth control pills into the water in amounts similar to those found to have contaminated aquatic life, plants and water in nature. After just seven weeks, male fathead minnows began producing yolk proteins, their gonads shrank, and their behavior was feminized - they fought less, floating passively. They also stopped reproducing, resulting in "ultimately, a near extinction of this species from the lake," said the scientists. While the Canadian study was prompted by human intervention, similar die-offs have occurred in the wild. InPakistan, the entire population of a common vulture virtually disappeared after the birds began eating carcasses of cows that had been treated with an anti-inflammatory drug. Scientists, in a 2004 study, said they eventually determined that the birds' kidneys were failing. "The death of those vultures - the fact that you could get a complete collapse of a population due to pharmaceuticals in the environment - that was a powerful thing," said Christian Daughton, an EPA researcher inLas Vegas. "It was a major ecological catastrophe." In November, at the annual Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry meeting in Milwaukee, 30 new studies related to pharmaceuticals in the environment were presented - hormones found in the Chicago River; abnormalities in Japanese zebra fish; ibuprofen, gemfibrozil, triclosan and naproxen in the lower Great Lakes. Many of those studies refer to the heralded research atLake Mead. There, on a recent morning, Steven Goodbred struggled to hold a large wriggling carp with both hands. On the outside, the carp looked fine, vibrant and strong, but the U.S. Geological Survey scientist assumed the worst. "Typically we see low levels of sex steroids, limited testicular function, low sperm count, that kind of thing," he said slipping the fish into a holding tank and closing the lid. "We'll have to wait and see about this fellow." These carp live, eat, reproduce and die at the mouth of what amounts to a 30-mile-long drainage system that starts within the toilets and sinks of the casinos, hotels and homes ofSin City. Some 180 million gallons of effluent are discharged into the channel each day from three wastewater treatment plants. The daily sewage discharge is expected to increase to 400 million gallons a day by 2050. The USGS and U.S Fish and Wildlife Service tracked the channel from its origins, before the inflow from the sewage plants, to where it empties intoLas Vegas Bay in the lake. Their findings: The amount of endocrine-disrupting compounds (including hormone treatments and other chemicals affecting reproduction) increased more than 646 times. Not far from the mouth of the drainage channel - amid the fishing boats and sightseeing tours - water is sucked into a long pipe, destined for a drinking water treatment plant, thenLas Vegas - thus beginning the cycle all over again. Other communities inNevada, as well as locales inCalifornia andArizona, also draw onLake Mead. "Lake Mead is a fortuitous worst-case scenario" for study, said environmental toxicologist Greg Moller, holding a bottle of Lake Mead water he planned to take back to his lab at the University of Idaho. "You've got the wastewater, you've got the documented impact on wildlife, and you have drinking water uptake." Although more than eight million tourists, including 500,000 anglers, visit the reservoir annually, there are no warnings about the contaminants. No signs. No advisories. That's not unusual. Scientists have been finding pharmaceuticals in hundreds of other public waterways across the nation and throughout the world - almost always without public fanfare, as documented in the AP investigation. At the same time, scientists are looking for remedies. InLas Vegas, just off the Strip at the Desert Research Institute, microbial biologist Duane Moser optimistically held a tray of increasingly murky test tubes. "We put a little bit of estrogen in here, and then we added a particular bacteria, and guess what? The bacteria are consuming the estrogen," he said. Someday, perhaps, scientists will be able to use these special bacteria to clean estrogen out of contaminated water.

"It's early, but it's promising," he said. 


For more information visit http://www.democracynow.org/about/jobs. 

Anti-epileptics were found in the drinking water of Southern California; a sex hormone was found in San Francisco¹s water; three medications and an antibiotic were found in the water supply ofTuscon,Arizona; and a mood stabilizer was found in the water ofNew Jersey. And that¹s just to name a few. An exhaustive five-month investigation by Associated Press has found the drinking water in at least twenty-four major American cities across the country contains trace amounts of a wide array of pharmaceuticals. We speak with Associated Press national writer, Jeff Donn.




