#8
12-04-2010, 07:43 PM
This is a report done by a girl in my class that I thought I should post up here. Very troubling to say the least. Especially for the people in the BB community.
What’s in your water?
Exposing Estrogen As a Pollutant and Its Links to Abnormal Sexual Development
Group 10B
Environmental Science 1021
If you knew that every time you had a glass of water, you were having a pharmaceutical cocktail, would you still drink it? The very medications you consume to improve your health could actually end up coming back to bite you later in life. Common belief holds that the end point of a medicine is at ingestion. In actual truth, the pills you swallow are only partially absorbed inside your body, a portion of them flushed down the toilet as human waste and ultimately ending up back in the water you drink (MacEachern, 2006).
In 2005, Canadians spent more than $18 billion on pharmaceutical products (Robinson et al., 2007). The most popular form of birth control, it was reported that in 2007 approximately 100 million women worldwide take estrogen based oral contraceptives (Nakajima, 2007). Of the medical substances humans ingest, 50-90% of them are excreted in urine and feces as metabolites (Robinson et al., 2007). However, pharmaceutical waste doesn’t just come from humans; ten percent of the steroids given to cattle are excreted (MacEachern, 2006). An investigation in Philadelphia revealed 56 different pharmaceutical contaminants and drug metabolites present in the drinking water supplied to its citizens, coming from anything from over-the-counter painkillers to Prozac and oral contraceptives (MacEachern, 2006).
When pharmaceutical contaminants are studied in isolation, individual concentrations are quite low and are often considered not dangerous to human health (MacEachern, 2006). Conversely, the longterm effects of a multitude of different drugs at low concentrations, potentially reacting with each other, are largely unknown (MacEachern, 2006). Speculation has been raised relating antibiotic resistance to low doses of antibiotic metabolites consumed over long periods of time in drinking water, but no concrete evidence has been provided at this time (Robinson et al., 2007). Of serious concern is the effect of hormone residues, specifically estrogen byproducts excreted by women on oral contraceptives. Non-species specific in nature, highly effective at minute concentrations, and having the ability to bioaccumulate in fatty tissue, estrogen tainted drinking water is very scary especially when you consider the high number of women who take the pill (Robinson et al., 2007).
The consumption of estrogenic residues has been linked to some serious sexual health problems in developing adolescents (Roy et al., 2009). Included in these are early onset puberty, higher occurrences of reproductive cancers, hermaphroditism, male feminization, and abnormal reproductive development (Roy et al., 2009).
Currently, there are no laws or legislations in place governing what constitutes “clean” water as far as pharmaceutical contamination goes (MacEachern, 2006). This means that the water bottling companies marketing “pure” and “natural” drinking water aren’t even legally required to test for contaminants, let alone required to remove them (MacEachern, 2006).
Because there is such a limited amount of concrete cause and effect research directly relating the consumption of drug tainted water over a long period of time to human health detriments, forcing drug companies to make greener drugs has not yet been possible. For this reason, awareness of the issue must be increased in order to make some major overhauls in the wastewater treatment and pharmaceutical specters.
Medication Metabolism: The life-cycle of “the pill”
Varying by medication, a large percentage of the pharmaceuticals you consume don’t actually get completely absorbed after ingestion (MacEachern, 2006). Partially degraded in your body, a large proportion of the pills you take are excreted in your urine and feces (MacEachern, 2006). They ultimately end up in wastewater treatment facilities, flushed into aquatic ecosystems, and even eventually back into public drinking water. Because they’re so widely prescribed and the effects of hormones are large even when consumed at very low concentrations, oral contraceptives are of great concern.
