Bottled water industry faces same federal standards for pharmaceuticals as tap water - none
Article History
There are updates to this article.

The federal standards for acceptable levels of pharmaceutical residue in bottled water are the same as those for tap water - there aren't any.

The Food and Drug Administration, which regulates the $12 billion bottled water industry in the United States, sets limits for chemicals, bacteria and radiation, but doesn't address pharmaceuticals.

Some water that's bottled comes from pristine, often underground rural sources; other brands have a source no more remote than local tap water. Either way, bottlers insist their products are safe, and say they generally clean the water with advanced treatments, though not explicitly for pharmaceuticals.

Nestle Waters North America Inc., an industry leader whose brands include Arrowhead, Poland Springs and Ozarka, said it selects sources that are removed from human activity, increasing the chances that the water will be pure. It then runs the water through three cleansing stages.

"We know that our multiple barrier process is effective," said Kevin Mathews, the company's director of health and environmental affairs.

Absent a regulatory mandate, however, Nestle follows the industry norm and does not test for pharmaceuticals. And given that testing can detect extremely small concentrations, Mathews would not rule out the presence of traces of pharmaceuticals in its water.

"I don't think anybody could say anything is free" from pharmaceuticals, Mathews said.

Annual bottled water consumption in the United States has increased about 50 percent, to 30 gallons per person, according to the Beverage Marketing Corporation.

"The industry is monitoring it," said Bob Hirst, a vice president at the International Bottled Water Association, which represents dozens of brands. "But we haven't seen anything to alarm us at this point."


Name
Comments

characters left


Comments from Examiner Readers

10:30 PM MST on Wed., Jul. 23, 2008 re: "DeKalb County residents advised to boil water"

Examiner Reader said:
thank you for posting the boil water order for Avondale.

Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

8:25 AM MST on Sat., May. 24, 2008 re: "Pharmaceuticals found in drinking water, affecting wildlife and maybe humans"

Ezra said:
Cocktail effect?

1 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
8:09 AM MST on Sat., May. 24, 2008 re: "Water providers and researchers rarely release full test results to the public"

Ezra said:
Water is pretty important stuff, if the wildlife starts suffering we will not be far behind. Societies convinced to take their medication instead of lead a healthy lifestyle. A Drug-Free America should mean just that. Get off the Drugs you Drugies. Thank you.

3 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
11:31 PM MST on Fri., May. 2, 2008 re: "Water cleaning technologies present challenges - some work better than others"

Examiner Reader said:
Paul Westerhof comments that RO produces several gallons of brine for each gallon of product water, which is a very misleading statement. In brackish or wastewater treatment, recoveries are normally much greater than 50% so less than one gallon of brine is produced for a gallon of product. Seawater may have recovery less than 50%, but this source is unlikely to be of concern for trace pharmaceuticals. Graeme Pearce Director Membrane Consultancy Associates

8 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
4:03 PM MST on Fri., May. 2, 2008 re: "No standards, no mandates to test, treat or limit pharmaceuticals in water"

Examiner Reader said:
Your article is wrong when it says-------Today, municipal drinking water is cleansed of germs - but not drugs. The germs are there. Suggest that you read the works of Amy Pruden------but the long and short of it is as follows: sewer plants release anrtibiotic resistant pathogens to rivers, these and their genetic material are later picked up by the fresh-water intakes to drinking water treatment plants. These are not affected by chlorine and pass through the filters. Pruden, et al (2006) has found these viable genetic fragments in the drinking water supply. These fragments then go to your intestinal bacteria. Once ingested, this genetic material may be transferred to normal gut flora, and subsequently to pathogenic bacteria found in humans or animals, making later treatment with particular antibiotics ineffective. Also one must consider transfer of genetic information from these organisms to more robust organisms as highlighted by Maria Sjolund et al. (2005) indicating that resi

6 agree | 7 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
 
 

(page generated in 0.13 seconds)