EWG: Most ‘Safe’ U.S. Tap Water Contaminated, Anything But Risk-Free

Your tap water might look crystal-clear, but there are a lot more contaminants floating around in there than you realize. An analysis of 28 million water records from nearly 500,000 American water utilities collected by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) reveals most Americans’ tap water contains contaminants at levels acceptable to the government, but may actually pose health risks to the people. [1]

The government doesn’t bother to impose requirements on hundreds of contaminants. Instead, health guidelines are issued by states and the federal government, but these are mere suggestions and goals. Amazingly, the guidelines are not enforceable by law. However, there is zero tolerance for the presence of any cancer-causing contaminant.

I went to the database and put in every zip code I’ve ever lived in – you can test your water here – and each one tested positive for higher-than-acceptable levels of at least 3 carcinogens, including chloroform. Yummy. The EWG found that tens of thousands of water utilities contain levels of cancer-causing contaminants. What’s more, every single zip code the group looked at turned up some form of contamination.

A senior analyst at EWG, Sonya Lunder said:

“We’re attempting to fill a huge gap here. I have not yet found any that have zero contaminants.” [2]

EWG President Ken Cook said on the group’s website:

“Americans deserve the fullest picture possible of what’s in their tap water. But they won’t get that information from the government or, in many cases, from their utilities. The only place they’ll find that is EWG’s drinking water report.”

Cook noted that even if the contaminants in a water system fall below federal guidelines, that doesn’t mean the water is safe. This is because it has been 20 years since the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) added a new contaminant to its list of regulated contaminants.

Since more than half of the contaminants found in U.S. tap water had no regulatory limit at all, the substances can be legally present even in high concentrations, and utilities must neither test for them nor inform residents about their presence.

Cook stated:

“Just because your tap water gets a passing grade from the government doesn’t always mean it’s safe. It’s time to stop basing environmental regulations on political or economic compromises, and instead listen to what scientists say about the long-term effects of toxic chemicals and empower Americans to protect themselves from pollutants even as they demand the protective action they deserve from government.”

Nneka Leiba, EWG’s Healthy Living Science Director, added:

“One of the challenges for us was to first, get across the message that ‘legal’ isn’t safe.

The legal limits that are set for drinking water often include political and economic compromises. They’re not purely based on health limits, so that’s part of the education process.” [3]

Example of contamination.

Findings from the Analysis

According to the EWG, contaminants detected in the country’s tap water included:

• 93 linked to an increased risk of cancer. The presence of known or likely carcinogens exceeding established federal or state health guidelines were found in more than 4,000 water systems. The contaminants pose minimal but important health risks, but levels found in tap water are not legally enforceable.

• 78 associated with brain and nervous system damage.

• 64 linked to developmental problems in children or fetuses.

• 45 tied to hormone disruption.

• 38 that potentially cause fertility problems. [2]

Example of contamination.

Other concerning contaminants discovered by the analysis:

• Chromium-6, a carcinogen with no federal regulations, was found in the drinking water supplies serving 250 million Americans in all 50 states. If the contaminant sounds familiar, it’s likely because it was made notorious by the film “Erin Brockovich.”

• 1,4-Dioxane, an unregulated compound detected in tap water that supplies 8.5 million people in 27 states at levels above those the EPA considers to pose a minimal cancer risk.

• Nitrate was detected in more than 1,800 water systems in 2015, serving 7 million people in 48 states above the level that research by the National Cancer Institute shows increases the risk of cancer – a level just half of the federal government’s legal limit for nitrate in drinking water. Nitrate is common in rural communities, where the chemical comes from animal waste and agricultural fertilizers.

If you want to know what contaminants are in your tap water, the EWG published the database online. Input your zip code and find out why everyone should have a water filtration system.

Sources:

[1] Quartz

[2] Environmental Working Group

[3] Gizmodo

---

---

About Mike Barrett:
	Mike is the co-founder, editor, and researcher behind Natural Society. Studying the work of top natural health activists, and writing special reports for top 10 alternative health websites, Mike has written hundreds of articles and pages on how to obtain optimum wellness through natural health.