Although commonly thought of as an exclusively female hormone, both males and females produce estrogen compounds naturally in their bodies at different stages of development (Watson et al., 2008). Women produce three different forms of estrogen through their lifetime: estradiol from the onset of puberty to menopause, estriol during pregnancy, and estrone during menopause. Perhaps one of the most important roles of estrogen is its role in sexual differentiation of both males and females during puberty (Roy et al., 2009)
Birth control oral contraceptives, a synthetic derivative of estradiol, produce similar actions in the body to the natural form (Robinson et al., 2007). After the pill is swallowed, it gets absorbed by the small intestine and broken down in the liver. However, studies show that 50-90% of any medicine ingested is actually excreted in urine and feces unchanged, or as a metabolite of the original (Robinson et al., 2007). With this said, metabolites, which are the byproducts of medicines after they’ve been partially broken down, may actually be more toxic than the parent form (Robinson et al., 2007). The estimated concentration of pharmaceutical products, of which ethinyl estradiol (the pill) is one, in drinking water in the US can reach levels as high as 0.3 g/L. Concentrations for treated wastewater, surface and ground water, can be as high as 10 g/L, 2 g/L, and 1 g/L, respectively (Robinson et al., 2007).
The excretion of drug residues wouldn’t be so concerning if current water treatment practices were successful at removing them. Pharmaceutically active compounds, including the hormone derivative in the pill, tend not to be broken down by the bacteria used in treatment tanks (Robinson et al., 2007). Thus, they manage to escape degradation by bacteria during the sewage treatment process, eventually making their way into aquatic ecosystems, and ultimately, drinking water (Robinson et al., 2007). Studies have found that only 38-83% of the natural steroids and artificial hormones are removed by the common wastewater treatment practices, depending on environmental conditions, construction and treatment technology, and how long the waste is treated for before being released as effluent (Singh et al., 2010; Robinson et al., 2007).
The fact that estradiol is lipophilic, meaning it accumulates in fatty tissues, is especially worrisome as it can be incorporated into the bodies of aquatic organisms, bioaccumulate over time, and possibly enter the human diet (Robinson et al., 2007). Davis et al. (2009) concluded that people consuming fish from areas where estrogenic pollution is in higher concentrations are at risk for developing cancer, neurological impairment, and reproductive problems.
Also concerning is the fact that pharmaceutical contaminants, including those found in the birth control pill, can end up being applied to agricultural lands as sludge (Robinson et al., 2007). They then proceed to seep into the water table and contaminate ground water wells, leaving those on an isolated water supply vulnerable to contaminants as well.
Health Implications
Since they have just recently been discovered in the environment, the effects of most pharmaceutical metabolites in drinking water are largely unknown (Dalyrmple et al., 2007). Because the majority of research conducted on the effects of hormone residues, and pharmaceutical contamination in general, has been in relation to aquatic ecosystem health, human implications must be speculated based on these studies.
Perhaps the most troublesome issue when it comes to estrogen metabolites as pollution is the fact that hormones are not species-specific, meaning that the hormones given to cows can also be active in humans (Robinson, 2007). Further, persistent under normal environmental conditions and active at very low levels (nanograms per litre!), hormones are able to change forms over time and interact with other contaminants in the water (Robinson et al., 2007). Because estradiol is a synthetic hormone that is designed to function exactly like the estrogens made by the body, when taken up by humans and aquatic organisms, it functions exactly as if the body had made it (Robinson et al., 2007).
Research conducted on white suckerfish populations up and downstream from an estrogenic wastewater treatment plant shows severe sexual abnormalities in downstream populations (Vajda et al., 2008). Skewed sex ratio, decreased sperm abundance, disrupted ovarian development, and hermaphroditism were all found in populations downstream, but not those upstream (Figure 1). Further, exposure to endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs) can actually lead to sex reversal in the case of female suckerfish. Testicular function in male fish was disrupted by EDCs in the downstream fish, shown in the decrease of sperm abundance downstream. Females upstream of the effluent had synchronous ovary development (fewer oocyte stages present at the same time), while downstream fish had many oocyte stages present (asynchronous, or abnormal ovary development).
Studies conducted on human health implications link drinking water contaminated with estrogens and estrogen-mimics reveal tremendous sexual development abnormalities in children and adolescents, with both sexes showing early onset puberty (Roy et al., 2009). Boys subjected to these contaminants were found to have undescended testes, birth defects of the penis, poor semen quality, and feminization (such as the development of breasts). Girls displayed chromosomal abnormalities, altered menstrual cycling, fetal growth restriction, and pregnancy loss. Adults were more likely to get cancers of the reproductive tract (testicular, prostate, breast, and ovarian); breast cancer showing the highest correlation when compared to the concentration of estrogen contamination in drinking water.
