Skowronski

Brittany Skowronski
English 101-125
Professor Padgett
April 4, 2016
Additives in water: the good, the bad, the ugly

Comment [AP1]: Use proper title case.

Debate and speculation over water is nothing new, people have debating over many
aspects of water and water consumption for as long as I can remember. Which form of water is
best for consumption? Is bottled water healthier than tap water? Or vice versa? Well what if I
were to tell you that both forms of water have almost the exact same risks/chemical additives?
The chemicals added in bottled and tap water keep water potable, but in larger quantities can
have serious adverse effects on the health and wellbeing of consumers.
So what is the difference between tap water and bottled water? Although many people
will stick to their guns and strongly stand by the belief that bottled water is cleaner, healthier,
and safest source of water [over tap water], this does not always appear to be the case. In fact,
according to the Safe Water Drinking Foundation (SWDF) the requirements for bottled water are
significantly less strict and almost nonexistent in many aspects. Where tap water is required to go
through extensive testing, disinfection processes, and regulatory procedures, bottled water has
much more freedom with what is added to its water, and it has more freedom to how often it gets
tested (SWDF, 2010).
So what processes do bottled water and tap water have to go through? Tap water is
required to be disinfected in city water and it is required to be disinfected at a rural level [well
water] if it is needed, however when it comes to bottled water disinfection is not required at all.
Bottled water also receives a pass when it comes to testing for viruses such as Cryptosporidium

Comment [AP2]: What in larger quantities? Just the

bottled water? Or the chemicals in larger quantities?

Skowronski 2

and Giardia, in that it is not required to test for those bacteria. Data from the Safe Water
Drinking Foundation suggests that bottled water gets tested a total of four times less often than
tap water, and it is actually legal for bottled water to contain strong amounts of fecal matter, as
well as asbestos, and bromate. Where fecal matter, bromate, and asbestos are required to be
tested for, recorded, and regulated in tap water no such testing is required for many companies
that manufacture, store, and sell bottled water. As a matter of fact, if there are traces of E. Coli or
fecal matter found in bottled water, it is still legal to sell, and it still passes the guidelines set
forth by the Food and Drug Administration (SWDF, 2010). Even when the bottled water is tested
it is not required to use certified labs to do the testing, and the findings that are found are not
required to be sent to the state of federal agents (SWDF, 2010). Meanwhile, across the board all
of what was previously listed is required to be tested in all city water infrastructures.
Although bacteria, microbes, other biological matter may be allowed in bottled water it
seems as if bottled water has much stricter guidelines and regulations that limit the amount of
chemical additives. According to the information posted by the SWDF the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) tends to have much stricter rules and regulations on what
chemicals/minerals/additives can be added to bottled water and how much is allowed as opposed
to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) who is in charge of city and rural tap water.
Fluoride, copper, and lead are found in both tap and bottled water, but the amount found in both
are stark. There seems to be less amounts of those additives found in bottled water than in tap
water, which is due to differing regulations among the two agencies. However different the
regulations are among the FDA and the EPA, the results are not across the board, within water
bottle companies, states/counties/towns, and the way the water is treated the levels of these
additives range within the legal range (SWDF, 2010). Since bottled water companies are usually

Skowronski 3

owned and operated by different corporations they each have different levels of these additives
found in each, as long as it is under the agencies consensus. The same also applies to tap water,
different cities and towns use different water purification processes and also have differing levels
of these additives, as well as other additives altogether. Tap water is supposed to be under the
allowed levels of these additives, but this is not always the case, some places have poor
infrastructure, corruption, and flawed results, take the city of Flint for instance.
So what purpose do these additives have doing in our water to begin with? Some of these
additives are beneficial to the health and sustainability of human life such as the chemicals listed
below. The addition of well-known chemical, fluoride, a word primarily heard when attending
the dentists office or on the back of tooth paste tubes, was added to the water for the first time in
1945 to prevent cavities and promote dental health to everyone and not just those who had access
to health care (Main, 2016). Copper is a trace element, required by most living organisms in
small quantities, copper compounds main purpose is to support and encourage health in
plants/animals as well as limit algae growth on surface water (WHO, 1996). Sodium is another
common trace element added into water, which is necessary and beneficial for life in small
quantities, however there are various sodium compounds found in water that have different
effects on life, as a matter of fact some compounds of sodium actually pose more risks than
benefits (WHO, 1996).
There are also additives that have no benefit to humans at all such as the following.
Leads incorporation in water actually poses no health benefits and it is only in water because of
old infrastructures that carry water to and from residences in big cities, this is due to the use of
lead pipes when the city infrastructure was built, and the continuous use since then (Shaw, 2016).
We discovered that lead was harmful to health around the 1960s when it started to be limited in