Environmental Working Group Releases its 2017 Guide to Sunscreens

If you’re planning to spend summer days by the pool or beach-side, you’ll likely reach for a bottle of sunscreen to prevent you from becoming red and crispy. These products are not all created equal, however, and it can be difficult to know what to purchase when you’re staring at the multitude of options available at the supermarket. Thankfully, the Environmental Working Group (EWG) has put out a list of the best and worst sunscreens every year since 2007 to help you decide.

This year, nearly ¾ of the products EWG examined offered inferior sun protection, or contained ingredients that can harm humans and/or the environment. One of those ingredients is oxybenzone, an endocrine-disrupting chemical which has also been linked to coral reef deaths.

The group says it has discovered a dramatic increase in the availability of mineral-only sunscreens, up from 17% of products in 2007 to 34% in 2017. Zinc oxide and titanium oxide products typically get positive reviews, as they are more stable in sunlight, offer a better balance between protection from both UVA and UVB rays, and rarely contain potentially harmful additives.

EWG says on its website that it remains concerned that a common sunscreen additive, a form of vitamin A called retinyl palmitate, can harm skin. It notes that government test data shows more skin tumors and lesions on animals treated with retinyl palmitate. Fortunately, the use of this potentially hazardous ingredient in sunscreen has decreased greatly – from nearly 40% of products in 2007, to just 14% of products reviewed in 2017.

Read: Synthetic Vitamin A Found in Sunscreens Linked to Skin Cancer

It should be noted that EWG considers sunscreen a last resort, behind the following protective measures:

• Wearing clothing, which can reduce your risk of suffering a nasty sunburn by 27%;

• Planning your day around the sun – the sun is lower in the sky and there is less of a burn risk early in the morning and in the late afternoon;

• Finding or making shade, which can reduce the risk of multiple burns by 30%;

• Sunglasses, which protect the eyes from UV rays;

• Checking the UV index.

Of course if you know that you’ll be out in the sun for any extended period of time, I’d still recommend using sunscreen over turning into a lobster and suffering from UV damage.

Concerning Chemicals

Source: Yahoo Health

• Oxybenzone is the EWG’s biggest concern health-wise, and for good reason. The endocrine disruptor is pervasive and has been detected in nearly every American. It has also been detected in breast milk. Oxybenzone is associated with relatively high rates of skin allergy.

• Octinoxate (Octylmethoxycinnamate) has been detected in breast milk, is an endocrine disruptor, and has been shown to alter animals’ behavior and thyroids in studies. It is associated with moderate rates of skin allergy.

• Homosalate has been found in mothers’ milk; disrupts estrogen, androgen, and progesterone; and leaves behind toxic breakdown products.

• Octocrylene has shown up in breast milk, and is associated with relatively high rates of skin allergy.

A High SPF Doesn’t Always Mean More Protection

If you’re light-haired and fair-skinned, you should not assume that a higher SPF sunscreen offers significantly more protection than a lower one. EWG writes on its website:

“Theoretically, applying sunscreen with a sun protection factor, or SPF, of 100 would allow beachgoers to bare their skin 100 times longer before suffering a sunburn. Someone who would normally redden after 30 minutes in the midday sun could stay out for 50 hours.

But for high-SPF sunscreens, theory and reality are two different things. Many studies have found that people are misled by the claims on high-SPF sunscreen bottles. They are more likely to use high-SPF products improperly and as a result may expose themselves to more harmful ultraviolet radiation than people relying on products with lower SPF values.”

An SPF 100 product should – theoretically – provide twice as much protection as an SPF 50 sunscreen. But, in truth, the difference is negligible. A sunscreen with an SPF of 50 blocks 98% of UVB rays, while an SPF 100 blocks 99%. If you apply a sunscreen with an SPF of 30 or a little more , you should be adequately protected from developing a sunburn, no matter how fair you are.

