Tag: wellness

Twenty-year study shows cleaner water slashes cancer and heart disease deaths

Date:November 27, 2025

Source:Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health

Summary:A 20-year project in Bangladesh reveals that lowering arsenic levels in drinking water can slash death rates from major chronic diseases. Participants who switched to safer wells had the same risk levels as people who were never heavily exposed. The researchers tracked individual water exposure with detailed urine testing. Their results show how quickly health improves once contaminated water is replaced.Share:

    

FULL STORY

Safer Wells Save Lives in Bangladesh
Cleaner water dramatically reduces chronic disease deaths, even for those exposed to arsenic for years. Credit: Shutterstock

A large 20-year investigation following nearly 11,000 adults in Bangladesh found that reducing arsenic in drinking water was tied to as much as a 50 percent drop in deaths from heart disease, cancer and several other chronic illnesses. The research offers the strongest long-term evidence so far that lowering arsenic exposure can reduce mortality, even for people who lived with contaminated water for many years. These results appear in JAMA.

Scientists from Columbia University, the Columbia Mailman School of Public Health and New York University led the analysis, which addresses a widespread health concern. Naturally occurring arsenic in groundwater remains a significant challenge across the world. In the United States, more than 100 million people depend on groundwater that can contain arsenic, particularly those using private wells. Arsenic continues to be one of the most common chemical contaminants in drinking water.

“We show what happens when people who are chronically exposed to arsenic are no longer exposed,” said co-lead author Lex van Geen of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, part of the Columbia Climate School. “You’re not just preventing deaths from future exposure, but also from past exposure.”

Two Decades of Data Strengthen the Evidence

Co-lead author Fen Wu of NYU Grossman School of Medicine said the findings offer the clearest proof yet of the connection between lowering arsenic exposure and reduced mortality risk. Over the course of two decades, the researchers closely tracked participants’ health and repeatedly measured arsenic through urine samples, which strengthened the precision of their analysis.

“Seeing that our work helped sharply reduce deaths from cancer and heart disease, I realized the impact reaches far beyond our study to millions in Bangladesh and beyond now drinking water low in arsenic,” said Joseph Graziano, Professor Emeritus at Columbia Mailman School of Public Health and principal investigator of the NIH-funded program. “A 1998 New York Times story first brought us to Bangladesh. More than two decades later, this finding is deeply rewarding. Public health is often the ultimate delayed gratification.”

Clear Drop in Risk When Arsenic Exposure Falls

People whose urinary arsenic levels fell from high to low had mortality rates that matched those who had consistently low exposure for the entire study. The size of the drop in arsenic was closely tied to how much mortality risk declined. Those who continued drinking high-arsenic water did not show any reduction in chronic disease deaths.

Arsenic naturally accumulates in groundwater and has no taste or smell, meaning people can drink contaminated water for years without knowing it. In Bangladesh, an estimated 50 million people have consumed water exceeding the World Health Organization’s guideline of 10 micrograms per liter. The WHO has described this as the largest mass poisoning in history.

From 2000 to 2022, the Health Effects of Arsenic Longitudinal Study (HEALS) monitored thousands of adults in Araihazar, Bangladesh. The project tested more than 10,000 wells in a region where many families rely on shallow tube wells with arsenic levels ranging from extremely low to dangerously high.

Researchers periodically measured arsenic in participants’ urine, a direct marker of internal exposure, and recorded causes of death. These detailed data allowed the team to compare long-term health outcomes for people who reduced their exposure with those who remained highly exposed.

Community Efforts Created a Natural Comparison Group

Throughout the study period, national and local programs labeled wells as safe or unsafe based on arsenic levels. Many households switched to safer wells or installed new ones, while others continued using contaminated water. This created a natural contrast that helped researchers understand the effects of reducing exposure.

Arsenic exposure decreased substantially in Araihazar during the study. The concentration in commonly used wells fell by about 70 percent as many families sought cleaner water sources. Urine tests confirmed a corresponding decline in internal exposure, averaging a 50 percent reduction that persisted through 2022.

Reduced Exposure Brings Lasting Health Benefits

These trends held true even after researchers accounted for differences in age, smoking and socioeconomic factors. Participants who remained highly exposed, or whose exposure rose over time, continued to face significantly higher risks of death from chronic diseases.

The researchers compared the health benefits of lowering arsenic to quitting smoking. The risks do not disappear immediately but drop gradually as exposure decreases.

In Bangladesh, well testing, labeling unsafe sources, drilling private wells and installing deeper government wells have already improved water safety for many communities.

“Our findings can now help persuade policymakers in Bangladesh and other countries to take emergency action in arsenic ‘hot spots’,” said co-author Kazi Matin Ahmed of the University of Dhaka.

To reach more households, the research team is collaborating with the Bangladeshi government to make well data easier to access. They are piloting NOLKUP (“tubewell” in Bangla), a free mobile app created from more than six million well tests. Users can look up individual wells, review arsenic levels and depths, and locate nearby safer options. The tool also helps officials identify communities that need new or deeper wells.

Clean Water Investments Can Save Lives

The study shows that health risks can fall even for people who were exposed to arsenic for years. This highlights an important opportunity: investing in clean water solutions can save lives within a single generation.

“Sustainable funding to support the collection, storage and maintenance of precious samples and data over more than 20 years have made this critically important work possible,” said Ana Navas-Acien, MD, PhD, Professor and Chair of Environmental Health Sciences at Columbia Mailman School of Public Health. “Science is difficult and there were challenges and setbacks along the way, but we were able to maintain the integrity of the samples and the data even when funding was interrupted, which has allowed us to reveal that preventing arsenic exposure can prevent disease.”

The study team included researchers from Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, the New York University Grossman School of Medicine, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Boston University School of Public Health, the Department of Geology at the University of Dhaka and the Institute for Population and Precision Health at the University of Chicago.

The HEALS project was launched by Columbia University through the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences’ Superfund Research Program, with most U.S. collaborators based at Columbia when the study began.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2025/11/251127010327.htm?

