Author: flintwaterstudy

A-List Actor But F-List Scientist: Mark Ruffalo Brings Fear And Misinformation To Flint

flintwaterstudy Articles , , , , ,

Actor Mark Ruffalo (who once played a doctor in a movie) and his Water Defense team have been outspoken about current health dangers from bathing and showering in Flint water.  Two weeks ago, Ruffalo went on CNN to highlight the unique dangers of bathing in Flint, due to corroding pipes:

 “where the problem really lies…is not the EPA, nor the State of Michigan, nor Dr. Mona or Marc Edwards, can tell the people of Flint it is safe to bath in Flint water because there are no standards” …“we do not know where these disinfection by-products (DBPs) are coming from, are they coming from the corroded lead, or are they coming from galvanized iron pipes”

Ruffalo’s new claim, adds to a February press release of Water Defense “Chief Scientist” Scott Smith proclaiming “DANGEROUS CHEMICALS DISCOVERED IN BATHS/SHOWERS OF FLINT, MI.”  Exactly how Mr. Smith earned a title of “Chief Scientist” from Mr. Ruffalo is something of a mystery– he does not appear to have any scientific degree, nor has he played such a role in a movie.

The DANGEROUS CHEMICAL that Water Defense discovered and has been most concerned with?  Chloroform.  The same chemical that the EPA and water industry have been addressing for 40 years, and for which we now have standards via the total trihalomethane (TTHM) regulation. Chloroform is a TTHM found in tap water of every city using chlorine. When the TTHM regulation was established, the location and method of measurement was set in the cold water distribution system. By measuring at that location, and controlling the levels of TTHMs before they enter homes, consumers are protected after that same water flows to their baths and showers. Clearly, there are standards for chloroform and TTHMs, to protect public health of residents in Flint and the rest of the United States.  Those same regulations also reasonably control the concentration of other unregulated DBPs.

Water Defense has consistently presented their chloroform and DBP data, as if they have discovered something new, dangerous and unique to Flint residents. But I reviewed their data, and it is typical of a very good tap water, as is expected given that Flint has now switched back to Detroit water. As a further check I sent the Water Defense DBP results to Dr. David Reckhow at U-Mass Amherst, one of the foremost authorities on DBPs in the world.  While Dr. Reckhow has never played a doctor in a movie (and hence his informed opinion will probably not get broadcast on CNN) he stated: “There is nothing at all unusual or abnormal in the Flint DBP data.”

Ruffalo’s absurd hypothesis that DBPs in Flint could be coming from “corroded lead” or “galvanized iron,” defies basic laws of physics and chemistry. Indeed, we do know where DBPs come from—they do not come from corroded pipe.

Water Defense came to Flint after a Federal Emergency was declared, and has exploited the fears of traumatized Flint residents, whose unfortunate prior experience taught them to carefully listen to views of outsiders who question authority.  Flint residents can be forgiven for thinking otherwise, but not everyone who challenges the claims of the EPA, CDC and State of Michigan are automatically correct. Since the declaration of the state of emergency in January, most of the bad actors that caused the Flint water crisis have been fired or resigned or indicted.  These agencies have since been going a very difficult job to the best of their abilities.

More than a month ago we became alarmed that Flint residents were taking the irresponsible and unscientific claims of Water Defense seriously.  Recall that this group also falsely stated that Flint residents could suffer health harm from drinking water with phosphate, or from breathing lead into their lungs from showers!  At that time we asked them in writing:

Are you and the rest of Water Defense, willing to accept liability, for any health harm that arises if people not currently affected by rashes and other ailments, stop bathing? 

Water Defense refused to respond to this question, but they have backtracked, and now state that:

Water Defense would never say that Flint water is unsafe for bathing or showering, we are just saying we do not know.

Excuse me?  Isn’t this akin to standing up and screaming “FIRE!” in a crowded movie theatre—then, after watching panicked people stampede to the exits and getting hurt, claiming that “FIRE!” really meant “I DO NOT KNOW IF THERE IS A FIRE!.”