Mitigation Techniques
In North America, many wastewater treatment plants don’t have the biological stage necessary for biodegradation of many pharmaceuticals (Robinson et al., 2009). Plagued with widespread estrogen contamination, the St-Lawrence River is one of the most affected bodies of water in Canada because it receives huge amounts of “treated” wastewater from a range of sources (Robinson et al., 200&). There is no regulated or general method of analysis of pharmaceuticals in aquatic environments, and most existing methods don’t cover a wide enough range of pollutants. Some water treatment methods, such as chlorine, could actually make certain contaminants, including estrogen metabolites, more toxic (MacEarchern, 2006).
The responsibility of removing pharmaceutical contamination lies with both the wastewater treatment facilities and with the drug design and manufacturing companies. Pharmaceuticals, including oral contraceptives, must be designed as “green drugs”, remaining intact and active in the body long enough to fully carry out their desired function before they are degraded and excreted (Robinson et al., 2007). Some methods exist to remove pharmaceuticals from wastewater or drinking water, such as ozonation, filtration with nano-particles, and absorption by granular active carbon. However, because they’re so expensive, they’re not practical on a large scale (Singh et al., 2010)
Hormones have huge detrimental reproductive and sexual health implications at concentrations lower than most other pharmaceutical contaminants (Robinson et al., 2007). “Hormesis” is the name given to the phenomenon where there health effects are seen at concentrations below the assigned “no observable effects level” (NOEL) (Robinson et al., 2007). NOEL is determined based on research, and is recommended to change as more studies are conducted on the effects of a substance in the body (Robinson et al., 2007). The implementation of lower NOEL’s would be the responsibility of the government, and the university community could be a driving force in lobbying for this.
Some cities in the United States run drug collection programs to collect and dispose of unused medications safely (Robinson et al., 2007). At this point in time, nothing like this exists in Canada. A program such as this one could be easily set up with the University Student Council, and on-campus pharmacy with support of students.
Importance to the UWO Community
With a demographic made up of a large portion of young men and women in their reproductive prime, the UWO student community is directly affected by the health implications of pharmaceutical pollution, specifically when it comes to estrogenic contamination.
As mentioned, current water treatment practices aren’t sufficient at removing these estrogenic pollutants. To date, no laws or regulations protecting citizens from pharmaceutical contaminants in drinking water supply are in place (MacEachern, 2006). To deal with this, legislation is imperative to make water treatment plants responsible for better treatment processes, and to hold drug companies liable for health impacts.
In order to accomplish policy and legislation changes, public involvement and lobbying government officials is crucial. The University of Western Ontario is a large body of educated individuals that have a loud voice in political and environmental concerns. A scholarly resource, the UWO community has the potential to make a huge impact on the issue of estrogenic contamination in drinking water. Able to take an all-encompassing approach to the issue, UWO is capable of using its many resources to conduct research, and to use this information to inform the community. There is a wealth of educated professionals that could provide credible scientific information to present to levels of government. From there, student activism could aid in the lobbying of government officials and pharmaceutical manufacturers.
Neglecting to reply to emails and phone calls, pharmaceutical companies are basically sweeping this issue under the rug. Taking no responsibility for the implications their wastes incur, manufacturers are focused exclusively on the money to be made and certainly not on the health of the environment, or the people affected by it.
References
Dalyrmple, O.K., Yeh, D.H., and Trotz, M.A. 2007. Review: Removing pharmaceuticals and
endocrine-disrupting compounds from wastewater by photocatalysis. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology. 82:121-134.
Davis, D., Donovan, M., Eagon, P., El Hefnawy, T., Houghton, F., Lenzner, D., Sussman, N.,
& Volz, C.D. (2009). Channel Catfish Estrogenicity and Sewer Overflows; Implications for Xenoestrogen Exposure. Proceedings of the 2007 National Conference on Environmental Science and Technology, 345-352.
International Programme on Chemical Safety. (n.d.). Kinetics. in Ethinyl Estradiol. Retrieved
from: http://www.inchem.org/documents/pims/pharm/pim221.htm
International Programme on Chemical Safety. (n.d.). Mode of Action. in Ethinyl Estradiol.