Over 38,000 Gallons of Water Have Been Recalled Due to ‘Foreign Black Substance’ Contamination

The gallon jugs were shipped to store locations in six states nationwide

By Moná Thomas 

Published on January 15, 2026 11:55AM EST

Leave a Comment

water bottles on an automated conveyor belt, Bottled water production line
water bottles on an automated conveyor belt, Bottled water production line.Credit : cofotoisme/Getty

NEED TO KNOW

  • 38,043 gallons of Meijer Steam Distilled Water have been recalled
  • The enforcement reports cite “floating black foreign substance” contamination for the recall
  • The company has yet to issue a statement confirming the nature of the foreign substance

More than 38,000 gallons of bottled water have been recalled after an Enforcement Report from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) revealed a “floating black foreign substance” appearing inside gallon-sized jugs.

According to a notice published by the FDA, the recall involves Meijer Steam Distilled Water, which is sold in one-gallon plastic containers with red caps. Meijer voluntarily initiated the recall in November 2025, and it remains ongoing as officials continue to review the issue. In total, 38,043 gallons of the product are affected.

Meijer Distilled Water, Recall
Meijer Distilled Water, Recall.Meijer 

The affected jugs can be identified by a best-by date of Oct. 4, 2026, along with lot code 39-222 #3 and a UPC code of 041250841197. Meijer item codes tied to the recall include Product ID 472859 and Item Code 477910.

The recalled water was distributed to Meijer stores across Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin. Consumers who purchased distilled water in those states are urged to check their containers carefully.

Our new app is here! Free, fun and full of exclusives. Scan to download now!

According to the FDA notice, the issue stems from the presence of a black substance floating inside the water, though the exact source and composition of the material have not been publicly identified. The agency has not yet assigned a recall classification, which typically indicates how serious a potential health risk may be.

Meijer did not initially respond to PEOPLE’s request for comment.

Distilled water is often used for more than just drinking. Many consumers rely on it for medical devices, such as CPAP machines, according to Verywell Health, as well as for infant formula preparation and sinus rinses, where water purity is especially important. Because of that, officials say consumers should stop using the recalled water immediately, even if no health issues are apparent.

At this time, no illnesses or injuries have been reported in connection with the recalled product. Still, the FDA advises anyone who has the affected water to either dispose of it safely or return it to a Meijer store for a refund or replacement.

The FDA continues to monitor the recall and has not provided additional details about how the contamination occurred. Consumers are encouraged to review any distilled water they have on hand and follow recall guidance to avoid potential exposure.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION

https://people.com/over-38-000-gallons-of-water-have-been-recalled-due-to-foreign-black-substance-contamination-11885997?

Drinking water source and exposure to regulated water contaminants in the California Teachers Study cohort

Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology volume 35, pages454–465 (2025)Cite this article

  • 4058 Accesses
  • 6 Citations
  • Metrics

Abstract
Background
Pollutants including metals/metalloids, nitrate, disinfection byproducts, and volatile organic compounds contaminate federally regulated community water systems (CWS) and unregulated domestic wells across the United States. Exposures and associated health effects, particularly at levels below regulatory limits, are understudied.

Objective
We described drinking water sources and exposures for the California Teachers Study (CTS), a prospective cohort of female California teachers and administrators.

Methods
Participants’ geocoded addresses at enrollment (1995–1996) were linked to CWS service area boundaries and monitoring data (N = 115,206, 92%); we computed average (1990–2015) concentrations of arsenic, uranium, nitrate, gross alpha (GA), five haloacetic acids (HAA5), total trihalomethanes (TTHM), trichloroethylene (TCE), and tetrachloroethylene (PCE). We used generalized linear regression to estimate geometric mean ratios of CWS exposures across demographic subgroups and neighborhood characteristics. Self-reported drinking water source and consumption at follow-up (2017–2019) were also described.

Results
Medians (interquartile ranges) of average concentrations of all contaminants were below regulatory limits: arsenic: 1.03 (0.54,1.71) µg/L, uranium: 3.48 (1.01,6.18) µg/L, GA: 2.21 (1.32,3.67) pCi/L, nitrate: 0.54 (0.20,1.97) mg/L, HAA5: 8.67 (2.98,14.70) µg/L, and TTHM: 12.86 (4.58,21.95) µg/L. Among those who lived within a CWS boundary and self-reported drinking water information (2017–2019), approximately 74% self-reported their water source as municipal, 15% bottled, 2% private well, 4% other, and 5% did not know/missing. Spatially linked water source was largely consistent with self-reported source at follow-up (2017–2019). Relative to non-Hispanic white participants, average arsenic, uranium, GA, and nitrate concentrations were higher for Black, Hispanic and Native American participants. Relative to participants living in census block groups in the lowest socioeconomic status (SES) quartile, participants in higher SES quartiles had lower arsenic/uranium/GA/nitrate, and higher HAA5/TTHM. Non-metropolitan participants had higher arsenic/uranium/nitrate, and metropolitan participants had higher HAA5/TTHM.

Impact
Though average water contaminant levels were mostly below regulatory limits in this large cohort of California women, we observed heterogeneity in exposures across sociodemographic subgroups and neighborhood characteristics. These data will be used to support future assessments of drinking water exposures and disease risk.

Similar content being viewed by others

Insights to estimate exposure to regulated and non-regulated disinfection by-products in drinking water
Article Open access
29 June 2022

US drinking water quality: exposure risk profiles for seven legacy and emerging contaminants
Article Open access
22 September 2023

Human health implications of metal pollution in the Betwa-Yamuna river system, India: evidence from Monte Carlo risk modelling
Article Open access
11 January 2026
Introduction
Drinking water represents an important source of exposure to inorganics (e.g., arsenic and nitrate), radionuclides (uranium, alpha particles), disinfection byproducts (DBPs), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) for populations in the United States (U.S.) and worldwide [1]. Approximately 90% of the U.S. population is served by public water systems, and 10% by private wells [2]. In California, approximately 95% of the population is served by public water systems [3]. Public water systems include at least 15 service connections or serve at least 25 people; community water systems (CWS) are a type of public water system that serve the same population year-round [2]. Public water systems are regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Safe Drinking Water Act [4]. The contaminants we evaluated are regulated through federally enforceable maximum contaminant levels (MCLs), which were determined based on economic and technical feasibility, treatment technologies, cost-benefit analysis, and public health benefit for specific health endpoints [4]. States generally have primacy over enforcement of federal drinking water regulations. Notably, the MCL goal, a non-enforceable standard based solely on risk to health, is 0 µg/l for arsenic, uranium, alpha particles, trichloroethylene (TCE), tetrachloroethylene (PCE), bromodichloromethane, bromoform, and dichloroacetic acid, as there is no known safe level of exposure to these contaminants [4]. Private wells are not federally regulated or monitored.