Amidst the heightened fears of water safety in Flint and the State of Michigan, there has now been a spike in gastrointestinal illness predominantly among school age children—the most common cause for this problem, by far, is a lack of proper bathing, showering and hand washing. Clearly, false and unsubstantiated claims about water safety, can hurt innocent people, just like shouting “Fire” in a crowded movie theatre. Mr. Ruffalo and Water Defense should be ashamed of themselves. Flint residents currently need funding and moral support—not pseudoscience and false alarms.

Question:  If Water Defense tells me that I found 200 ppb chloroform in my shower, does that mean I am over the EPA standard of 80 ppb?

One disturbing means by which Water Defense implies that Flint water is dangerous, is by conducting testing using a non-standard methodology and location, and implying that if a result greater than 80 ppb is achieved the water is dangerous according to EPA standards.  This is a common refrain of some consumers who have been given Water Defense results.

Put simply, a 200 ppb test value from Water Defense is over the 80 ppb EPA standard, and the water is proven dangerous right?  Wrong.

When an EPA regulation is set for safety, the location of the measurement and the method of the measurement is also specified. To compare a water to the standard, you need to sample according to the regulation.

The proprietary “Water Bug” sponge sampling technology pushed by Water Defense, has little or nothing to do with the EPA approved method.  It could give results 2, 5, 10 or even 100 times higher than the EPA standard, and it would say nothing at all about the regulated safety of Flint water.

Water Defense numbers cannot be compared to the EPA standard.

Primary Author: Dr. Marc Edwards

Note: This article has been modified to include a question from a Flint resident.

Are there DANGEROUS levels of chloroform in Flint water?

flintwaterstudy Articles

Are there DANGEROUS levels of chloroform in Flint water?

Over the last few months, it has repeatedly been asserted by some that there are dangerous levels of chemicals, such as chloroform, in Flint water heaters and showers.  Moreover, that prior testing conducted in Flint by Virginia Tech and others, has “focused on lead and copper only.” Both of these statements are false.

The water industry has known for 40 years, that chemicals such as chloroform are expected to form whenever chlorine is added to water.  Thus, the presence of chloroform is expected in all samples collected from a system using chlorine, as is the case in Flint and Detroit and many cities all over the United States.

The EPA and the water industry are concerned about these chemicals, and have a regulation designed to make sure that they are present in water at reasonably low concentrations.  This is called the total trihalomethane (TTHMs) regulation or Disinfection By-Products (DBP) regulation.  By controlling the levels of chloroform and other chemicals by regular measurement in the water distribution system, they are also reasonably controlled by extension, in consumer water heaters and showers.

When we went to Flint in August 2015, we did measure TTHMs and chloroform throughout the distribution system.  We reported at that time, that Flint was meeting Federal laws for TTHMs and chloroform.  We also collected a few samples of chloroform and TTHMs in cold and hot water samples, from homes/businesses on Detroit water and Flint water.  That data is presented in the table at the end of this article.  We did indeed find chloroform, but at levels similar to other U.S. cities, and well within normal expectations.  Continued monitoring of chloroform in Detroit water by EPA and others to the present day, has confirmed that there is nothing happening in relation to TTHMs since August 2015 that is outside of normal expectations.  If we hear or find problems with TTHMs, chloroform or DBPs, we would release those results immediately.

Most of our subsequent work has focused on lead, simply because the levels of lead in Flint water exceed Federal standards. All other parameters that we have been monitoring are within Federal standards, including chloroforms and TTHMs.

Legionella levels were high in some large buildings, as we have acknowledged, but unfortunately there are no Federal Laws currently regulating Legionella.  EPA, the city and state, are working aggressively to control potential legionella problems with chlorine and flushing.

 If chloroform is formed whenever chlorine is added to water, why don’t water utilities stop adding chlorine to water?

 The simple answer is that many, many people would die from waterborne diseases such as cholera and Legionella if utilities stopped adding disinfectant such as chlorine to water.  Hence, the relatively small risk arising from chloroform (and other similar DBPs) in water, is far outweighed by the large number of lives saved from killing dangerous microorganisms.  This is well understood and we link to a recent article on chloroform in drinking water that discusses this tradeoff.

TTHM Results from August 2015:

THM

Q+A: Dr. Marc Edwards

Frequently Asked Questions for Flint Residents — 1+ Year Anniversary Edition

flintwaterstudy Articles

It has now been more than one year since we first worked with Lee-Anne Walters to thoroughly sample her house for lead and other metals. After analyzing those samples and recovering from the shocking high lead results, we eventually decided to launch what is likely the most thorough independent evaluation of a drinking water supply in U.S. history.