Retrieved from: http://www.inchem.org/documents/pims/pharm/pim221.htm
Khanal, S. K., Xie, B., Thompson, M.L., Sung, S., Ong, S., & Van Leeuwen, J.H. (2006).
Fate, transport, and biodegradation of natural estrogens in the environment and engineered system. Environmental Science and Technology, 40(21), 6537-6546
MacEachern, D. (2006, August 26) Drinking water of 41 million Americans contaminated
with pharmaceuticals. Message posted to http://www.enn.com/top_stories/article/38022.
Nakajima, S.T., Archer, D.F., & Ellman, H. (2005). Efficacy and safetnew 24-day oral
contraceptive regimen of norethindrone acetate 1 mg/ethinyl estradiol 20 μg (Loestrin® 24 Fe). Fertility and Sterility, 84, S169-S170. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.07.420
Robinson, I., Junqua, G., Van Coillie, R., & Thomas, O. (2007). Trends in the detection of
pharmaceutical products, and their impact and mitigation in water and wastewater in North America. Analytic and Bioanalytic Chemistry, 387(4), 1143-1151
Roy, J.R., Chakraborty, S., & Chakraborty, T.R. (2009). Estrogen-like endocrine disrupting
chemicals affecting puberty in humans – a review. Medical Science Monitor. 15(6), 137-145.
Singh, S.P., Azua, A., Chaudhary, A., Khan, S., Willet, K.L., & Gardinali, P.R. (2010).
Occurrence and distribution of steroids, hormones and selected pharmaceuticals in South Florida coastal environments. Ecotoxicology, 19, 338-350
Vajda, A.M., Barber, L.B., Gray, J.L., Lopez, E.M., Woodling, J.D., and Norris, D.O. 2008.
Reproductive disruption in fish downstream from an estrogenic wastewater effluent. Environ Sci Technol. 42:3407-3414.
Watson, C.S., Jeng, Y., & Kuchukov, M.Y. (2008). Nongenomic actions of estradiol
compared with estrone and estriol in pituitary tumour cell signaling and proliferation. FASEB Journal, 22, 3328 – 3336.
What’s in your water?
Exposing Estrogen As a Pollutant and Its Links to Abnormal Sexual Development
Group 10B
Environmental Science 1021
If you knew that every time you had a glass of water, you were having a pharmaceutical cocktail, would you still drink it? The very medications you consume to improve your health could actually end up coming back to bite you later in life. Common belief holds that the end point of a medicine is at ingestion. In actual truth, the pills you swallow are only partially absorbed inside your body, a portion of them flushed down the toilet as human waste and ultimately ending up back in the water you drink (MacEachern, 2006).
In 2005, Canadians spent more than $18 billion on pharmaceutical products (Robinson et al., 2007). The most popular form of birth control, it was reported that in 2007 approximately 100 million women worldwide take estrogen based oral contraceptives (Nakajima, 2007). Of the medical substances humans ingest, 50-90% of them are excreted in urine and feces as metabolites (Robinson et al., 2007). However, pharmaceutical waste doesn’t just come from humans; ten percent of the steroids given to cattle are excreted (MacEachern, 2006). An investigation in Philadelphia revealed 56 different pharmaceutical contaminants and drug metabolites present in the drinking water supplied to its citizens, coming from anything from over-the-counter painkillers to Prozac and oral contraceptives (MacEachern, 2006).
When pharmaceutical contaminants are studied in isolation, individual concentrations are quite low and are often considered not dangerous to human health (MacEachern, 2006). Conversely, the longterm effects of a multitude of different drugs at low concentrations, potentially reacting with each other, are largely unknown (MacEachern, 2006). Speculation has been raised relating antibiotic resistance to low doses of antibiotic metabolites consumed over long periods of time in drinking water, but no concrete evidence has been provided at this time (Robinson et al., 2007). Of serious concern is the effect of hormone residues, specifically estrogen byproducts excreted by women on oral contraceptives. Non-species specific in nature, highly effective at minute concentrations, and having the ability to bioaccumulate in fatty tissue, estrogen tainted drinking water is very scary especially when you consider the high number of women who take the pill (Robinson et al., 2007).