Skowronski 4

house paints and eventually banned, however in cities the government has not removed or
renovated the infrastructure that is bringing many Americans contaminated drinking water(Lead
Fact Sheet). Arsenic, which is also a huge additive in water, does not serve any beneficial
purpose either, in fact the only known health outcomes from arsenic exposure are negative,
arsenic enters water through dyes, soaps, drugs, and through rocks, wood, as well as other
objects found in nature, so it is not an intentional addition to these water sources (EPA). Traces
of chlorine are found in drinking water as well, chlorine is used to clean the water from bacteria
and contaminants but there is no beneficial health reason for its addition other than that
(Disinfection with Chlorine). There are also many other additives found in both forms of
water, but those listed are the most common.
Although there are some beneficial health factors associated with some of the common
additives in water in larger quantities there are huge risks associated with larger doses and
continuous use. Fluoride is one of those examples, while it may be beneficial for the population
and it does strengthen teeth and promote oral health, it is really harmful in large or extended
doses. The chemical itself is rather dangerous it has been known to be able to eat through both
concrete and steel when spilt. There is also a lot of speculation that fluoride is a government tool
to pacify the citizens and keep them well behaved, although this may not be the case the first
noted use of fluoride was in Germanys Nazi Prison camps (Borkin, 1978). Although the
conspiracies have flourished from that fact there are some concerning results when it comes to
cognitive and mental performance and fluoride, a study was published in the Journal of
Neurotoxicology and Teratology and the study tested the mental abilities of youth from rural
areas in China. The children had various levels of fluoride in their well water, and have been
living off of that water for a large portion of their lives. The children were required to bring in

Comment [AP3]: This is starting to sound conspiratorial.

Dont build a thesis on speculation.

Skowronski 5

samples of their water and have tests done to see the amount of fluoride in their blood, all of
these children were tested in various ways to show their mental and cognitive capabilities. The
results showed that the children who consumed higher levels of fluoride were less likely to
perform well on the tests, in fact the children who were exposed to higher levels of fluoride
holistically scored much lower than the children who were exposed to lower levels of fluoride
(Choi, 2015). As well as the mental constraints there is also a high link between fluoride and
death, as well as cancer, a famous quote from Dean Burk PhD. which was presented to congress
in 1976, states "In point of fact, fluoride causes more human cancer death, and causes it faster
than any other chemical." So fluoride might not be as safe or beneficial as it seems.
Another common additive found in water is arsenic, arsenic is found in almost all sources
of water on the market, and is also found in many forms of poison. Arsenic is added to water
through rocks and other natural elements, it is typically removed from the public water because
of the toxicity. The EPA allows a smaller amount of arsenic in our water, the exact figure is 10
micrograms per liter. There was a longitudinal study done on arsenic exposure by the
Department of Epidemiology at the Lazio Regional Health Service in Rome, their primary focus
was the effects of small amounts of arsenic over an extended period of time. Their participants
ingested water with 19 micrograms of arsenic per liter, just a little under two times the regulatory
amount in the US, for 20-39.5 years. The results showed a significantly high risk for malignant
cancers and other fatal diseases in places where the levels of arsenic were at higher levels. This
information is important to the United States and consumers of water because in their lab
findings they stated Results provide new evidence for risk assessment of low-medium
concentrations of arsenic and contribute to the ongoing debate about the threshold-dose of effect,
suggesting that even concentrations below 10 g/L carry a mortality risk. (DIppoliti, 2015).

Skowronski 6

This quote suggests that the amount of arsenic found in the water that we are currently ingesting
could have serious mortality risks.
People usually associate water with pools or bombs, but it is actually found in something
more common: water. Chlorine is vital in the water purification process, it is used to kill the
microbes and other bacterial or biological contaminants found in water. Chlorine is all around us,
but research provided by the Hiroshima University suggests that the chlorine in water has
significant links to gastrointestinal cancer in rats (Sasada, 2015). It is unethical to test
experiments that may be harmful to the health of humans, so animal models are used. Animal
models are important to understanding the links between various chemicals and life, and the
findings can be applied to humans.
There was a study published in the Toxicology and Industrial Health that studied the
effects of lead on rats, the study was longitudinal and focused on the effects on the lifespan on
the animal. The rats that consumed the water that was contaminated with lead had the same
health effects as severe lead poisoning in humans, such as dehydration, diarrhea, gastrointestinal
problems, and tumors. The lives of the rats that received the contaminated water were
significantly lower than those who did not receive contaminated water, the life expectancy was
also less than the control group as well, the control groups percentage of survival was 90% and
the group that received lead had a percentage of survival of 60% (Novakova, 2015).
In modern media lead is the most well-known dangerous additive in water, due to the
Flint water Crisis. In Flint there was a city-wide water change from the Detroit water and
Sewerage Department to the Flint River which was not treated, the water contained heavy metals
[some of which listed above] and it sapped lead from the lead pipes used to distribute the water
to the homes of the people from Flint and poisoned the people of Flint (Fonger). The situation