Anti-Epileptics, Sex Hormones, Mood Stabilizers, Antibiotics Among Array of Pharmaceuticals in US Water Supply


Drugged water march twelve

Drug Traces Common in Tap Water


Filed at 12:09 p.m. ET 

A vast array of pharmaceuticals -- including antibiotics, anti-convulsants, mood stabilizers and sex hormones -- have been found in the drinking water supplies of at least 41 million Americans, an Associated Press investigation shows. To be sure, the concentrations of these pharmaceuticals are tiny, measured in quantities of parts per billion or trillion, far below the levels of a medical dose. Also, utilities insist their water is safe. But the presence of so many prescription drugs -- and over-the-counter medicines like acetaminophen and ibuprofen -- in so much of our drinking water is heightening worries among scientists of long-term consequences to human health. In the course of a five-month inquiry, the AP discovered that drugs have been detected in the drinking water supplies of 24 major metropolitan areas -- from Southern California to Northern New Jersey, fromDetroit toLouisville, Ky. Water providers rarely disclose results of pharmaceutical screenings, unless pressed, the AP found. For example, the head of a group representing majorCalifornia suppliers said the public ''doesn't know how to interpret the information'' and might be unduly alarmed.

How do the drugs get into the water?

People take pills. Their bodies absorb some of the medication, but the rest of it passes through and is flushed down the toilet. The wastewater is treated before it is discharged into reservoirs, rivers or lakes. Then, some of the water is cleansed again at drinking water treatment plants and piped to consumers. But most treatments do not remove all drug residue. And while researchers do not yet understand the exact risks from decades of persistent exposure to random combinations of low levels of pharmaceuticals, recent studies -- which have gone virtually unnoticed by the general public -- have found alarming effects on human cells and wildlife. ''We recognize it is a growing concern and we're taking it very seriously,'' said Benjamin H. Grumbles, assistant administrator for water at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Members of the AP National Investigative Team reviewed hundreds of scientific reports, analyzed federal drinking water databases, visited environmental study sites and treatment plants and interviewed more than 230 officials, academics and scientists. They also surveyed the nation's 50 largest cities and a dozen other major water providers, as well as smaller community water providers in all 50 states.

Here are some of the key test results obtained by the AP:

Officials inPhiladelphia said testing there discovered 56 pharmaceuticals or byproducts in treated drinking water, including medicines for pain, infection, high cholesterol, asthma, epilepsy, mental illness and heart problems. Sixty-three pharmaceuticals or byproducts were found in the city's watersheds. Anti-epileptic and anti-anxiety medications were detected in a portion of the treated drinking water for 18.5 million people inSouthern California. Researchers at the U.S. Geological Survey analyzed a Passaic Valley Water Commission drinking water treatment plant, which serves 850,000 people inNorthern New Jersey, and found a metabolized angina medicine and the mood-stabilizing carbamazepine in drinking water. A sex hormone was detected inSan Francisco's drinking water. The drinking water forWashington,D.C., and surrounding areas tested positive for six pharmaceuticals. Three medications, including an antibiotic, were found in drinking water supplied toTucson, Ariz. The situation is undoubtedly worse than suggested by the positive test results in the major population centers documented by the AP. The federal government doesn't require any testing and hasn't set safety limits for drugs in water. Of the 62 major water providers contacted, the drinking water for only 28 was tested. Among the 34 that haven't:Houston,Chicago, Miami,Baltimore, Phoenix,Boston andNew York City's Department of Environmental Protection, which delivers water to 9 million people. Some providers screen only for one or two pharmaceuticals, leaving open the possibility that others are present. The AP's investigation also indicates that watersheds, the natural sources of most of the nation's water supply, also are contaminated. Tests were conducted in the watersheds of 35 of the 62 major providers surveyed by the AP, and pharmaceuticals were detected in 28. Yet officials in six of those 28 metropolitan areas said they did not go on to test their drinking water -- Fairfax, Va.; Montgomery County in Maryland; Omaha, Neb.; Oklahoma City; Santa Clara, Calif., and New York City. TheNew York state health department and the USGS tested the source of the city's water, upstate. They found trace concentrations of heart medicine, infection fighters, estrogen, anti-convulsants, a mood stabilizer and a tranquilizer. City water officials declined repeated requests for an interview. In a statement, they insisted that ''New York City's drinking water continues to meet all federal and state regulations regarding drinking water quality in the watershed and the distribution system'' -- regulations that do not address trace pharmaceuticals. In several cases, officials at municipal or regional water providers told the AP that pharmaceuticals had not been detected, but the AP obtained the results of tests conducted by independent researchers that showed otherwise. For example, water department officials inNew Orleans said their water had not been tested for pharmaceuticals, but aTulane University researcher and his students have published a study that found the pain reliever naproxen, the sex hormone estrone and the anti-cholesterol drug byproduct clofibric acid in treated drinking water. Of the 28 major metropolitan areas where tests were performed on drinking water supplies, onlyAlbuquerque; Austin,Texas; andVirginia Beach,Va.; said tests were negative. The drinking water inDallas has been tested, but officials are awaiting results.Arlington,Texas, acknowledged that traces of a pharmaceutical were detected in its drinking water but cited post-9/11 security concerns in refusing to identify the drug. The AP also contacted 52 small water providers -- one in each state, and two each inMissouri andTexas -- that serve communities with populations around 25,000. All but one said their drinking water had not been screened for pharmaceuticals; officials in Emporia, Kan., refused to answer AP's questions, also citing post-9/11 issues. Rural consumers who draw water from their own wells aren't in the clear either, experts say. TheStroud Water Research Center, inAvondale, Pa., has measured water samples fromNew York City's upstate watershed for caffeine, a common contaminant that scientists often look for as a possible signal for the presence of other pharmaceuticals. Though more caffeine was detected at suburban sites, researcher Anthony Aufdenkampe was struck by the relatively high levels even in less populated areas. He suspects it escapes from failed septic tanks, maybe with other drugs. ''Septic systems are essentially small treatment plants that are essentially unmanaged and therefore tend to fail,'' Aufdenkampe said. Even users of bottled water and home filtration systems don't necessarily avoid exposure. Bottlers, some of which simply repackage tap water, do not typically treat or test for pharmaceuticals, according to the industry's main trade group. The same goes for the makers of home filtration systems. Contamination is not confined to theUnited States. More than 100 different pharmaceuticals have been detected in lakes, rivers, reservoirs and streams throughout the world. Studies have detected pharmaceuticals in waters throughout Asia, Australia, Canada and Europe even in Swiss lakes and theNorth Sea. For example, in Canada, a study of 20Ontario drinking water treatment plants by a national research institute found nine different drugs in water samples. Japanese health officials in December called for human health impact studies after detecting prescription drugs in drinking water at seven different sites. In theUnited States, the problem isn't confined to surface waters. Pharmaceuticals also permeate aquifers deep underground, source of 40 percent of the nation's water supply. Federal scientists who drew water in 24 states from aquifers near contaminant sources such as landfills and animal feed lots found minuscule levels of hormones, antibiotics and other drugs. Perhaps it's because Americans have been taking drugs -- and flushing them unmetabolized or unused -- in growing amounts. Over the past five years, the number ofU.S. prescriptions rose 12 percent to a record 3.7 billion, while nonprescription drug purchases held steady around 3.3 billion, according to IMS Health and The NielsenCo. ''People think that if they take a medication, their body absorbs it and it disappears, but of course that's not the case,'' said EPA scientist Christian Daughton, one of the first to draw attention to the issue of pharmaceuticals in water in theUnited States. Some drugs, including widely used cholesterol fighters, tranquilizers and anti-epileptic medications, resist modern drinking water and wastewater treatment processes. Plus, the EPA says there are no sewage treatment systems specifically engineered to remove pharmaceuticals. One technology, reverse osmosis, removes virtually all pharmaceutical contaminants but is very expensive for large-scale use and leaves several gallons of