Tests for drugs in tap water
Monday, 29 September 2008
Drinking water supplies are to be tested for the presence of prescription drugs amid fears that rivers are being contaminated by the growing quantity of pharmaceuticals flushed unwittingly down the drain.
The Government has commissioned scientists to test river water at intake points where it is abstracted for human consumption, The Independent can reveal. They will also test drinking water after it has been through the water-treatment cycle.
Under a pilot project to begin next year, supplies will be examined for about five of the most common and potentially dangerous prescription drugs. The experts will meet over the next few weeks to decide which drugs to look for and where testing should be carried out. However, an insider said this was likely to be at selected sites on the river Thames because its water-catchment area covered the most densely populated part of the country.
Powerful anti-cancer drugs are of particular concern as they can be excreted unaltered from the body into the sewerage system. They are thought to be potentially dangerous because they are highly toxic to dividing cells, are easily dissolved in water and are difficult to destroy by conventional water-treatment techniques.
About 50 of these "cytotoxic" drugs are prescribed to patients in Britain and researchers are concerned they may have an additive effect – where small concentrations of two or more drugs become more poisonous when absorbed together at the same time in drinking water.
Scientists are also worried that even if cytotoxic drugs are getting into the water supply at doses too low to affect adults, they may still pose a significant risk to babies in the womb because they would be potentially susceptible to the effects of anti-cancer substances aimed at preventing cell division.
The pilot testing has been ordered by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and the Drinking Water Inspectorate, which is responsible for overseeing the monitoring of water supplies in Britain. The tests will be carried out by a consortium of laboratories led by Defra's Central Science Laboratory in York.
Under European rules, drinking water in the UK is monitored for nearly 50 different contaminants, but none of these include the active ingredients of prescription drugs, such as the powerful cytotoxic drugs used to treat the growing number of cancer patients.
However, a study this year of the theoretical risk posed by one common cytotoxic drug, called 5-fluorouracil (5FU), found there could be sufficient amounts of the chemical being flushed into rivers from chemotherapy patients to end up contaminating the water supply in low concentrations.
"It seems highly probable that in parts of the UK cytotoxic drugs will be present at concentrations of a few nanograms [billionths of a gram] per litre in river water," said Andrew Johnson, a water quality scientist at the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology at Wallingford, Oxfordshire.
"We have no evidence that these particular drugs are entering the drinking water supply, but we conclude that there is a least the theoretical risk of low-level contamination by cytotoxic drugs," Dr Johnson said.
"It is highly unlikely that concentrations below the nanograms per litre level would represent a risk to adults, however, the developing human embryo inside a pregnant woman could be particularly vulnerable to minute amounts of these agents as they would be able to pass through the gut and placenta," he added.
It is estimated that the quantity of chemotherapy drugs used to treat cancer is rising by about 10 per cent a year. Many of these pharmaceuticals are becoming more potent as scientists work out how to ameliorate toxic side-effects and so raise permitted dosages.
Dr Johnson and colleagues believe that, with the expected increase in population density in parts of Britain, and the growing incidence of cancer, along with greater water abstraction from rivers and lower river flows owing to drier summers, there will be a bigger risk of cytotoxic drugs ending up in the drinking water supply. "No one is denying the enormous benefit society derives from cytotoxic drugs but that is not an argument for saying we should be ignorant of their effects – if any – on the environment," Dr Johnson said.
Alistair Boxall, an environmental chemist at the Central Science Laboratory who will oversee the tests, said it was unlikely that any prescription drugs that ended up in tap water would be present in high enough concentrations to adversely affect health.
"The vast majority of pharmaceuticals probably pose a very small risk to human health. I find it hard to believe they will have any effect – you would have to drink so much water to get anywhere near a viable dose," Dr Boxall said.
Peter Marsden, of the Drinking Water Inspectorate, said that the testing programme would begin next year at four sites along a major river which yet to be designated. It would continue for at least a year before the results were evaluated, he added.
Drugs on tap: Pharmaceuticals in the water supply
*Water purification is a complex process that involves filtration, ozonation, a second filtation through activated charcoal and, finally, a chorination or disinfection stage.
*Several studies have shown that conventional water purification cannot completely remove some prescription drugs from a contaminated water source.
*Water abstraction from rivers is increasing, due to the rise in demand and increasing population density, especially in the south-east of England.
*In 2004, a study of the 50 most common prescription drugs in Britain showed that the amount of each drug consumed annually varied from 12,000kg to 3,500,000kg.
*Cytotoxic (toxic to cells) drugs used in chemotherapy are potentially dangerous in water supplies because they dissolve easily in water, remain potent in low concentrations and may have an additive effect taken together.
*Chemotherapy prescriptions are increasing by 10 per cent a year. Patients having chemotherapy are often given the drugs in hospital but are then allowed home, where they excrete them into the domestic sewerage system.
*Britons consume 2,700kg of 5-fluorouracil – just one of 50 cytotoxic drugs. By comparison, they consume about 45kg of the active ingredient of the contraceptive pill, which is believed to be responsible for freshwater fish changing sex.
*British water companies have to test for 48 potential contaminants in drinking water. None of them is for a pharmaceutical drug that can be excreted from the body.
*Scientists in Germany have found pharmaceutical drugs in Berlin's water supply and have called for further research into what could be a Europe-wide problem.