Skowronski 7

was not fully apparent to the public and a huge percentage of the people of Flint have been
hospitalized and a total of twelve were killed due to the exposure. It is important to understand
that this is only one of many current scandals about the negligence of city officials and the water
supply, another case occurred in 2016 in New Jersey, and another in Louisiana, all due to
outdated infrastructure and negligence.
Although Columbia SC might have an attentive and ethical water staff and the water is
hopefully within the EPA parameters, it is important to learn about these additives and ponder
the idea that these substances are found in our water and what affect they have on the human
body. In an ideal world there would only be the additives and the trace elements in the amounts
our body needs directly, but unfortunately this is not the case. There are organizations and
groups that oppose the use and abuse of these substances, in order to have a healthier and longer
lifespan of themselves and those around them, that are taking donations and support, as well as
the survivors and families of those in Flint, Lousiana, and New Jersey. Together a difference can
be made and we can rid our water of poison.
Brittany,
I really like the topic you are working with here. You point out a lot of really interesting
information that is certainly engaging, but Im having trouble with your sense of exigency here.
You pull information that is kind of antiquated and talk about chemicals that is in water that isnt
great for us, but Im not getting enough about how much is in our water and how much it takes to
really harm us. Then there are the speculative-type of claims, which you cant really make in an
academic paper. Again, this was really interesting, but I need a little more to lean on here in
order for this argument to be persuasive.

Skowronski 8

WORKS CITED
Anderson, Elisha. "Legionnaires'-associated Deaths Grow to 12 in Flint Area." Detroit Free
Press. 11 Apr. 2016. Web. Apr. 2016.
Borkin, Joseph. The Crime and Punishment of I.G. Farben. New York: Free, 1978. Print.
Choi, Anna L., Ying Zhang, Guifan Sun, David C. Bellinger, Kanglin Wang, Xiao Jing Yang, Jin
Shu Li, Quanmei Zheng, Yuanli Fu, and Philippe Grandjean. "Association of Lifetime
Exposure to Fluoride and Cognitive Functions in Chinese Children: A Pilot Study."
Neurotoxicology and Teratology 47 (2015): 96-101. Academic Search Complete. Web.
DIppoliti, Daniela, et al. "Arsenic In Drinking Water And Mortality For Cancer And Chronic
Diseases In Central Italy, 1990-2010." Plos ONE 10.9 (2015): 1-19. Academic Search
Complete. Web. 14 Apr. 2016.
EPA. "Technical Fact Sheet: Final Rule for Arsenic in Drinking Water." Environmental
Protection Agency. Web.
<http://nepis.epa.gov/EXE/ZYPDF.CGI?Dockey=20001XXE.txt>.

Skowronski 9

"Disinfection with Chlorine." Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2015. Web. Apr.
2016.
Fonger, Ron. "Lead Leaches into 'very Corrosive' Flint Drinking Water, Researchers Say." Lead
Leaches into 'very Corrosive' Flint Drinking Water, Researchers Say. Michigan Live.
Web. Apr. 2016.
"Lead Fact Sheet." Department of Environment Safety, Sustainability, and Risk. University of
Maryland. Web. Apr. 2016.
Main, By Douglas. "Facts About Fluoridation." LiveScience. TechMedia Network, 2015. Web.
Apr. 2016.
Sasada, Tatsunari, et al. "Chlorinated Water Modulates The Development Of Colorectal Tumors
With Chromosomal Instability And Gut Microbiota In Apc-Deficient Mice." Plos ONE
10.7 (2015): 1-15. Academic Search Complete. Web. 14 Apr. 2016.
Shaw, J. "EPA under Pressure to get the Lead Out of Americas Water Supply - Hot Air."
HotAir. 02 Feb. 2016. Web. Apr. 2016.
"Sodium in Drinking Water." World Health Organization. World Health Organization, 1996.
Web.