“There are hundreds and thousands of drugs out there, and so it is a pretty fair assumption that some of the things emerging from treatment are a lot more toxic than we thought” ... Stuart Khan, one of the study’s authors.

TRACES of common pain-killing drugs are being transformed into toxic forms by waste water treatment plants, a new report from researchers at the University of NSW shows.

The study, which used samples from water treatment plants across Sydney and some interstate plants, showed that the organic sludge used to help destroy household chemicals can actually transform them into something else.

The altered chemicals from three widely-used household drugs were detected at very low levels, meaning that there is minimal risk to human health. But the consequences could be much larger for some aquatic environments where treated water is reused.

”There are hundreds and thousands of different drugs out there, and so it is a pretty fair assumption that some of the things emerging from treatment are a lot more toxic than we thought,” said one of the study’s authors, Stuart Khan, from the water research centre at the University of NSW.

Some drugs occur in two forms, called ”enantiomers”, which are very similar but not quite identical. ”Chemically, they are like a mirror image of each other; different in the same way a right hand and a left hand are different from each other,” Dr Khan said.

Sometimes pairs of enantiomers have different effects on living organisms, and when this happens, the enantiomer with a beneficial effect is separated from its toxic mirror image, and turned into a safe drug.

The key to the new findings is that careful testing of water samples from treatment plants were compared with fresh water and water containing raw sewage, including samples from the heavily-polluted Cooks River. The sewage contained the enantiomers associated with ordinary pharmaceuticals that are flushed down toilets or sinks across the city. But the treated waste water samples showed that the organic ”scrubbing” by bacteria in treatment plants had restored some of the toxic enantiomers.

The most infamous case of a chemical being transformed into a toxic chemical took place in the 1950s, when the drug thalidomide was administered to pregnant women but was changed to a toxic form in the human gut, causing birth defects.

”What this research means is that we really need to think about this question of measuring toxins a lot more broadly,” Dr Khan said.

The study was published in the peer-reviewed journal Water Research, and follow-up work is now being done on the effects of waste water treatment on other chemicals.

Click here to read more.

U.S. Geological Survey hydrologic technicians collect a stream sample from Hallocks Mill Brook downstream of the outfall of one of the wastewater treatment plants investigated.

In a 2004-2009 study, USGS scientists found that pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities can be a significant source of pharmaceuticals to the environment. Effluents from two wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) that receive discharge from pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities (PMFs) had 10 to 1000 times higher concentrations of pharmaceuticals than effluents from 24 WWTPs across the nation that do not receive PMF discharge. The effluents from these two WWTPs are discharged to streams where the measured pharmaceuticals were traced downstream, and as far as 30 kilometers from one plant’s outfall.

This is the first study in the United States that assesses PMFs as a potential source of pharmaceuticals to the environment. The PMFs investigated are pharmaceutical formulation facilities, where ingredients are combined to form final drug products and products are packaged for distribution. While pharmaceuticals have been measured in many streams and aquifers across the nation, levels are generally lower than one part per billion (1 ppb). Concerns persist, however, that higher levels may occur in environmental settings where wastewaters are released to the environment.

In this study, 35 to 38 effluent samples were collected from each of three WWTPs in New York State and one effluent sample was collected from each of 23 strategically selected WWTPs across the nation. The samples were analyzed for seven target pharmaceuticals including opioids and muscle relaxants, some of which have not been previously studied in the environment. Pharmaceutical concentrations in effluents from two of the three WWTPs in New York State, which both receive more than 20 percent of their discharge from PMFs, were compared to the measurements made at the third plant in New York State and at the other 23 plants across the nation, which all do not receive discharge from PMFs. Maximum pharmaceutical concentrations in effluent samples from the 24 WWTPs that do not receive discharge from PMFs rarely (about 1 percent) exceeded one part per billion. By contrast, maximum concentrations in effluents from the two WWTPs receiving PMF discharge were as high as 3,800 ppb of metaxalone (a muscle relaxant), 1,700 ppb of oxycodone (an opioid prescribed for pain relief), greater than 400 ppb of methadone (an opioid prescribed for pain relief and drug withdrawal), 160 ppb of butalbital (a barbituate), and greater than 40 ppb of both phendimetrazine (a stimulant prescribed for obesity) and carisoprodol (a muscle relaxant).