The consumption of estrogenic residues has been linked to some serious sexual health problems in developing adolescents (Roy et al., 2009). Included in these are early onset puberty, higher occurrences of reproductive cancers, hermaphroditism, male feminization, and abnormal reproductive development (Roy et al., 2009).
Currently, there are no laws or legislations in place governing what constitutes “clean” water as far as pharmaceutical contamination goes (MacEachern, 2006). This means that the water bottling companies marketing “pure” and “natural” drinking water aren’t even legally required to test for contaminants, let alone required to remove them (MacEachern, 2006).
Because there is such a limited amount of concrete cause and effect research directly relating the consumption of drug tainted water over a long period of time to human health detriments, forcing drug companies to make greener drugs has not yet been possible. For this reason, awareness of the issue must be increased in order to make some major overhauls in the wastewater treatment and pharmaceutical specters.
Medication Metabolism: The life-cycle of “the pill”
Varying by medication, a large percentage of the pharmaceuticals you consume don’t actually get completely absorbed after ingestion (MacEachern, 2006). Partially degraded in your body, a large proportion of the pills you take are excreted in your urine and feces (MacEachern, 2006). They ultimately end up in wastewater treatment facilities, flushed into aquatic ecosystems, and even eventually back into public drinking water. Because they’re so widely prescribed and the effects of hormones are large even when consumed at very low concentrations, oral contraceptives are of great concern.
Although commonly thought of as an exclusively female hormone, both males and females produce estrogen compounds naturally in their bodies at different stages of development (Watson et al., 2008). Women produce three different forms of estrogen through their lifetime: estradiol from the onset of puberty to menopause, estriol during pregnancy, and estrone during menopause. Perhaps one of the most important roles of estrogen is its role in sexual differentiation of both males and females during puberty (Roy et al., 2009)
Birth control oral contraceptives, a synthetic derivative of estradiol, produce similar actions in the body to the natural form (Robinson et al., 2007). After the pill is swallowed, it gets absorbed by the small intestine and broken down in the liver. However, studies show that 50-90% of any medicine ingested is actually excreted in urine and feces unchanged, or as a metabolite of the original (Robinson et al., 2007). With this said, metabolites, which are the byproducts of medicines after they’ve been partially broken down, may actually be more toxic than the parent form (Robinson et al., 2007). The estimated concentration of pharmaceutical products, of which ethinyl estradiol (the pill) is one, in drinking water in the US can reach levels as high as 0.3 g/L. Concentrations for treated wastewater, surface and ground water, can be as high as 10 g/L, 2 g/L, and 1 g/L, respectively (Robinson et al., 2007).
The excretion of drug residues wouldn’t be so concerning if current water treatment practices were successful at removing them. Pharmaceutically active compounds, including the hormone derivative in the pill, tend not to be broken down by the bacteria used in treatment tanks (Robinson et al., 2007). Thus, they manage to escape degradation by bacteria during the sewage treatment process, eventually making their way into aquatic ecosystems, and ultimately, drinking water (Robinson et al., 2007). Studies have found that only 38-83% of the natural steroids and artificial hormones are removed by the common wastewater treatment practices, depending on environmental conditions, construction and treatment technology, and how long the waste is treated for before being released as effluent (Singh et al., 2010; Robinson et al., 2007).
The fact that estradiol is lipophilic, meaning it accumulates in fatty tissues, is especially worrisome as it can be incorporated into the bodies of aquatic organisms, bioaccumulate over time, and possibly enter the human diet (Robinson et al., 2007). Davis et al. (2009) concluded that people consuming fish from areas where estrogenic pollution is in higher concentrations are at risk for developing cancer, neurological impairment, and reproductive problems.
Also concerning is the fact that pharmaceutical contaminants, including those found in the birth control pill, can end up being applied to agricultural lands as sludge (Robinson et al., 2007). They then proceed to seep into the water table and contaminate ground water wells, leaving those on an isolated water supply vulnerable to contaminants as well.