Those who have been following our work know that with the help of Flint residents, in August 2015 we sampled fecal bacteria, hot and cold water trihalomethanes (THMs), a full profile of metals from the source water to the tap, and even the emerging problem of opportunistic pathogens including Legionella.

We have been an honest broker. Our first reported results verified state and county claims that the fecal bacteria and THM problems in Flint were under control in August 2015. After we helped Flint residents reveal a widespread water lead problem, we laid out our logic as to why the state of Michigan was “both unscientific and irresponsible” in its claims the water was safe to drink in terms of lead levels.  We then asserted the water was unsafe to because the lead levels exceeded Federal standards — we feel subsequent events have proven that our judgment was correct. 

Since about early April 2016, we have increasingly been responding to citizen questions about claims made by a group that came to Flint after the Federal Emergency was declared and months after the city had switched back to Detroit water. We were initially hopeful that this group would help advance scientific understanding on behalf of Flint residents-after all they stated that they would “make certain that the irrefutable scientific data and truth leads the dialogue.”

Unfortunately, that has not been the case. This group has since proven itself to be unqualified, unscientific and irresponsible. Below we attempt to answer two exemplary questions from Flint residents, that have arisen from this groups wild and unsubstantiated claims (download their statement below).

Why is phosphate being added to the Flint water, if it causes my health problems including low blood pressure? 

Answer: Low levels of phosphate are being added to Flint water to restore the protective coating that once lined Flint pipes and kept lead out of the water.  About half of all utilities in the U.S. currently add phosphate to their water to control corrosion and reduce lead leaching. Phosphate was added to Flint’s water (via Detroit) for decades before the April 2014 switch.

We can find no basis for the claim that the low levels of phosphate presently added to Flint water in order to heal the system and reduce lead, can cause consumer health problems including low blood pressure.

After we heard this claim from residents and then read it in writing:

<<Group>> toxicologists have reviewed the testing results to date and have found that excessive phosphates can lead to low blood pressure which residents of Flint are reporting.”

we were initially in disbelief.

We asked twice to obtain a written statement from this group’s toxicologist(s) supporting this bizarre statement, or indeed, any rational basis for their alarmist claim. None have been provided to us.

Are we in danger from breathing lead in water into our lungs, and if so, why hasn’t EPA warned us about this health risk?

Answer:  You cannot breathe significant amounts of lead from water into your lungs.

After we heard this claim and read it in writing:

<<Group>> toxicologists have reviewed the testing results to date and have found that …aerosolized particulate lead from showers …can be inhaled directly to the lungs.

we were again initially in disbelief.  We again asked twice to see the toxicologist report supporting this unfounded statement, or indeed, any rational basis for this alarmist claim. None have been provided.

The group further asserted that aerosolized lead supposedly breathed into Flint consumers’ lungs, could be causing the rashes and breathing difficulties reported by residents. They also warned that following the flushing advice that all credible parties (EPA/CDC/City of Flint/Virginia Tech/MDEQ) agreed is necessary to help heal the pipes and clean out the Flint water system, could actually endanger residents:

 It may be that the flushing recommendations issued last Friday by the MI DEQ and the EPA could increase the risk of released volatile chemicals and/or aerosolized <lead> particulates that pose risks of inhalation.

The group has not provided any evidence to back up this counterproductive concern.

Commentary

The individuals making these claims do not have expertise in potable water systems, epidemiology or toxicology, or for that matter any credentials that would qualify them to make statements about dangers of Flint’s current water supply from phosphate or aerosolized lead.

We do not reject their claims because of their complete lack of experience and qualifications.  We reject their claims because they are unable to back up their written public warnings about imminent possible dangers to Flint residents from phosphate or breathing lead from water, with scientifically plausible hypotheses, data, or supporting research.

After we pointed out problems with their logic and they failed to provide us the toxicologist reports supposedly supporting these claims, we asked that they publicly correct their erroneous statements. They have not done so.  Hence, we have no alternative but to provide this FAQ to counter their irresponsible claims. The last thing Flint residents need, after what occurred through October 2015, are more unfounded and unscientific assertions about their water supply.

