Ewwwwwwwwwwwwww

This is so gross!

Great job UVA putting this together.

Comments

[Whitney Wilson]

Interesting, but the real questions are (1) what are the concentrations that flow out of the waste water treatment plants, and (2) what is the impact of those concentrations.

[blank]

I had the exact same thought Whitney. Who cares what is flowing in - it's what is flowing out that would be important. Also don't know how they even measure a nanogram, but that doesn't sound like much to me.

Nothing to see here folks, keep it moving.

[Not Einstien]

Yep, that's right "blank". If you are to ignorant to understand it or to lazy to do 30 seconds of Google research, it's not a problem, right?

Well, guess again.

The wastewater treatment plants are not designed to remove these drugs.

" Over the last decade, awareness and concern about pharmaceuticals in the water have grown. They are difficult to remove from the wastewater stream because medicines come in variety of chemical structures, each requiring different treatment methods.

Furthermore, wastewater treatment plants receive pharmaceutical loads from many sources — hospitals, veterinary clinics, households and even pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities."

http://www.awwa.org/publications/StreamlinesArticle.cfm?itemnumber=54752

[Ghost of Alexander Hamilton]

This is good stuff. NPR had a study on from Denmark that was study affluent to look at substance abuse and then match its records with other data.

[Bubby Hussein, Hillbilly Sheikh]

Not Einstein is correct. WWTP's are not designed to remove these compounds. The concentrations are undoubted based on population demographics in the sewage collection basin and known pharmaceutical usage. Most of them are very active at the nanogram/l concentration.

[Valley Indie]

Yet, no one has addressed Whitney's obvious and intelligent questions.

Those are the only relevant issues. But that wouldn't be as tantalizing or sensationalist, would it?

[Let's Be Free]

Yep to Whitney. Refering to the article linked by Not Einstein, the big deal seems to be with the waste water streams of manufacturers.

Note the data source says estimated without giving information on how estimated, always a reason for skepticism.

The engineering/construction firms that design and build sewage treatment plants love scaring the bejesus out of us to get the regulatory hurdles increased -- makes them rich. Standards have gotten ridiculously high.

Pharmaceutical chemicals are not generally inert; they are meant to be ingested in order to interact with the human body so in the treatment process there likely is significant degradation, chemical interactions and/or bonding with suspended matter that is separated from the wastewater stream. Thus, even though not specifically targeted in wastewater treatment, outflow concentrations are certainly less than inflows; the question is how much, even assuming the unsourced and non-contextual data are cause for concern.

That said we should all know better than to dispose of unused medicines into the waste water stream.

[Bubby Hussein, Hillbilly Sheikh]

There was a program in the late nineties to examine these pharma residues and make them part of the discharge regulated analysis. The Bush Administration decided it was unnecessary and cut funding to EPA for the program. What the Pollyannas need to remember is what goes into the river untreated gets picked up in the drinking water intake downstream. And those potable water treatments aren't built to remove the compounds either.

[Glen Tomkins]

This is just one more example of the way in which our society socializes the risks and privatizes the profits.

The first half of that formula is bad enough, as we let Big Pharma sell products that will, one way or the other, end up in several downstream consumption "streams", without forcing Big Pharma to take responsiblity for the consequences. Even worse, we as a society don't bother to establish govt capabilities to do that job and protect us from the risks the private sector is allowed to profit from free of that responsibility.

The waste water treatment systems we have were not designed to deal with any of the products on the UVA list. There is some chemical treatment, but the systems we have rely mainly on bacteria, in an aerobic and then an anaeorobic phase, to break down whatever the waste water might have dissolved in it. Designed for this purpose or not, no doubt the chemical and biological components of present systems will break down some of these compounds. But it's also true that they almost certainly will not break down all of them.

Worse, it's not at all clear that some of the breakdown products might not be even more harmful than the compounds listed. That's one reason the UVA study should not be thought of as propagandizing because it displays the concentrations of compounds going into the waste treatment system rather than what's coming out the other end. We don't know what to look for on the other end, what even more mutated witch's brew might emerge when the witch's brew we let into the system is worked on by that system.

It gets even worse. Many of the compounds on the UVA list are antibiotics, yet our present water treatment system relies heavily on bacteria to do the breaking down of compounds in waste water. It's bad enough that we encourage antibiotic resistance by treating livestock indiscriminately with antibiotics. Now we're letting loose with antibiotics indiscriminately on the bacteria we use in tens of thousands of waste water treatment facilites.