Nitrate is a common contaminant of drinking water supplies in agricultural areas, due to use of nitrogen fertilizers and concentrated animal feeding operation waste [5, 6]. Atmospheric deposition, erosion of natural deposits, and septic tank or sewage leakage contribute to nitrate contamination in rural and urban areas [4]. Geogenic arsenic occurs in groundwater across the U.S., with regional differences due to climatic and geological factors; arid climates can cause evaporative concentration of arsenic in shallow groundwater supplies and lead to high levels, such as in the San Joaquin Valley of California [7,8,9,10]. Mining and historical arsenical pesticide use are anthropogenic sources of arsenic contamination in water supplies [8]. Uranium is present in different rock types and is leached from host mineral phases to surface and ground water supplies; uranium mining/milling and mobilization of uranium via nitrate fertilizer use are anthropogenic sources of uranium contamination [11,12,13,14,15]. Uranium and other radionuclides can decay and release alpha radiation, often quantified as total gross alpha for monitoring compliance purposes. DBPs are formed by the reaction of chlorine and bromine with natural organic compounds during the disinfection of water supplies to treat pathogens [16]. DBPs are commonly found in public water supplies across the U.S., with the highest concentrations observed in those reliant on surface water or shallow groundwater [16]. While over 700 DBPs have been identified, the most abundant classes are trihalomethanes (THMs, which include the chemicals chloroform, dibromochloromethane, bromodichloromethane, and bromoform, and regulated as the sum total, TTHM), and haloacetic acids (HAA5, regulated as the sum of dichloroacetic acid, trichloroacetic acid, monochloroacetic acid, bromoacetic acid, and dibromoacetic acid) [4, 17, 18]. The VOCs TCE and PCE are solvents used in dry cleaning, metal degreasing, textile, art, and industrial processes, and may be found in some consumer products [19]. Toxic waste disposal sites, sometimes recognized as Superfund sites under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), are anthropogenic sources of inorganic arsenic, uranium, TCE, and PCE in groundwater [12, 19,20,21,22,23,24].

Numerous studies implicate one or more of these drinking water contaminants in adverse health effects, including cancer, cardiovascular disease, reproductive and developmental toxicity, nephrotoxicity, and other adverse health conditions [1, 16, 20, 25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39]. Inorganic arsenic is classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as a cause of cancers of the bladder, lung, and skin, and is associated with increased risk of cancers of the kidney, liver, and prostate [26]. Inorganic arsenic is also a potent toxicant associated with numerous adverse health outcomes, including cardiovascular disease, hypertension, and reproductive disorders [26, 31, 32]. Uranium exposure through drinking water is associated with renal damage and nephrotoxicity, and an increased risk of colorectal, breast, kidney, prostate, and total cancer [20, 27, 33]. Nitrate is classified by IARC as a probable human carcinogen when ingested under conditions that result in the endogenous formation of N-nitroso-compounds, most of which are animal carcinogens [28, 34]. Cancers of the stomach, colon, bladder, kidney, ovary, and thyroid, and thyroid disease are associated with elevated nitrate ingested from drinking water; however, the number of studies of most cancer sites is limited [29, 35]. Higher intake of DBPs through drinking water is associated with increased bladder cancer risk, and a limited number of studies suggest DBP exposures are potential risk factors for colon, rectum, and endometrial cancer [16, 36]. TCE is classified as carcinogenic to humans based on kidney cancer, and PCE (Group 2A) as probably carcinogenic to humans based on bladder cancer evidence [30]. Occupational studies also support adverse developmental, neurological, and hepatotoxic effects of TCE and PCE exposures [19]. Assessment of long-term drinking water contaminant exposures and associated health risks have traditionally been limited by the lack of water quality data that could be assigned to individuals in epidemiologic cohorts; understanding large-scale water quality data at the level of consumer intake is a critical research gap [40]. Additionally, there are relatively few cohort studies evaluating drinking water exposures at levels below the MCLs and World Health Organization guidelines that are commonly experienced by the general U.S. population [1]. Inequalities in CWS arsenic, uranium, and nitrate exposures by sociodemographic characteristics such as, race and ethnicity, income, education, region, and rurality/urbanicity have been documented [41, 42]. Few studies have evaluated sociodemographic inequalities in DBP and TCE/PCE exposures in the United States.

Our primary objective for this study was to describe exposure to regulated, frequently detected and measured contaminants in drinking water in the California Teachers Study (CTS), a large prospective cohort of women. We described the spatial linkage of participants’ residences to their drinking water source and corresponding estimates of contaminant concentrations. For a subset, we evaluated the agreement between address-assigned and self-reported drinking water source and described the daily intake of tap water and CWS contaminants. Additionally, we examined inequalities in CWS exposures across sociodemographic groups.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41370-024-00703-9

Microplastics in drinking water: quantitative analysis of microplastics from source to tap by pyrolysis–gas chromatography-mass spectrometry

  • Research Article
  • Open access
  • Published: 05 November 2025

You have full access to thisopen accessarticle

Download PDF

Environmental Science and Pollution ResearchAims and scopeSubmit manuscript

Microplastics in drinking water: quantitative analysis of microplastics from source to tap by pyrolysis–gas chromatography-mass spectrometry

Download PDF

Abstract

The widespread presence of microplastics (MPs) in fresh surface water has raised concerns about potential human exposure through drinking water sourced from these environments. While MP research is advancing to understand the occurrence and fate of MPs in drinking water production systems, data based on mass concentration is scarce. This study assesses MP concentrations in the drinking water supply system of Amsterdam (the Netherlands) from source to tap, analyzing raw water from two freshwater sources (Lek Canal and Bethune Polder), treated water from two drinking water treatment plants (DWTPs) (Leiduin and Weesperkarspel DWTPs), and household tap water samples from the Amsterdam distribution area. MPs ≥ 0.7 µm were identified and quantified using pyrolysis gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (Py-GC–MS) targeting 6 high production volume polymers: polyethylene (PE), polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) polypropylene (PP), polystyrene (PS), and polyvinyl chloride (PVC). Average MP concentrations in raw water samples were 50.6 ± 34.7 µg/L (n = 14) and 47.5 ± 33.7 µg/L (n = 14), while treated water samples exhibited significantly lower levels of 0.80 ± 0.44 µg/L (n = 12) and 1.65 ± 2.19 µg/L (n = 14), demonstrating high removal efficiencies of 97–98%. PE, PVC, and PET were the most abundant polymer types detected. Household tap water samples showed lower concentrations with an average of 0.21 ± 0.12 µg/L (n = 20). These findings highlight the effective removal of MPs during drinking water treatment processes while emphasizing the need for further research to understand the factors influencing MP transport and fate within water distribution networks.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11356-025-37130-8?