We further note, for the record, that when we felt the MDEQ and EPA were wrong before the declaration of the state of emergency, we called them out on it publicly and in writing. Conversely, when these groups have provided scientifically valid advice, as they are now, we will defend them. Put simply, we will call out anyone who is creating problems through bad science, and defend anyone is working towards a solution with good science.

We further believe that the EPA, State of Michigan and CDC have been doing their best to help Flint residents since at least January 2016. While the government response has not been perfect, we believe it has been very good.  If anything, our only criticism, is that the Feds have erred on the side of excessive caution, when they publicly expressed concern that the lead filters might not be working at water lead levels above 150 ppb. Extensive testing data has confirmed that the lead filters do work.  While understandable confusion about the protectiveness of the filters has resulted, we do not fault the agencies for erring on the side of public safety when bottled water was also available.

We are also not excusing past mistakes. But we do acknowledge the outstanding efforts of hundreds of state, federal and city employees (and others) who have been doing their utmost to help the Flint water system and residents recover.  We will not stand silent, when the agencies outstanding efforts to help Flint consumers are unfairly attacked.

Download the group’s claims about Flint water:

Download (PDF, 53KB)

Q+A: Dr. Marc Edwards

Some Perspectives On Rashes And Health Problems From Bathing Or Showering; Whether you are in Flint MI Or Elsewhere In The USA

flintwaterstudy Articles, Research Updates

We have examined questions of rashes and breathing difficulties that potentially arise from showering in municipal tap water since 2002 when we first responded to reports of such problems afflicting residents in Maui, HI. In Maui, our team worked with a local medical doctor to demonstrate that the water did not have adequate levels of disinfectant and had high concentrations of a certain bacteria called P. aeruginosa, which is known to cause “hot tub rashes.” That bacteria was then identified within some consumers’ rashes.  The incidence of rashes decreased when changes to water treatment were made that removed nutrients from the water and increased chlorine.

Unfortunately, ever since that modest success story, we have not made much progress in understanding this issue, except to say that whatever causes the problem(s) seems to be very complicated.

The people in Flint MI began questioning the safety of bathing when the Flint River was in use, but this still remains a large concern of many citizens there even after switching back to Detroit water. Below we share our experiences and opinions to date with specific discussion relative to residents in Flint, MI.  The Q+A is also based on my experiences with my own daughter Ailene Edwards (now 14 years old), who had very serious rashes exacerbated by bathing when she was younger.

What causes rashes and breathing difficulties — possibly due to showering or bathing tap water exposures?

Over the years, I have personally seen and fielded complaints from consumers all over the country who believed that bathing and showering was either causing or exacerbating health problems including rashes and breathing problems. These complaints have come from systems served by private wells, as well as municipal systems using chloramine and chlorine. As a general rule, when these problems arise, they only affect a sub-set of the population. This suggests that site specific factors (e.g., water heater temperature or presence of a particular type of pipe in a neighborhood), genetics or other environmental factors play a role. In our family, Ailene was the only one who had severe problems.  Even in the Maui case study, where we believe it is highly likely that the water was causing rashes, “only” about 5-10% of the population was impacted. Although this incidence may “seem” low, the symptoms can be quite severe for the individual afflicted and caregivers (in my case, as a parent) can feel a lot of guilt trying to prevent pain and suffering.

Am I crazy to think that water might sometimes be causing breathing problems or rashes?

No. I am with you on this.

What can I do to stop the problems? 

As difficult as it is, you should experiment with sponge baths using distilled or deionized water, to see if that reduces the problems.  If so, you have a possible solution. My daughter eventually grew out of the rash problem that was caused by bathing in our well water.  Please note that our well water comes from a Jefferson National Forest aquifer and had no added chlorine or chloramine, so the fact that a given water causes a problem does not necessarily mean the water is contaminated or otherwise dangerous.

What can the water utility and EPA do to stop the problems?

The utility has to meet federal standards for water that makes it suitable for the majority of customers in terms of drinking, bathing, and showering.  Immunocompromised individuals (people with weakened immune systems) are always at elevated risk from harmful water exposures whether it is due to Cryptosporidium, Legionella, or other contaminants.  Disinfection by-product exposures in homes are controlled by measurements taken in the water distribution system—those measurements are designed to reduce exposures occurring in the homes.