-
Print Article
-
Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2008 Independent News and Media Limited

Comments
26 Comments
I question the effectiveness of a scientist who states, 'I find it hard to believe they [the drug traces] will have any effect.' Someone who discounts the possibility of one of the outcomes being tested for does not strike me as an objective, or suitable, investigator.
A standard water filter will not remove pharmecutical chemicals but it is possible to get a much higher standard of filter fixed to one's taps.
The irony is that this experiment takes place while the government is attempting to push through the forced medication of the populace via fluoridisation which has proven toxic effects and minimal health benefits - world wide web npwa.org.uk
Posted by C T | 04.10.08, 12:14 GMT
It is interesting to read the posts here.
I own and run a watercooler company and we have an excellent English spring water which we bottle and distribute with low transport miles. It's a healthy product making a positive effect to the economy - yet Panorama and others (The Sun last week) seem to want to knock our industry.
I know why I drink spring water and I am so pleased that these issues are being discussed.
Posted by Tanya Rostron | 30.09.08, 22:03 GMT
This is serious because people drinking tap water may be affected by the active ingredients in medical drug. Many such drugs also have fluoride and benzene-related chemicals added, to make the active ingredients work more powerfully. Benzene and fluoride are toxic and benzene is a proven cause of cancer and leukaemia.
Posted by a. wills | 30.09.08, 13:52 GMT
Does anyone know if these chemicals CAN be removed?
Do the plants, that drink this water too, purify it?
Or do they simply absorb it?
If our water companies filters do not remove it, can home systems such as distillers?
Posted by Michelle | 30.09.08, 13:13 GMT
Getting back to the subject at hand, namely the health risk of contaminated tap water in the UK. .....
There's clearly a problem with our tap water and judging by the number of comments on here, I suspect that many people feel strongly about the fact that we haven't been told about this sooner.
What ACTION can we take now? WHO do we pressure to raise the standards of our tap water? WHO will represent us in our concern? Is there a petiton we can sign? Could somebody please advise me about this?
It makes the problems with plastic in mineral water bottles pale into insignificance. And what a great subject this would make for a Panorama investigation.
Posted by Anna Robertson | 30.09.08, 08:16 GMT
I am at least as interested in how much drugs there are in prescription drugs. I am convinced by their lack of effectiveness that some of the prescription drugs I use are not only counterfeit, but fake. That is they are made of something like the stuff that they are poisoning the babies with in China. Except I am paying as much as $15 per tablet. So I would be interested in a gadget that would test prescription drugs for their active ingredients. Any inventors out there?
Posted by Jonathan Cole | 30.09.08, 05:32 GMT
One wonders why this problem hasn't been addressed since it was reported 19 March 1997, in Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, "IDENTIFICATION OF FLUOROQUINOLONE ANTIBIOTICS AS THE MAIN SOURCE OF umuC GENOTOXICITY IN NATIVE HOSPITAL WASTEWATER", by Andreas Hartmann, and others. Further reference was in "SCIENCE NEWS", VOL. 153, 21 March 1998, "Drugged Waters", by Janet Raloff.
It has been 10 years, a decade, and still reports of bacterial resistance causing illnesses and deaths. Makes me wonder if it isn't a form of population control.
Posted by Anita | 30.09.08, 03:11 GMT
Thats pretty annoying isnt it. What a joke.
Jiff
www.anonweb.eu.tc
Posted by Jiff DoDah | 30.09.08, 02:00 GMT
It has been done through all the major cities in the USA also, and revealed alarming amounts of all sorts of funky drugs, from meds for schizofrenia and depression to contraceptives and pain killers. Depending on the city one lives there, the exposure to tap water presents a slightly different risk. This entire planet is just being completely f*%#kd up by "progress" and over population. Here is a movie plot for ya: world has gone bonkers and every city in every country has a mandatory "persons extermination" weekly as part of a scale-back programme to minimise the down-spiral of the planet. Two or three main character families. Who will be exterminated? Throw in political corruption, economic greed, media manipulation, mass hysteria, conspiracy to monopolize the subdivision of Mars or Venus for out-a-space community "development" (we f*#$@kd Earth lets go f*%#ck the entire solar plexus), and a dash of unusual romantic pairings and voila'; we have an "almost-true story" blockbuster...
Posted by Acarretada | 29.09.08, 19:32 GMT
Research on this topic goes back to the 70's (1) and work on animal drugs goes back to the Swann Report of 1969 (2). I myself did my PhD in this area at Imperial College starting in 2001 (3, 4) and big pharma has been aware about this for some time.
1) Garrison A.W. et al (1976) GC/MS analysis of organic compounds in domestic wastewater. In: Identification and analysis of organic pollutants in water (ed. Keith LH), pp. 517-566. Ann Arbour Science, Minneapolis
2) Swann M.M., et al (1969) Report of the joint committee on the use of antimicrobials in animal husbandry and veterinary medicine. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London, UK.
3) Jones O.A.H. et al (2002) Aquatic environmental assessment of the top 25 English prescription pharmaceuticals. Water Research, 36, 5013-5022
4) Jones O.A.H., et al (2005) Pharmaceutical residues in the aquatic environment - A threat to drinking water? Trends in Biotechnology., 23, 163-1
Posted by Oliver Jones | 29.09.08, 16:59 GMT
26 Comments