Press Release

Exposure to PFAS in drinking water linked to higher blood levels of these “forever” chemicals

First-of-its-kind study at ADLM 2025 lays the foundation for addressing public health threat

Share

  • Share On Facebook
  • Share On Instagram
  • Share On Twitter
  • Share On Linkedin
  • >Share With Email

CHICAGO — Breaking research presented today at ADLM 2025 (formerly the AACC Annual Scientific Meeting & Clinical Lab Expo) found that people who live in areas with higher levels of PFAS in their drinking water also have elevated blood levels of these manufactured chemicals. Highlighting why these so-called “forever chemicals” are a growing public-health concern, these findings provide support for policies encouraging more PFAS testing and treatment in public water systems.

“Drinking water is one of the most important routes for exposure to environmental contaminants, including PFAS,” said Dr. Wen Dui, a member of the research team from Quest Diagnostics that conducted the study. “This study was the first of its kind to apply the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) PFAS guidance to study correlation between PFAS in human bodies and drinking water in a large-scale clinical population.” 

First developed in the 1940s, PFAS, or per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances, were designed to resist water, oil, grease, and heat, making them useful in numerous consumer products and across multiple industries. For example, PFAS can be found in non-stick cookware, waterproof clothing, and fast-food packaging, as well as in firefighting foams, aircraft components, medical devices, and construction materials. The substances can enter the public water supply when manufacturers release wastewater into nearby water sources, for example, or when PFAS in landfills leach into groundwater.

Scientists are concerned about possible health consequences of PFAS, which build up in people and the environment over time. For instance, NASEM found evidence of an association between PFAS and adult kidney cancer, decreased infant and fetal growth, abnormally high cholesterol, and a reduced antibody response. The NASEM guidance recommends that anyone with high blood levels of PFAS, defined as a summed total of more than 20 ng/mL of nine key PFAS, receive further testing and reduce their exposure.

“Several federal agencies, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and NASEM, have worked together to summarize evidence, publish guidance, and encourage more clinical PFAS testing,” Dui said. “Quest developed and published a blood test for serum PFAS quantitation of the nine NASEM-recommended analytes to address the critical need for reliable PFAS measurement in clinical laboratories,” Dui said.

As one of its first steps, the team sought to establish the relationship between drinking water contaminated with PFAS and PFAS levels in people’s blood — which is what this new study accomplishes.

Since the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency monitors the amount of PFAS in public water systems, the researchers were able to pull information from previously collected blood samples to do a geographic comparison by exposure level. They evaluated blood samples taken from 771 individuals who lived in zip codes with high exposure to PFAS through their water and 788 people with low exposure to the substances, ensuring the two groups were otherwise comparable in their age and gender distribution.

They found that 7.1% of the people from zip codes with high-exposure to PFAS had elevated blood levels of PFAS (>20 ng/mL), versus only 2.8% of the people in the low-exposure group — a significant difference. Moreover, the estimated average of combined PFAS in the blood samples was significantly higher in the high-exposure group (9.2 ng/mL) versus the low-exposure group (6.1 ng/mL), as were mean blood levels of each individual PFAS studied.

“Our study found that a higher PFAS level in U.S. public drinking water supply corresponds to higher PFAS serum concentrations in exposed communities,” Dui said, adding that, as a next step, the company hopes to contribute to research on the correlation between PFAS exposure and health outcomes.

Session information

ADLM 2025 registration is free for members of the media. Reporters can register online here: https://xpressreg.net/register/adlm0725/media/landing.asp

Abstract B-281: Correlation between PFAS forever chemical concentrations in remnant serum and public drinking water will be presented during:

Scientific poster session
Wednesday, July 30
9:30 a.m. – 5 p.m. (presenting authors in attendance from 1:30 – 2:30 p.m.)

The session will take place in the Poster Hall on the Expo show floor of McCormick Place, Chicago.

About ADLM 2025

ADLM 2025 (formerly the AACC Annual Scientific Meeting & Clinical Lab Expo) offers 5 days packed with opportunities to learn about exciting science from July 27-31 in Chicago. Plenary sessions will explore urgent problems related to clinical artificial intelligence (AI) integration, fake medical news, and the pervasiveness of plastics, as well as tapping into the promise of genomics and microbiome medicine for personalized healthcare.

At the ADLM 2025 Clinical Lab Expo, more than 800 exhibitors will fill the show floor of the McCormick Place Convention Center in Chicago, with displays of the latest diagnostic technology, including but not limited to AI, point-of-care, and automation.

About the Association for Diagnostics & Laboratory Medicine (ADLM)

Dedicated to achieving better health for all through laboratory medicine, ADLM (formerly AACC) unites more than 70,000 clinical laboratory professionals, physicians, research scientists, and business leaders from 110 countries around the world. Our community is at the forefront of laboratory medicine’s diverse subdisciplines, including clinical chemistry, molecular diagnostics, mass spectrometry, clinical microbiology, and data science, and is comprised of individuals holding the spectrum of lab-related professional degrees, certifications, and credentials. Since 1948, ADLM has championed the advancement of laboratory medicine by fostering scientific collaboration, knowledge sharing, and the development of innovative solutions that enhance health outcomes. For more information, visit www.myadlm.org.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION

https://myadlm.org/media/press-release-archive/2025/07-july/exposure-to-pfas-in-drinking-water-linked-to-higher-blood-levels-of-these-forever-chemicals?