polluted water for every one that is made drinkable. Another issue: There's evidence that adding chlorine, a common process in conventional drinking water treatment plants, makes some pharmaceuticals more toxic. Human waste isn't the only source of contamination. Cattle, for example, are given ear implants that provide a slow release of trenbolone, an anabolic steroid used by some bodybuilders, which causes cattle to bulk up. But not all the trenbolone circulating in a steer is metabolized. A German study showed 10 percent of the steroid passed right through the animals. Water sampled downstream of aNebraska feedlot had steroid levels four times as high as the water taken upstream. Male fathead minnows living in that downstream area had low testosterone levels and small heads. Other veterinary drugs also play a role. Pets are now treated for arthritis, cancer, heart disease, diabetes, allergies, dementia, and even obesity -- sometimes with the same drugs as humans. The inflation-adjusted value of veterinary drugs rose by 8 percent, to $5.2 billion, over the past five years, according to an analysis of data from the Animal Health Institute. Ask the pharmaceutical industry whether the contamination of water supplies is a problem, and officials will tell you no. ''Based on what we now know, I would say we find there's little or no risk from pharmaceuticals in the environment to human health,'' said microbiologist Thomas White, a consultant for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. But at a conference last summer, Mary Buzby -- director of environmental technology for drug maker Merck & Co. Inc. -- said: ''There's no doubt about it, pharmaceuticals are being detected in the environment and there is genuine concern that these compounds, in the small concentrations that they're at, could be causing impacts to human health or to aquatic organisms.'' Recent laboratory research has found that small amounts of medication have affected human embryonic kidney cells, human blood cells and human breast cancer cells. The cancer cells proliferated too quickly; the kidney cells grew too slowly; and the blood cells showed biological activity associated with inflammation. Also, pharmaceuticals in waterways are damaging wildlife across the nation and around the globe, research shows. Notably, male fish are being feminized, creating egg yolk proteins, a process usually restricted to females. Pharmaceuticals also are affecting sentinel species at the foundation of the pyramid of life -- such as earth worms in the wild and zooplankton in the laboratory, studies show. Some scientists stress that the research is extremely limited, and there are too many unknowns. They say, though, that the documented health problems in wildlife are disconcerting. ''It brings a question to people's minds that if the fish were affected ... might there be a potential problem for humans?'' EPA research biologist Vickie Wilson told the AP. ''It could be that the fish are just exquisitely sensitive because of their physiology or something. We haven't gotten far enough along.'' With limited research funds, said Shane Snyder, research and development project manager at the Southern Nevada Water Authority, a greater emphasis should be put on studying the effects of drugs in water. ''I think it's a shame that so much money is going into monitoring to figure out if these things are out there, and so little is being spent on human health,'' said Snyder. ''They need to just accept that these things are everywhere -- every chemical and pharmaceutical could be there. It's time for the EPA to step up to the plate and make a statement about the need to study effects, both human and environmental.'' To the degree that the EPA is focused on the issue, it appears to be looking at detection. Grumbles acknowledged that just late last year the agency developed three new methods to ''detect and quantify pharmaceuticals'' in wastewater. ''We realize that we have a limited amount of data on the concentrations,'' he said. ''We're going to be able to learn a lot more.'' While Grumbles said the EPA had analyzed 287 pharmaceuticals for possible inclusion on a draft list of candidates for regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act, he said only one, nitroglycerin, was on the list. Nitroglycerin can be used as a drug for heart problems, but the key reason it's being considered is its widespread use in making explosives. So much is unknown. Many independent scientists are skeptical that trace concentrations will ultimately prove to be harmful to humans. Confidence about human safety is based largely on studies that poison lab animals with much higher amounts.There's growing concern in the scientific community, meanwhile, that certain drugs -- or combinations of drugs -- may harm humans over decades because water, unlike most specific foods, is consumed in sizable amounts every day.Our bodies may shrug off a relatively big one-time dose, yet suffer from a smaller amount delivered continuously over a half century, perhaps subtly stirring allergies or nerve damage. Pregnant women, the elderly and the very ill might be more sensitive.Many concerns about chronic low-level exposure focus on certain drug classes: chemotherapy that can act as a powerful poison; hormones that can hamper reproduction or development; medicines for depression and epilepsy that can damage the brain or change behavior; antibiotics that can allow human germs to mutate into more dangerous forms; pain relievers and blood-pressure diuretics.For several decades, federal environmental officials and nonprofit watchdog environmental groups have focused on regulated contaminants, pesticides, lead, PCBs  which are present in higher concentrations and clearly pose a health risk.However, some experts say medications may pose a unique danger because, unlike most pollutants, they were crafted to act on the human body.''These are chemicals that are designed to have very specific effects at very low concentrations. That's what pharmaceuticals do. So when they get out to the environment, it should not be a shock to people that they have effects,'' says zoologist John Sumpter at Brunel University in London, who has studied trace hormones, heart medicine and other drugs.And while drugs are tested to be safe for humans, the timeframe is usually over a matter of months, not a lifetime. Pharmaceuticals also can produce side effects and interact with other drugs at normal medical doses. That's why -- aside from therapeutic doses of fluoride injected into potable water supplies -- pharmaceuticals are prescribed to people who need them, not delivered to everyone in their drinking water. ''We know we are being exposed to other people's drugs through our drinking water, and that can't be good,'' says Dr. David Carpenter, who directs the Institute for Health and the Environment of the State University of New York atAlbany. 