The pharmaceuticals investigated in this study were identified using a forensic approach that identified pharmaceuticals present in samples and subsequently developed methods to quantify these pharmaceuticals at a wide range of concentrations. Additional pharmaceuticals, which may be formulated at these sites, also were identified as present in the effluents of these two WWTPs. Ongoing studies are documenting the levels at which these additional pharmaceuticals occur in the environment. Information on other contaminants measured in the outflows of these WWTPs during this study are presented in Phillips and others, 2008. The environmental data, a description of the methods used, information on quality-assurance methods and protocols, and quality-control data are available in an accompanying USGS Open-File Report.

This study is part of a long-term effort by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the USGS Toxic Substances Hydrology Program to determine the fate and effects of chemicals of emerging environmental concern and to provide water-resource managers with objective information that assists in the development of effective water management practices.

References Phillips, P.J., Smith, S.G., Kolpin, D.W., Zaugg, S.D., Buxton, H.T., Furlong, E.T., Esposito, Kathleen, and Stinson, Beverley, 2010, Pharmaceutical formulation facilities as sources of opioids and other pharmaceuticals to wastewater treatment plant effluents: Environmental Science and Technology Phillips, P.J., Smith, S.G., Kolpin, D.W., Zaugg, S.D., Buxton, H.T., Furlong, E.T., Esposito, Kathleen, and Stinson, Beverley, 2010, Method description, quality assurance, environmental data, and other information for analysis of pharmaceuticals in wastewater-treatment-plant effluents, stream water, and reservoirs, 2004-2009: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2010-1102, 2010. Phillips, P.J., Stinson, B., Zaugg, S.D., Furlong, E.T., Kolpin, D.W., Esposito, K.M., Bodniewicz, B., Pape, R., and Anderson, J., 2008, A multi-disciplinary approach to the removal of emerging contaminants in municipal wastewater treatment plans in New York State, 2003-2004: Clearwaters, v. 38, no. 3, p. 48-59.

Click her for more info.

Sewage effluent testing has shown high levels of estrogen and other pharmaceuticals that are likely to interfere with the reproductive cycle – and provide larger breasts for guys (as well as slower running and biking capabilities).

Sewage sludge has other issues – especially if handled improperly,

A way to beat up your sludge pumper up there? But then,I have a septic tank too. C

FYI,

Makes me wonder about biosolids waste from treatment plants that may be applied to land. Also, what’s in your septic tank?

T Yarish

“What’s surprising and shocking is how many compounds in effluent could be antiandrogenic,” says Louis Guillette Jr., an environmental toxicologist at the Medical University of South Carolina, who was not involved in the study. “If you combine such a large number of antiandrogens with estrogenic compounds, then you have a milieu that generates a more feminizing signal,” he says. “Researchers have to start thinking about the total hormonal signal arising from exposure to multiple compounds.”

Based on the concentrations of antiandrogenic compounds in the bile combined with their potency in the yeast screen, the researchers estimated that over half of the androgen blocking activity in fish bile came from chlorophene and triclosan, two germicides popular in consumer products like soap. This study is the first to show that chlorophene is antiandrogenic, Hill says.

From Chemical and Engineer News:

November 11, 2011 | Latest News Androgen Blockers Appear In Effluent

Water Pollutants: Popular germ killers could feminize male fish By Janet Pelley Department: Science & Technology Keywords: sewage effluent, antiandrogens, environmental estrogens, endocrine disruption, feminized fish, chlorophene, triclosan [+]Enlarge

Feminizing Soup Sewage effluent can contain a complex mixture of compounds that block male hormones Credit: Shutterstock Scientists have long blamed environmental estrogens in wastewater for feminizing male fish downstream of sewage plants. Instead of estrogens, however, a new study of treated wastewater identifies a wide range of antiandrogens–compounds that block male hormones– that can accumulate in fish (Environ. Sci. Technol., DOI: 10.1021/ es202966c).