Study links PFAS contamination of drinking water to a range of rare cancers

In the first study of its kind, researchers from the Keck School of Medicine of USC found an association between levels of manmade “forever chemicals” in drinking water and the incidence of certain digestive, endocrine, respiratory, and mouth and throat cancers.

Zara Abrams

Image shows water from faucet with the letters PFAS under a magnifying glass.
Image/Francesco Scatena, iStock

Communities exposed to drinking water contaminated with manufactured chemicals known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) experience up to a 33% higher incidence of certain cancers, according to new research from the Keck School of Medicine of USC.

The study, funded by the National Institutes of Health and just published in the Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology, is the first to examine cancer and PFAS contamination of drinking water in the U.S.

PFAS, which are used in consumer products such as furniture and food packaging, have been found in about 45% of drinking water supplies across the United States. Past research has linked the chemicals, which are slow to break down and accumulate in the body over time, to a range of health problems, including kidney, breast and testicular cancers.

To paint a more comprehensive picture of PFAS and cancer risk, Keck School of Medicine researchers conducted an ecological study, which uses large population-level datasets to identify patterns of exposure and associated risk. They found that between 2016 and 2021, counties across the U.S. with PFAS-contaminated drinking water had higher incidence of certain types of cancer, which differed by sex. Overall, PFAS in drinking water are estimated to contribute to more than 6,800 cancer cases each year, based on the most recent data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

“These findings allow us to draw an initial conclusion about the link between certain rare cancers and PFAS,” said Shiwen (Sherlock) Li, PhD, a postdoctoral researcher in the Department of Population and Public Health Sciences at the Keck School of Medicine and first author of the study. “This suggests that it’s worth researching each of these links in a more individualized and precise way.”

In addition to providing a roadmap for researchers, the findings underscore the importance of regulating PFAS. Starting in 2029, the EPA will police levels of six types of PFAS in drinking water, but stricter limits may ultimately be needed to protect public health, Li said.

The toll of PFAS 

To understand how PFAS contamination relates to cancer incidence, the researchers compared two exhaustive datasets—one covering all reported cancer cases and the other including all data on PFAS in drinking water data across the country. Data on cancer cases between 2016 and 2021 were obtained from the National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program, while data on PFAS levels in public drinking water (2013-2024) came from the EPA’s Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule programs.

Li and his colleagues controlled for a number of factors that could influence cancer risk. At the individual level, these included age and sex; at the county level, they ruled out changes in cancer incidence due to socioeconomic status, smoking rates, obesity prevalence, urbanicity (how urban or rural an area is) and the presence of other pollutants.

The researchers then compared cancer incidence in each county to PFAS contamination in the drinking water, using the EPA’s recommended cutoffs for each type of PFAS. Counties where drinking water surpassed recommended maximum levels of PFAS had a higher incidence of digestive, endocrine, respiratory, and mouth and throat cancers. Increases in incidence ranged from slightly elevated at 2% to substantially elevated at 33% (the increased incidence of mouth and throat cancers linked to perfluorobutanesulfonic acid, or PFBS).

Males in counties with contaminated drinking water had a higher incidence of leukemia, as well as cancers of the urinary system, brain and soft tissues, compared to males living in areas with uncontaminated water. Females had a higher incidence of cancers in the thyroid, mouth and throat, and soft tissues. Based on the latest available EPA data, the researchers estimate that PFAS contamination of drinking water contributes to 6,864 cancer cases per year.

“When people hear that PFAS is associated with cancer, it’s hard to know how it’s relevant. By calculating the number of attributable cancer cases, we’re able to estimate how many people may be affected,” Li said, including inferring the personal and financial toll of these cases year after year.

Protecting public health 

These population-level findings reveal associations between PFAS and rare cancers that might otherwise go unnoticed. Next, individual-level studies are needed to determine whether the link is causal and to explore what biological mechanisms are involved.

On the regulation side, the results add to the mounting evidence that PFAS levels should be limited, and suggest that proposed changes may not go far enough.

“Certain PFAS that were less studied need to be monitored more, and regulators need to think about other PFAS that may not be strictly regulated yet,” Li said

The work is part of a collaboration between the Southern California Environmental Health Sciences Center, which is funded by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, and the USC Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center at the Keck School of Medicine.

About this research 

In addition to Li, the study’s other authors are Lu Zhang, Jesse Goodrich, Rob McConnell, David Conti, Lida Chatzi and Max Aung from the Department of Population and Public Health Science, Keck School of Medicine of USC, University of Southern California; and Paulina Oliva from the Department of Economics, Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences, University of Southern California.

This work was supported by a pilot grant from the Southern California Environmental Health Sciences Center [P30ES007048] and the National Cancer Institute [5P30CA014089-47].

CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION

Study links PFAS contamination of drinking water to a range of rare cancers

Troubled waters? The future of drinking water in the U.S.

From fluoride to “forever chemicals,” drinking water has been in the spotlight this year. In a Q&A, Yale epidemiologist Nicole Deziel discusses the water we drink today — and what’s on tap for the future.

Aug 13, 2025

7 min read

By Meg Dalton

(Illustration by Michael S. Helfenbein)

Woman drinking water from a glass

Listen to this story

8:33

In 1945, Grand Rapids, Michigan, made history — as the first city in the world to add small amounts of fluoride to its public water supply. At the time, studies showed communities with higher levels of natural fluoride in water had better dental health. Water fluoridation is now practiced in about 25 countries around the world, including Spain, Malaysia, and the United States. In the U.S., approximately 63% of the population drinks fluoridated water.

Low levels of fluoride, a naturally occurring mineral, can be found in many sources of drinking water due to natural processes like the weathering of rocks and human activities like manufacturing. However, there’s growing debate over whether additional fluoride should be introduced to drinking water. This year, states including Utah and Florida have banned the use of fluoride in public water systems, and federal officials have called for more states to follow suit.

Nicole Deziel is an associate professor of epidemiology (environmental health sciences) and co-director of the Yale Center for Perinatal, Pediatric and Environmental Epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health. In an interview, she explains the benefits and risks of fluoride, how “forever chemicals” and climate change impact water quality, and how we can monitor the water we drink.

Nicole Deziel
Nicole Deziel

The interview has been edited for length and clarity.