It’s important to understand that bathing is never completely a “risk free” activity.  However, the dangers of not bathing are also significant, and not bathing also poses health risks. Each individual needs to balance that risk given their own circumstance.

What about bathing and showering in Flint MI?

Flint River Water.  When Flint River water was being used, federal standards for disinfection by-products (THMs) and bacteria were being exceeded. The treatment plant and the water distribution system were not being run in a satisfactory manner. Although Legionella is not currently regulated in homes, the levels of chlorine in the system were not sufficient to help control this problem, especially in large buildings (note: we have looked, and not yet found Legionella in smaller buildings in Flint).  Thus, health risks of bathing in Flint water were probably much higher than in other U.S. cities, until the switch back to Detroit water in October of 2015.

Detroit Water.  After the switch back to Detroit water, and subsequent close oversight of the system from the U.S EPA, FEMA and other outsiders, the system has been meeting U.S. standards for disinfection by-products and bacteria.  Chlorine residuals have improved dramatically .  Lead levels are still too high for drinking or using the water for cooking. However, you cannot breathe significant lead from water while showering or bathing, and it cannot pass through your skin into your blood at significant levels. Therefore, the risk of lead exposure during bathing is not concerning as long as children do not drink large quantities of bath water.

On the basis of my thorough review, there is currently no scientifically valid reason to believe that risks of bathing or showering in Flint are currently higher than in other U.S. cities.  We support the current U.S. EPA guidance that indicates bathing or showering in unfiltered Flint water is not riskier than in other cities. If you feel the water is harming yourself or your child, and are experiencing breathing difficulties or rashes that you think are due to the water, bathing or showering is certainly not recommended for the reasons mentioned above. We also understand that many consumers will not feel safe bathing or showering in Flint water, for a long time, due to a lack of trust in the water supply. 

Anecdotal Reports from Flint Residents

We have tracked what happened to rashes of a few families that left Flint.  In two cases discussed thus far, the consumers kept having the rashes weeks after they left Flint.  Their hypothesis is that whatever caused it, simply changing the water (i.e.,  by moving) is not getting rid of the problem. We point this out because the continuing problem of rashes in these residents, suggests that the current water may not necessarily be the source of the problem.

Will filters help Mitigate this Problem in Flint?

There is little reason to believe that purchasing and using expensive in-home filters will help reduce health problems including rashes or breathing problems.  Some “whole-house” filters with granular activated carbon actually increase problems with certain bacteria, including Legionella, because they can remove chlorine used to disinfect the water.  That said, if you feel that your in-home filter system is helping you personally, continue to use it. But in my experience, purchasing such systems has only a low likelihood of solving the rash and breathing problems.

The lead filters installed at the end of faucets will not remove chlorine from the home plumbing and are very unlikely to increase Legionella risks. While these filters are very effective at removing lead, there is very little reason to think that treating the water with these filters, will help reduce rashes or breathing problems.

Additional questions?

Feel free to e-mail us on [email protected].  We will try to keep this list updated as we learn more.

Q&A: Dr. Marc Edwards

Results of March 2016 Legionella Sampling Event in Smaller Buildings in Flint

flintwaterstudy Articles, Research Updates , ,

In March 2016, we sampled tap water from 5 homes and 6 small businesses in Flint, with ALL testing culture-negative for Legionella.  We used a standard culture-method often used by hospitals to determine if there is a risk of Legionnaire’s Disease outbreak.  This is good news.  We will be following up with another sampling this summer when the weather is warmer and there is more of a tendency of Legionella bacteria to grow.

We are also examining the water samples we have collected more closely using DNA-based methods.  The DNA methods may help us detect lower levels of Legionella that we couldn’t see with culture and also identify different kinds of Legionella, but the trade-off is that we will not be able to tell the difference between live and dead bacteria.  That is why the culture method is considered the standard for determining risk of getting Legionnaires’ Disease from tap water.

Using the best available science, the sampling we performed in March 2016 showed that if any living Legionella were present, their levels were low the day of testing. There is always some risk of Legionnaire’s Disease from tap water, but our current results from March suggest the risk was not concerning at any of our sample sites in Flint.  We will remain vigilant in our tracking and testing of this potential problem in Flint homes.