“About 90% of the studies on endocrine disruption focus on environmental estrogens,” says Helmut Segner, a toxicologist at the University of Bern, in Switzerland, who was not involved in the study. These studies show that compounds in sewage effluent behave like estrogen and lead to low sperm counts and the genesis of eggs in the testes of male fish.

However, recent surveys have found that sewage effluent can also block testosterone. The same surveys linked the effluent to feminized male fish. Some scientists think they could affect human reproductive health, as well. But the surveys of antiandrogens didn’t nail down the identity of the compounds. Elizabeth Hill, an analytical chemist at the University of Sussex, wanted to know which compounds posed a threat to fish.

Hill and her team took advantage of the fact that bile ducts in fish livers concentrate environmental contaminants. The scientists exposed trout for 10 days to effluent from a domestic sewage plant in the U.K. They then extracted the bile and separated it into fractions, using reversed phase-high performance liquid chromatography.

Using recombinant yeast containing a human androgen receptor, the researchers tested whether each fraction contained antiandrogens. The yeast also contained a reporter gene that produced a color change when the scientists exposed the yeast to androgens. If the researchers added a bile fraction to the yeast and saw no color change, they reasoned that it contained androgen blockers. Team member Pawel Rostkowski then analyzed the chemicals in the fraction using gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. He identified each chemical by comparing its spectrum to those of known compounds. He then purchased commercially available standards for compounds he had found and confirmed that they blocked androgens using the yeast screen.

The research revealed 14 antiandrogenic compounds, and Hill thinks there were dozens more in the samples. The study is the first to show that fish take up antiandrogens from among the thousands of organic compounds in sewage effluents, Hill says.

“What’s surprising and shocking is how many compounds in effluent could be antiandrogenic,” says Louis Guillette Jr., an environmental toxicologist at the Medical University of South Carolina, who was not involved in the study. “If you combine such a large number of antiandrogens with estrogenic compounds, then you have a milieu that generates a more feminizing signal,” he says. “Researchers have to start thinking about the total hormonal signal arising from exposure to multiple compounds.”

Based on the concentrations of antiandrogenic compounds in the bile combined with their potency in the yeast screen, the researchers estimated that over half of the androgen blocking activity in fish bile came from chlorophene and triclosan, two germicides popular in consumer products like soap. This study is the first to show that chlorophene is antiandrogenic, Hill says.

Hill cautions that the study did not show that antiandrogens affect fish health. Her collaborators at the University of Exeter are currently testing these compounds to see if they feminize male fish.

CHE Alaska call: Toxic Chemicals that Disrupt Hormones: Impacts on Fish and People

August 24, 2011 at 9:00 am Alaska / 10:00 am Pacific / 1:00 pm Eastern

RSVP: To join this free call and receive the dial-up instructions, please RSVP to Alaska Community Action on Toxics atdiana@akaction.org or (907) 222-7714.

Description: A one hour discussion with environmental biologist Dr. Frances Solomon about endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDC). Dr. Solomon will discuss the toxic properties of EDCs, exposure pathways for fish and humans with a focus on routes of exposure for people living in the Arctic, why young humans and juvenile fish are more vulnerable to the toxic effects of EDCs, and how you can reduce your exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals. We will also discuss the specific impacts of two groups of EDCs — phthalates and perfluorinated compounds (PFCs) and proposed regulatory reform including the Safe Chemicals Act of 2011 and the Safe Cosmetics Act of 2011.

Speaker:

Dr. Frances Solomon is an environmental biologist with a bachelor’s degree in biology from the University of Rochester (Rochester, New York), and a master’s degree in environmental health and a Ph.D. in fisheries from the University of Washington (Seattle, Washington). She has 25 years of experience in environmental agencies, focusing on the biological impacts of toxic water pollutants, pollution prevention and control, and cleanup of contaminated sites.