What are the benefits of fluoride? Are there any potential risks?

Nicole Deziel: Fluoride can strengthen our bones and teeth enamel, and the strengthening of the enamel prevents cavities. But too much of it can damage our bones and enamel in a process called fluorosis, and it can potentially have neurological effects as well. Fluoridation of the public water supply can help address disparities in dental insurance and access to dental care.

Finding the right amount where the benefits outweigh the risks is key. The U.S. Public Health Service recommends a fluoride concentration of 0.7 mg/L [parts per million] in drinking water. The World Health Organization recommends a limit of 1.5 mg/L, while the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency sets a limit of 4 mg/L. Newer evidence of more subtle neurological effects is prompting reexamination of these target levels and limits.

Why are we seeing some states ban the use of fluoride in public water systems? Why are some people suspicious of it?

Deziel: There’s a long history of controversy about fluoride, including urban legends and conspiracy theories. For some people, it may seem counterintuitive to add a chemical that may have some toxic properties to make our water safer. However, we do this with chlorine as well. Chlorine is toxic at high levels and can form harmful byproducts, but we add it to drinking water to disinfect it and kill bacteria and pathogens to make our water safe to drink. We’re often doing these kinds of tradeoffs in environmental health and public health. In addition, misinformation and distrust of science could all be contributing to us revisiting this [the fluoridation of water]. 

Finding the right amount [of fluoride] where the benefits outweigh the risks is key.

Nicole Deziel

However, there’s been some new data that should prompt us to reexamine fluoride. There have been a few recent studies that have shown that fluoride exposure is linked to lower IQ levels in children where fluoride levels are above some of the target levels. Some in the dental community have raised concerns about how the data in those studies are being interpreted. Given these concerns, it is important that experts across disciplines collectively re-examine the latest evidence on fluoride’s risks and benefits to ensure the public and policymakers receive clear, evidence-based guidance.

Let’s move from fluoride to so-called “forever chemicals,” also known as PFAS. What are PFAS, and why are they called “forever chemicals”?

Deziel: PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are commonly referred to as “forever chemicals” due to their persistence in the environment as well as human bodies. They’re molecules that have chains of carbon and fluorine, and the carbon-fluorine bond is the strongest chemical bond known.

Their properties have made PFAS very desirable in many consumer products like Teflon pans, stain-resistant and water-resistant clothing and textiles, food packaging, and more. They’re also in firefighting foam.

According to some estimates, 90% of drinking water in the U.S. contains PFAS. How did happen, and what impact do PFAS have on our health?

Deziel: This happens for a few reasons, such as improper disposal of PFAS at manufacturing sites and the use of firefighting foams at airports and military bases. But PFAS are also in household products, many of which can go down the drain and be introduced into our environment.

PFAS have been linked to a variety of adverse health problems, including endocrine disruption, cancer, reproductive effects, decreased effects on our immune system, decreased efficacy of vaccines, and more.

Last year, the U.S. set the first-ever national limits on PFAS. Now, some of those regulations are being delayed or reconsidered. How are limits set for contaminants like PFAS?

Deziel: The Environmental Protection Agency sets maximum contaminant levels for drinking water under the Safe Drinking Water Act. When they set them, they’re allowed to consider not just public health but technological or economic feasibility. It took about 20 years just to get the PFAS standards passed, even though we’ve known about these issues for decades. This is a very slow and inefficient process, and the standards are not keeping pace with the science. So, it’s frustrating that the few new standards set may not even move forward.

In recent years, we’ve also seen several extreme weather events, from wildfires and floods to intense heat and droughts. How does climate change threaten the safety of our drinking water?

Deziel: Climate change can impact our drinking water in many ways. First, increasing intense droughts can affect our water supplies and lead to water scarcity. With wildfires, we often focus on the smoke and the immediate damage, but once the fires have been addressed, there are concerns about all the fire-retardant chemicals that are deposited into our soils and waterways. Plus, wildfires require a lot of water. Rising sea levels can create saltwater intrusion into freshwater sources. Floods and storms can release chemicals into our waterways and impact our water infrastructure overall. So there are many ways our changing climate and extreme weather can affect drinking water.

What can people like you and me do to monitor — and even improve — the quality of the water we drink?

Deziel: In public health, we talk about a hierarchy of controls. So, the best would be to have evidence-based drinking water standards that reflect the best science, and that would be because not everybody has the time and resources to research different strategies or purchase different filters.

However, if someone wanted to reduce their exposures to chemicals, there are several different filtering devices that are available. The most common is the charcoal, or activated carbon, filter. These can remove some chemicals including chlorine, some metals, some organic contaminants, and some but not all PFAS. They can be installed for the whole house, under the sink, or directly on the faucet. Reverse osmosis filters, which push water through a special membrane, are more effective at removing a much wider range of chemicals, but they’re more expensive. Countertop and pitcher-style filters are other options. They use gravity to pass water through a carbon cartridge. They’re generally more affordable, and while they don’t remove as many contaminants as in-line systems, they offer some protection and may be a good starting point for some households.

People may be tempted to turn to bottled water. However, many brands of bottled water are just tap water that’s been run through extra purification steps (spring water and mineral water are exceptions). This additional treatment can mean the water is very clean, but bottled water comes with significant downsides. In the U.S., only a tiny fraction of the millions of plastic bottles we use actually get recycled, with most polluting streets, rivers, and oceans. Producing those bottles uses petroleum and releases greenhouse gases, adding to climate change. Moreover, single-use plastic bottles can release endocrine-disrupting chemicals called phthalates as well as tiny plastic particles known as microplastics, especially if left in sunlight and heat.

Media Contact

Fred Mamoun

fred.mamoun@yale.edu203-436-2643

CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION

https://news.yale.edu/2025/08/13/troubled-waters-future-drinking-water-us?

Investigators

Portable tests could detect “forever chemicals” in your home’s drinking water

By Tara Molina

We know how important clean water is, but tricky chemicals that get into our water can be hard to detect, posing dangers to our water systems and our health ­– until now.

Researchers with the University of Chicago have teamed up with Argonne National Labs in Lemont to detect the smallest chemicals in our water in an effort to make it safer and healthier for all.

PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are better known as “forever chemicals.” They’re man-made compounds that are found in places like fast food packaging, firefighters’ foams and other places. They’re long-lasting chemicals and do not naturally degrade, instead accumulating in the environment and our bodies over time, which is why the Environmental Protection Agency issued regulations on them last year.

Until recently, they were somewhat difficult to detect in drinking water, but labs like Argonne are making gains.

“It affects essentially all of us, and it is, in fact, dangerous,” Argonne’s Seth Darling said. “They’re really toxic to humans. They’ve been linked to cancer, they’ve been linked to reproductive issues, thyroid problems, all kinds of health issues.”

Darling is working alongside Junhong Chen, with UChicago’s Pritzker School of Molecular Engineering. They’re building a first-of-its-kind sensor that can detect PFAS in water.

“The work we are doing here is really important, because now we have a way to be able to measure this PFAS,” Chen said. “Almost the only way to measure for PFAS is to take the water sample and send it to a high-end analytical laboratory for the analysis.”

Darling says that, because the chemicals are dangerous even at low concentrations, you need a technique that can test for extremely low levels. The sensor they’re behind can detect down to what would equate to one grain of sand in an Olympic-sized swimming pool, or 250 parts per quadrillion.

Typically, this level of inspection would require intensive and expensive lab testing. Their goal is to make these tests accessible for anyone to make sure their water is safe, directly from their home.

“What’s important here is developing new ways,” Darling said, “low-cost, fast ways to determine: Is there PFAS in your water and, if so, how much?”

Other universities in the Chicago area have also delved in to research PFAS. Back in the spring, Northwestern University professor of chemistry SonBinh Nguyen and professor of engineering Tim Wei developed a graphene oxide solution that is water- and oil-resistant and could be a replacement for PFAS in items such as takeout coffee cups.

Adam Harrington contributed to this report.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION

https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/chicago-researchers-portable-tests-forever-chemicals-drinking-water/?intcid=CNM-00-10abd1h

Risk of cardiovascular disease linked to long-term exposure to arsenic in community water supplies

Understanding risk below the current US EPA regulatory standard

Source:Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health

Summary:Long-term exposure to arsenic in water may increase cardiovascular risk and especially heart disease risk even at exposure levels below the federal regulatory limit, according to new research. A study describes exposure-response relationships at concentrations below the current regulatory limit and substantiates that prolonged exposure to arsenic in water contributes to the development of ischemic heart disease.Share:

    

FULL STORY

Long-term exposure to arsenic in water may increase cardiovascular disease and especially heart disease risk even at exposure levels below the federal regulatory limit (10µg/L) according to a new study at Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health. This is the first study to describe exposure-response relationships at concentrations below the current regulatory limit and substantiates that prolonged exposure to arsenic in water contributes to the development of ischemic heart disease.

The researchers compared various time windows of exposure, finding that the previous decade of water arsenic exposure up to the time of a cardiovascular disease event contributed the greatest risk. The findings are published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.

“Our findings shed light on critical time windows of arsenic exposure that contribute to heart disease and inform the ongoing arsenic risk assessment by the EPA. It further reinforces the importance of considering non-cancer outcomes, and specifically cardiovascular disease, which is the number one cause of death in the U.S. and globally,” said Danielle Medgyesi, a doctoral Fellow in the Department of Environmental Health Sciences at Columbia Mailman School. “This study offers resounding proof of the need for regulatory standards in protecting health and provides evidence in support of reducing the current limit to further eliminate significant risk.”

According to the American Heart Association and other leading health agencies, there is substantial evidence that arsenic exposure increases the risk of cardiovascular disease. This includes evidence of risk at high arsenic levels (>100µg/L) in drinking water. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reduced the maximum contaminant level (MCL) for arsenic in community water supplies (CWS) from 50µg/L to 10µg/L beginning in 2006. Even so, drinking water remains an important source of arsenic exposure among CWS users. The natural occurrence of arsenic in groundwater is commonly observed in regions of New England, the upper Midwest, and the West, including California.

To evaluate the relationship between long-term arsenic exposure from CWS and cardiovascular disease, the researchers used statewide healthcare administrative and mortality records collected for the California Teachers Study cohort from enrollment through follow-up (1995-2018), identifying fatal and nonfatal cases of ischemic heart disease and cardiovascular disease. Working closely with collaborators at the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), the team gathered water arsenic data from CWS for three decades (1990-2020).

The analysis included 98,250 participants, 6,119 ischemic heart disease cases and 9,936 CVD cases. Excluded were those 85 years of age or older and those with a history of cardiovascular disease at enrollment. Similar to the proportion of California’s population that relies on CWS (over 90 percent), most participants resided in areas served by a CWS (92 percent). Leveraging the extensive years of arsenic data available, the team compared time windows of relatively short-term (3-years) to long-term (10-years to cumulative) average arsenic exposure. The study found decade-long arsenic exposure up to the time of a cardiovascular disease event was associated with the greatest risk, consistent with a study in Chile finding peak mortality of acute myocardial infarction around a decade after a period of very high arsenic exposure. This provides new insights into relevant exposure windows that are critical to the development of ischemic heart disease.

Nearly half (48 percent) of participants were exposed to an average arsenic concentration below California’s non-cancer public health goal <1 µg/L. In comparison to this low-exposure group, those exposed to 1 to <5 µg/L had modestly higher risk of ischemic heart disease, with increases of 5 to 6 percent. Risk jumped to 20 percent among those in the exposure ranges of 5 to <10 µg/L (or one-half to below the current regulatory limit), and more than doubled to 42 percent for those exposed to levels at and above the current EPA limit ≥10µg/L. The relationship was consistently stronger for ischemic heart disease compared to cardiovascular disease, and no evidence of risk for stroke was found, largely consistent with previous research and the conclusions of the current EPA risk assessment.

These results highlight the serious health consequences not only when community water systems do not meet the current EPA standard but also at levels below the current standard. The study found a substantial 20 percent risk at arsenic exposures ranging from 5 to <10 µg/L which affected about 3.2 percent of participants, suggesting that stronger regulations would provide significant benefits to the population. In line with prior research, the study also found higher arsenic concentrations, including concentrations above the current standard, disproportionally affect Hispanic and Latina populations and residents of lower socioeconomic status neighborhoods.