Health Implications
Since they have just recently been discovered in the environment, the effects of most pharmaceutical metabolites in drinking water are largely unknown (Dalyrmple et al., 2007). Because the majority of research conducted on the effects of hormone residues, and pharmaceutical contamination in general, has been in relation to aquatic ecosystem health, human implications must be speculated based on these studies.
Perhaps the most troublesome issue when it comes to estrogen metabolites as pollution is the fact that hormones are not species-specific, meaning that the hormones given to cows can also be active in humans (Robinson, 2007). Further, persistent under normal environmental conditions and active at very low levels (nanograms per litre!), hormones are able to change forms over time and interact with other contaminants in the water (Robinson et al., 2007). Because estradiol is a synthetic hormone that is designed to function exactly like the estrogens made by the body, when taken up by humans and aquatic organisms, it functions exactly as if the body had made it (Robinson et al., 2007).
Research conducted on white suckerfish populations up and downstream from an estrogenic wastewater treatment plant shows severe sexual abnormalities in downstream populations (Vajda et al., 2008). Skewed sex ratio, decreased sperm abundance, disrupted ovarian development, and hermaphroditism were all found in populations downstream, but not those upstream (Figure 1). Further, exposure to endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs) can actually lead to sex reversal in the case of female suckerfish. Testicular function in male fish was disrupted by EDCs in the downstream fish, shown in the decrease of sperm abundance downstream. Females upstream of the effluent had synchronous ovary development (fewer oocyte stages present at the same time), while downstream fish had many oocyte stages present (asynchronous, or abnormal ovary development).
Studies conducted on human health implications link drinking water contaminated with estrogens and estrogen-mimics reveal tremendous sexual development abnormalities in children and adolescents, with both sexes showing early onset puberty (Roy et al., 2009). Boys subjected to these contaminants were found to have undescended testes, birth defects of the penis, poor semen quality, and feminization (such as the development of breasts). Girls displayed chromosomal abnormalities, altered menstrual cycling, fetal growth restriction, and pregnancy loss. Adults were more likely to get cancers of the reproductive tract (testicular, prostate, breast, and ovarian); breast cancer showing the highest correlation when compared to the concentration of estrogen contamination in drinking water.
Mitigation Techniques
In North America, many wastewater treatment plants don’t have the biological stage necessary for biodegradation of many pharmaceuticals (Robinson et al., 2009). Plagued with widespread estrogen contamination, the St-Lawrence River is one of the most affected bodies of water in Canada because it receives huge amounts of “treated” wastewater from a range of sources (Robinson et al., 200&). There is no regulated or general method of analysis of pharmaceuticals in aquatic environments, and most existing methods don’t cover a wide enough range of pollutants. Some water treatment methods, such as chlorine, could actually make certain contaminants, including estrogen metabolites, more toxic (MacEarchern, 2006).
The responsibility of removing pharmaceutical contamination lies with both the wastewater treatment facilities and with the drug design and manufacturing companies. Pharmaceuticals, including oral contraceptives, must be designed as “green drugs”, remaining intact and active in the body long enough to fully carry out their desired function before they are degraded and excreted (Robinson et al., 2007). Some methods exist to remove pharmaceuticals from wastewater or drinking water, such as ozonation, filtration with nano-particles, and absorption by granular active carbon. However, because they’re so expensive, they’re not practical on a large scale (Singh et al., 2010)
Hormones have huge detrimental reproductive and sexual health implications at concentrations lower than most other pharmaceutical contaminants (Robinson et al., 2007). “Hormesis” is the name given to the phenomenon where there health effects are seen at concentrations below the assigned “no observable effects level” (NOEL) (Robinson et al., 2007). NOEL is determined based on research, and is recommended to change as more studies are conducted on the effects of a substance in the body (Robinson et al., 2007). The implementation of lower NOEL’s would be the responsibility of the government, and the university community could be a driving force in lobbying for this.
Some cities in the United States run drug collection programs to collect and dispose of unused medications safely (Robinson et al., 2007). At this point in time, nothing like this exists in Canada. A program such as this one could be easily set up with the University Student Council, and on-campus pharmacy with support of students.
Importance to the UWO Community
With a demographic made up of a large portion of young men and women in their reproductive prime, the UWO student community is directly affected by the health implications of pharmaceutical pollution, specifically when it comes to estrogenic contamination.