Dr. Solomon is passionate about bringing her work experience and knowledge to the classroom. She teaches short courses and gives lectures for environmental professionals, health care professionals, and the general public in Washington State, Alaska, and Canada about impacts of metals and persistent organic pollutants, including endocrine disruptor chemicals (EDCs), on aquatic ecosystems and human health. She teaches environmental pollution courses at Western Washington University and The Evergreen State College, Tacoma. She has also taught at University of Washington Tacoma, University of British Columbia, and Northwest University in Xi’an, China.

Sincerely,

Erika Sanders, Administrative Coordinator

Collaborative on Health and the Environment

Urban Water Management Plan, a state-required document that includes

demand projections. How much water will Santa Rosa officially request

for future growth?

This will take place in the SR City Council Chambers on Tues. Nov. 9th.

Brenda

By Melissa Knopper

Back in the 1990s, Theo Colborn, then-senior scientist with the World Wildlife Fund, sounded the first alarms about endocrine disrupters. In the book Our Stolen Future (Plume) Colborn describes her early findings that connected these endocrine disruptors—via chemicals in plastics, pesticides and pharmaceuticals—with male fish laying eggs and bald eagle eggs crumbling into tiny pieces. Soon, scientists developed new research techniques to study these estrogen-like compounds, which are highly active at trace levels. Now, those new research tools are putting the spotlight on an extremely persistent, and perhaps equally disruptive, group of contaminants: antidepressants. A new body of evidence is building. Study after study shows widely prescribed drugs such as Prozac, Effexor and Celexa disrupt the natural order when they are excreted into the water. Scientists in Mississippi discovered antidepressants are interfering with the way tadpoles develop into frogs. They also interfere with the ability of tiny minnows to escape predators. Experts say these early signs could point to long-term problems for the aquatic food chain as a whole.

Edward T. Furlong, Ph.D., a research chemist for the United States Geological Survey’s (USGS) National Water Quality laboratory in Denver, Colorado, says the reasons antidepressants wreak havoc on fish is because they work on the body’s serotonin system. Most organisms on Earth have this important neurotransmitter in their bodies, from the tiniest nematode (microorganisms in soil) to the largest mammals and humans. Once antidepressants disperse in the environment (in this case by traveling down streams in wastewater effluent), they can affect a wide range of living creatures.

In fish, Furlong explains, serotonin is associated with aggression, predation and escape instincts. “The fish is in water continuously,” he says, “so dissolved antidepressants can cross the gills 24/7.”

USGS scientists wanted to learn more about how these compounds—found in both water and sediment—might affect fish behavior. One 2010 study produced a surprising discovery: The antidepressants most common in stream water were not the ones that showed up in fish brains. “There are many reasons why this selective uptake may occur—including differences in fat versus water solubilities of the antidepressants,” Furlong says.

So what happens when fish have antidepressants in their brains? Just like people, they mellow out. Some studies showed striped bass that uncharacteristically didn’t pursue smaller fish. Another important finding showed tiny fathead minnows who neglected to swim away when threatened by a simulated predator.

Dana Kolpin, a researcher with the USGS Toxic Substances Hydrology Program, says that minnows usually react to predators with what is a called a C-start mechanism. These fish didn’t. “It’s an innate behavior for fish. It’s how they escape predators,” he says. “They bend into a ‘C’ and escape with higher velocity.”

The researchers are still trying to discover why this affected only the minnows in the larval stage—a very vulnerable part of their lifecycle. What’s clear is that this is not a good sign for the fish. “A slower response to predators is not helpful when you are on the lower end of the food chain,” Furlong says.

And what about the long-term impact on the environment? It’s still early to say, scientists say. But fathead minnows are a key food source for other fish species, such as trout and bass. Also, USGS research shows antidepressants persist in the water and travel as far as five miles downstream from wastewater treatment plants. “As with many contaminants, there is the potential for them to move up the food chain,” Kolpin says.

Officials from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) say they are aware of the new research on antidepressants and fish. “We value the data collected by other agencies and organizations as it will contribute to EPA’s ongoing work to better understand the occurrence, risk and treatment of pharmaceuticals in water, as well as methods for preventing pharmaceuticals from entering water,” the agency said in a statement. U.S. Food and Drug Administration officials said they are also keeping track of the latest USGS fish research. However, FDA officials add, “We don’t believe these low levels of pharmaceuticals in the waterway pose any risk to human health.”