Source: The New York Times

High-SPF products may come with greater health risks, as well. These sunscreens require higher concentrations of sun-filtering chemicals than low-SPF sunscreens, and these chemicals have been linked to tissue damage and potential hormone disruption, not to mention skin allergies. The risks simply aren’t worth it – they don’t do a better job of protecting you.

Which Sunscreens You Should buy

This year, Environmental working Group gave 239 beach and sport sunscreens a green rating, the highest rating assigned to products by the group. There are also 239 green-rated sunscreen lotions for kids.

EWG also lists the worst of the worst sunscreens in its report, which includes recognizable names such as Banana Boat, Coppertone, CVS Health, Equate (Wal-Mart brand), and Neutrogena.

Source:

Environmental Working Group’s Guide to Sunscreens

Image Sources:

The New York Times

Yahoo Health

---

---

About Julie Fidler:
	Julie Fidler is a freelance writer, legal blogger, and the author of Adventures in Holy Matrimony: For Better or the Absolute Worst. She lives in Pennsylvania with her husband and two ridiculously spoiled cats. She occasionally pontificates on her blog.

Don’t Forget About the 2017 Dirty Dozen List: Most Pesticide-Tainted Produce

Every year the Environmental Working Group (EWG) puts out a list of the 12 types of produce that contain the most pesticides. The group analyzes tests by the U.S. Department of Agriculture for the list. The list was released in the beginning of the year, but it’s important to browse the list multiple times so the information is at your fingertips. [1]

This year, the EWG found that close to 70% of samples of 48 types of conventional produce contained residues of 1 or more pesticides. In all, USDA researchers found 178 different pesticides and pesticide breakdown products in the samples of produce, which numbered in the thousands. These chemicals remained on the produce even after they were washed and, in some cases, peeled.

In a news release, Sonya Lunder, an EWG senior analyst, says:

“If you don’t want to feed your family food contaminated with pesticides, the EWG Shopper’s Guide helps you make smart choices, whether you’re buying conventional or organic produce.

Eating of fruits and vegetables is essential no matter how they’re grown, but for the items with the heaviest pesticide loads, we urge shoppers to buy organic. If you can’t buy organic, the Shopper’s Guide will steer you to conventionally grown produce that is the lowest in pesticides.” [1]

Choosing produce with the least amount of pesticides is vital to the health of children, Lunder says.

“Even low levels of pesticide exposure can be harmful to infants, babies and young children, so when possible, parents and caregivers should take steps to lower children’s exposures to pesticides while still feeding them diets rich in healthy fruits and vegetables.” [1]

The “Dirty Dozen” List

Strawberries are at the top of the list because the USDA found that the most contaminated sample of the fruit had 20 different pesticides. [1]

New to the list this year is pears and potatoes, displacing cherry tomatoes and cucumbers from last year’s list.

At least one pesticide residue was found on nearly all of the strawberries, spinach, peaches, nectarines, cherries, and apples.

On average, the spinach samples contained twice as much pesticide residue by weight than any other crop. In fact, EWG says 3/4 of spinach samples were contaminated with residues of a neurotoxic pesticide banned in Europe for use on food crops. It is part of a group of pesticides that have been linked to behavioral disorders in young children in recent studies.

Read: Pesticides as Dangerous as Secondhand Smoke to Kids

You can find the full list of 51 types of produce on EWG’s website.

The “Clean 15”

Not every fruit and vegetable is coated in chemicals, fortunately, and the EWG also made a list of the types of produce that are least likely to contain pesticide residues.

Sources:

[1] Environmental Working Group

[2] Environmental Working Group

---

---

About Julie Fidler:
	Julie Fidler is a freelance writer, legal blogger, and the author of Adventures in Holy Matrimony: For Better or the Absolute Worst. She lives in Pennsylvania with her husband and two ridiculously spoiled cats. She occasionally pontificates on her blog.