As mentioned, current water treatment practices aren’t sufficient at removing these estrogenic pollutants. To date, no laws or regulations protecting citizens from pharmaceutical contaminants in drinking water supply are in place (MacEachern, 2006). To deal with this, legislation is imperative to make water treatment plants responsible for better treatment processes, and to hold drug companies liable for health impacts.
In order to accomplish policy and legislation changes, public involvement and lobbying government officials is crucial. The University of Western Ontario is a large body of educated individuals that have a loud voice in political and environmental concerns. A scholarly resource, the UWO community has the potential to make a huge impact on the issue of estrogenic contamination in drinking water. Able to take an all-encompassing approach to the issue, UWO is capable of using its many resources to conduct research, and to use this information to inform the community. There is a wealth of educated professionals that could provide credible scientific information to present to levels of government. From there, student activism could aid in the lobbying of government officials and pharmaceutical manufacturers.
Neglecting to reply to emails and phone calls, pharmaceutical companies are basically sweeping this issue under the rug. Taking no responsibility for the implications their wastes incur, manufacturers are focused exclusively on the money to be made and certainly not on the health of the environment, or the people affected by it.
References
Dalyrmple, O.K., Yeh, D.H., and Trotz, M.A. 2007. Review: Removing pharmaceuticals and
endocrine-disrupting compounds from wastewater by photocatalysis. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology. 82:121-134.
Davis, D., Donovan, M., Eagon, P., El Hefnawy, T., Houghton, F., Lenzner, D., Sussman, N.,
& Volz, C.D. (2009). Channel Catfish Estrogenicity and Sewer Overflows; Implications for Xenoestrogen Exposure. Proceedings of the 2007 National Conference on Environmental Science and Technology, 345-352.
International Programme on Chemical Safety. (n.d.). Kinetics. in Ethinyl Estradiol. Retrieved
from: http://www.inchem.org/documents/pims/pharm/pim221.htm
International Programme on Chemical Safety. (n.d.). Mode of Action. in Ethinyl Estradiol.
Retrieved from: http://www.inchem.org/documents/pims/pharm/pim221.htm
Khanal, S. K., Xie, B., Thompson, M.L., Sung, S., Ong, S., & Van Leeuwen, J.H. (2006).
Fate, transport, and biodegradation of natural estrogens in the environment and engineered system. Environmental Science and Technology, 40(21), 6537-6546
MacEachern, D. (2006, August 26) Drinking water of 41 million Americans contaminated
with pharmaceuticals. Message posted to http://www.enn.com/top_stories/article/38022.
Nakajima, S.T., Archer, D.F., & Ellman, H. (2005). Efficacy and safetnew 24-day oral
contraceptive regimen of norethindrone acetate 1 mg/ethinyl estradiol 20 μg (Loestrin® 24 Fe). Fertility and Sterility, 84, S169-S170. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.07.420
Robinson, I., Junqua, G., Van Coillie, R., & Thomas, O. (2007). Trends in the detection of
pharmaceutical products, and their impact and mitigation in water and wastewater in North America. Analytic and Bioanalytic Chemistry, 387(4), 1143-1151
Roy, J.R., Chakraborty, S., & Chakraborty, T.R. (2009). Estrogen-like endocrine disrupting
chemicals affecting puberty in humans – a review. Medical Science Monitor. 15(6), 137-145.
Singh, S.P., Azua, A., Chaudhary, A., Khan, S., Willet, K.L., & Gardinali, P.R. (2010).
Occurrence and distribution of steroids, hormones and selected pharmaceuticals in South Florida coastal environments. Ecotoxicology, 19, 338-350
Vajda, A.M., Barber, L.B., Gray, J.L., Lopez, E.M., Woodling, J.D., and Norris, D.O. 2008.
Reproductive disruption in fish downstream from an estrogenic wastewater effluent. Environ Sci Technol. 42:3407-3414.
Watson, C.S., Jeng, Y., & Kuchukov, M.Y. (2008). Nongenomic actions of estradiol
compared with estrone and estriol in pituitary tumour cell signaling and proliferation. FASEB Journal, 22, 3328 – 3336.