Environmentalists like Renee Sharp, senior scientist with the Environmental Working Group (EWG), say this new research on fish and antidepressants points to the need for better testing. “It speaks to the need for more testing to look for ecological impacts,” Sharp says. “There are gaping holes in many aspects of our regulatory system.”

Sharp points to one promising solution: the green pharmaceutical movement. “We need to think about redesigning drugs so they’re effective, but they don’t cause problems,” she says.

Meanwhile, EWG urges consumers who have leftover antidepressants or prescription drugs to dispose of them responsibly, instead of flushing them. Prescription drug take-back programs are available in many communities. “Antidepressants are definitely helping to heal a lot of suffering,” Sharp says. “But we have a lot of chemicals at very low levels that are all interacting with one another. It’s a real concern.”

MELISSA KNOPPER is an environmental journalist living in Denver, Colorado, who has written two books on medicine and the environment.

Pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities can be a significant source of pharmaceuticals to surface waters, according to a new study by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducted in cooperation with the State of New York. Outflow from two wastewater treatment plants in New York that receive more than 20 percent of their wastewater from pharmaceutical facilities had concentrations of pharmaceuticals that were 10 to 1000 times higher than outflows from 24 plants nationwide that do not receive wastewater from pharmaceutical manufacturers.

“This is the first study in the U.S. to identify pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities as a significant source of pharmaceuticals to the environment,” said Matthew C. Larsen, USGS Associate Director for Water. “The USGS is working with water utilities to evaluate alternative water treatment technologies with the goal of reducing the release of pharmaceuticals and other emerging contaminants to the environment.”

Maximum concentrations in outflows from the two wastewater treatment plants in New York were:

• 3,800 parts per billion (ppb) of metaxalone (a muscle relaxant)
• 1,700 ppb of oxycodone (an opioid prescribed for pain relief)
• Greater than 400 ppb of methadone (an opioid prescribed for pain relief and drug withdrawal)
• 160 ppb of butalbital (a barbiturate)
• Greater than 40 ppb of phendimetrazine (a stimulant prescribed for obesity) and carisoprodol (a muscle relaxant)
• 3.9 ppb diazepam (an anti-anxiety medication)

While pharmaceutical concentrations were significantly lower in receiving streams, measurable concentrations were detected as far as 20 miles downstream.

By contrast, outflow from the wastewater treatment plants that do not receive wastewater from pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities had concentrations that rarely exceeded one ppb.

“This study would not have been possible without the cooperation and support of the New York Department of Environmental Conservation and wastewater treatment plants in New York and nationwide,” said USGS scientist Patrick Phillips, who led the study. “We continue to work with the NYS DEC to monitor the quality of the outflows and receiving streams.”

For this study, USGS scientists collected outflow samples periodically from 2004 to 2009 from three New York wastewater treatment plants, two of which receive more than 20 percent of their wastewater from pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities. USGS also collected samples from 2006-2009 from 23 selected wastewater treatment plants across the nation that do not receive wastewater from pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities.

All of the samples were analyzed for seven pharmaceuticals, including opioids and muscle relaxants, representing some of the most frequently prescribed medications in the U.S. Some pharmaceuticals studied have not previously been included in environmental studies.

The pharmaceuticals investigated in this study were identified using a forensic approach that identified initially unknown chemicals present in the wastewater treatment plant outflows at elevated levels. Although public records were not available for all pharmaceuticals formulated at these sites, available data indicate that these seven pharmaceuticals are manufactured at one or both of the New York facilities involved in the study. Additional pharmaceuticals were identified in the outflow of these two wastewater treatment plants, and ongoing studies are documenting the levels at which they occur in the environment.

This study is part of a long-term effort to determine the fate and effects of chemicals of emerging environmental concern and to provide water-resource managers with objective information that assists in the development of effective water management practices. More information can be found online.