from Johns-Hopkins 2008

Bottled water in your car is very dangerous!

On the Ellen show, Sheryl Crow said this is what caused her breast cancer.  It has been identified as the most ommon cause of the high levels of dioxin in breast cancer tissue.

Sheryl Crow's oncologist told her:

Women should not drink bottled water that has been left in a car. The heat reacts with the chemicals in the plastic of the bottle which releases dioxin into the water.  Dioxin is a toxin increasingly found in breast cancer tissue. So please be careful and do not drink bottled water that has been left in a car.  Pass this on to all the women in your life. This information is the kind we need to know that just might save us!  Use a stainless steel canteen or a glass  bottle instead of plastic!


This information is also being circulated at Walter Reed Army Medical Center

No plastic containers in microwave.

No water bottles in freezer

No plastic wrap in microwave.

A dioxin chemical causes cancer, especially breast cancer.

Dioxins are highly poisonous to the cells of our bodies. Don't freeze your plastic bottles with water in them as this releases dioxins from the plastic. Recently, Edward Fujimoto, Wellness Program Manager atCastle Hospital , was on a TV program to explain this health hazard.

He talked about dioxins and how bad they are for us. He said that we should not be heating our food in the microwave using plastic containers...This especially applies to foods that contain fat.

 He said that the combination of fat, high heat,=2 0 and plastic releases dioxin into the food and ultimately into the cells of the body...Instead, he recommends using glass, such as   Corning Ware, Pyrex or ceramic containers for heating food.. You get the same results, only without the dioxin.

So such things as TV dinners, instant ramen and soups, etc., should be removed from the container and heated in something else. Paper isn't bad but you don't know what is in the paper. It's just safer to use tempered glass,   Corning  Ware, etc. He reminded us that a while ago some of the fast food restaurants moved away from the foam containers to paper. The dioxin problem is one of the reasons....Also, he pointed out that plastic wrap, such as Saran wrap, is just as dangerous when placed over foods to be cooked in the microwave. As the food is nuked, the high heat causes poisonous toxins to actually melt out of the plastic wrap and drip into the food. Cover food with a paper towel instead.

This is an article that should be sent To anyone important in Your life!