I never rail against the deniers on the Right. Go ahead, make your points about how NLS and UVA's point about toxic stuff in waste water plant inflow isn't the whole story. The whole story is much worse, and gets worse the more you unpack the situation and lay out all the wider contexts that you people mistakenly imagine serve to defuse concerns. Thanks for helping us get that story out.

[Glen Tomkins]

@Let's be free
"...we should all know better than to dispose of unused medicines into the waste water stream."

Well, actually, flushing unused meds down the toilet is about the only option most people have, even if that were the main source of these compounds in the waste stream. Some, perhaps, most, of these compounds are urinated or defecated by people using these meds. Ever try turning unused meds into somebody who you hope might have a better way of disposing of them? Ever try turning your bagged urine and feces into any of these places for what you hope is safe disposal?

And, frankly, the idea that your pharmacist, doctor or even local hospital, really have any better ideas than you do about what meds need to be handled in what way to minimize the downstream risks, is mostly an illusion.

That's the point. We don't require the folks that introduce these compounds into the consumption stream to study this sort of question, this whole downstream problem, before we let them fire away. And then we don't, as a society, take on that responsibility ourselves, and have our govt do the studies we need to do to have any idea of what meds have to be disposed of what way to keep us out of downstream trouble. We leave it as a crap shoot, if you'll pardon the pun.

[Glen Tomkins]

@Valley Indie and Whitney

"Interesting, but the real questions are (1) what are the concentrations that flow out of the waste water treatment plants, and (2) what is the impact of those concentrations."

The point is, who should be responsible for answering those intelligent questions, and when in the process should they have to come up with the answers?

Your answer seems to be that the problemn is that folks who do the limited study that their limited resources permit, and can do no more than raise an alarm, are raising an alarm. You seem to be suggesting that they should shut up until they have all the answers.

Isn't it more reasonable to have entities, folks like Big Pharma or its govt regulators, that have the resources to study the whole problem, do that either before we let this stuff flow downstream. or, in the case of products with immediate life-saving benefits as soon as possible after we starte allowing release?

You should be asking these intelligent questions of your govt and Big Pharma, and demanding intelligent answers before they release the Kraken.

But that's waste water under the bridge. You and I and the rest of us didn't do that sensible Plan A before the fact, before we let them use the public downstream as a dump. Let me ask you a question. Do you have a better Plan B than raising the questions now, and demanding answers and accountability from the people responsible? I don't see much to recommend your Plan C, shoot the messenger, try to pre-empt any discussion of the problem by demandng that the folks who raise the concern have to have all the answers already before they raise the alarm.

[Michael]

I'll just leave this here:

http://www.smarxtdisposal.net/

I was surprised that it wasn't spam too (judging from the url).

[Retire Frank Wolf]

The #1 pharmaceutical in our NoVA drinking water is Metformin. In the 22101 zip code it has twice the concentration as the #2 drug, amoxicillin. According to Wikipedia, "The main use for metformin is in the treatment of diabetes mellitus type 2, especially in overweight people." Furthermore, "The most common adverse effect of metformin is gastrointestinal upset, including diarrhea, cramps, nausea, vomiting and increased flatulence." This explains a lot.

[Louis Vuitton Canvas Monogram Purses]

I’ve gone into hundreds of [fortune-teller's parlors], and have been told thousands of things, but nobody ever told me I was a policewoman getting ready to arrest her.

[Louis Vuitton Canvas Monogram Purses]

I’ve gone into hundreds of [fortune-teller's parlors], and have been told thousands of things, but nobody ever told me I was a policewoman getting ready to arrest her.

[Hermes]

funding needs by mid-2014 and a further 81 billion euros between mid-2014 and end-2020 –- or 135 billion in total. This contribution will come by swapping old bonds for new Greek bonds, or by rolling over old bonds into new bonds when they mature.

[Hermes]

funding needs by mid-2014 and a further 81 billion euros between mid-2014 and end-2020 –- or 135 billion in total. This contribution will come by swapping old bonds for new Greek bonds, or by rolling over old bonds into new bonds when they mature.

[Burberry Handbags]

The IIF has proposed four “bond swap/rollover” options, two of which would require creditors to take an immediate 20 percent haircut on the value of their bonds. The other options don’t require haircuts but pay lower interest rates.

[Burberry Handbags]

The IIF has proposed four “bond swap/rollover” options, two of which would require creditors to take an immediate 20 percent haircut on the value of their bonds. The other options don’t require haircuts but pay lower interest rates.

[biomedical engineer]

your article is interesting, thank you for sharing

[Medical Water Treatment]

what are the concentrations for the water?