“Our results are novel and encourage a renewed discussion of current policy and regulatory standards,” said Columbia Mailman’s Tiffany Sanchez, senior author. “However, this also implies that much more research is needed to understand the risks associated with arsenic levels that CWS users currently experience. We believe that the data and methods developed in this study can be used to bolster and inform future studies and can be extended to evaluate other drinking water exposures and health outcomes.”

Co-authors are Komal Bangia, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Oakland, California; James V. Lacey Jr and Emma S. Spielfogel,California Teacher Study, Beckman Research Institute, City of Hope, Duarte, California; and Jared A Fisher, Jessica M. Madrigal, Rena R. Jones, and Mary H. Ward, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute.

The study was supported by the National Cancer Institute, grants U01-CA199277, P30-CA033572, P30-CA023100, UM1-CA164917, and R01-CA077398; and also funded by the Superfund Hazardous Substance Research and Training Program P42ES033719; NIH National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences P30 Center for Environmental Health and Justice P30ES9089, NIH Kirschstein National Research Service Award Institutional Research Training grant T32ES007322, NIH Predoctoral Individual Fellowship F31ES035306, and the Intramural Research Program of the NCI Z-CP010125-28.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/10/241023131603.htm

Scientist on personal mission to improve global water safety makes groundbreaking discovery

Source:University of Bristol

Summary:A study shedding new light on how arsenic can be made less dangerous to humans has the potential to dramatically improve water and food safety, especially in the Global South.Share:

    

FULL STORY

A study led by the University of Bristol shedding new light on how arsenic can be made less dangerous to humans has the potential to dramatically improve water and food safety, especially in the Global South.

For the lead researcher it’s an academic and personal mission because he witnessed first-hand the constant struggle to find clean, arsenic-free water as a child in India.

Lead author Dr Jagannath Biswakarma, Senior Research Associate at the University’s School of Earth Sciences, said: “There are millions of people living in regions affected by arsenic, like I was growing up. This breakthrough could pave the way for safer drinking water and a healthier future.”

Arsenic pollution exposure is a huge environmental and public health issue in southern and central Asia and South America, where people depend on groundwater for drinking and farming. The more toxic and mobile form of arsenic, called arsenite, easily seeps into water supplies and can lead to cancers, heart disease and other serious conditions.

Dr Biswakarma said: “I’ve seen the daily battle for safe drinking water in my hometown Assam. It’s very hard to find groundwater sources that aren’t contaminated with arsenic, so for me this research hits close to home. It’s an opportunity to not only advance science, but also better understand the extent of a problem which has affected so many people in my own community and across the world for many decades.”

Scientists previously believed arsenite could only be turned into the less harmful form, called arsenate, with oxygen. But this new study has shown it can still be oxidised, even in the absence of oxygen, with small amounts of iron which act as a catalyst for oxidation.

Dr Biswakarma said: “This study presents a new approach to addressing one of the world’s most persistent environmental health crises by showing that naturally occurring iron minerals can help oxidise, lowering the mobility of arsenic, even in low-oxygen conditions.”

Study findings revealed that arsenite could be oxidised by green rust sulfate, a source of iron prevalent in low-oxygen conditions, such as groundwater supplies. They also showed this oxidation process is further enhanced with a chemical released by plants and commonly found in soils and groundwater.

“These organic ligands, such a citrate from plant roots, could play a critical role in controlling arsenic mobility and toxicity in natural environments,” Dr Biswakarma added.

The implications of this discovery are particularly significant for regions in the Global South facing some of the world’s highest levels of arsenic pollution. In countries such as India and Bangladesh, the local geology is rich in iron, and reducing conditions often dominate in groundwater systems, leading to high levels of arsenic contamination. In the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna Delta, which spans Bangladesh and eastern India, millions of people have been exposed to arsenic-contaminated groundwater for decades as the chemical enters the water through natural processes.

Dr Biswakarma said: “Many households rely on tube wells and hand pumps, but these systems do not guarantee access to clean water. The water often cannot be used for drinking or other household tasks due to its toxicity, odour, and discoloration. Additionally, there is an ongoing financial burden associated with obtaining new tube wells or hand pumps. As a result, economically disadvantaged families continue to struggle to find safe water for their daily needs.”

Similarly, the Mekong Delta and the Red River Delta, in Vietnam, face ongoing challenges with arsenic pollution, affecting drinking water supplies and agricultural productivity. Rice paddies can become hotspots of arsenic exposure, as the toxic chemical can accumulate in soil and be absorbed by rice plants, posing a further health risk through food consumption.

“The research opens the door for developing new strategies to mitigate arsenic pollution. Understanding the role of iron minerals in arsenic oxidation could lead to innovative approaches to water treatment or soil remediation, using natural processes to convert arsenic into its less harmful form before it enters drinking water supplies,” said co-author Molly Matthews, who worked on the paper during her Masters degree in Environmental Geoscience at the University of Bristol.

Identifying the specific form of arsenic in a sample can be challenging. Even a trace amount of oxygen can convert arsenite into arsenate, so it is vital to protect samples from exposure to air. Thanks to funding from the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF) the team was able to conduct these complex experiments at its XMaS synchrotron facility, in Grenoble, France.

Co-author Dr James Byrne, Associate Professor of Earth Sciences, added: “Determining arsenic formation at the atomic level using X-ray absorption spectroscopy was crucial for confirming changes to the arsenic oxidation state. The synchrotron therefore played a pivotal role in supporting our findings, which have potentially broad implications for our understanding of water quality.”

This work at University of Bristol was supported through a UK Research & Innovation (UKRI) Future Leaders Fellowship (FLF) awarded to Dr James Byrne. Further research is now needed to explore how these findings can be applied in real-world settings.

Dr Biswakarma said: “The whole research team worked tirelessly on this project, putting in 24/7 shifts including over Easter to conduct the experiments in France.

“I genuinely believe, with more work, we can find effective possible solutions and we’re already making great inroads to overcoming this big global issue. We’re excited to investigate how this process might work in different types of soils and groundwater systems, especially in areas where arsenic contamination is most severe.”

Finding bold answers to big questions concerning global challenges is at the heart of the University of Bristol’s research. This study cuts across core themes, including advancing equitable and sustainable health, and driving forward social justice.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/10/241029120854.htm