California Has a Drinking Water Problem
According to a nationwide study led by researchers at Columbia University, parts of the state have levels of arsenic in public drinking water higher than 5 micrograms per liter.
While the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) currently maintains that levels of arsenic in drinking water are safe at 10 micrograms per liter or less, the study found certain health risks were associated with lower levels.
Researchers found that consumption of drinking water with levels of arsenic of 10 micrograms or less were connected to a higher chance of babies being born preterm, with lower birth weights, or smaller than expected for their gestational age.
Other research has found that cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes have been linked to low levels arsenic exposure, while chronic exposure to the mineral has been associated with heightened cancer risks.
An EPA spokesperson previously told Newsweek that the maximum contaminant level for arsenic in drinking water was based on an assessment of implementation and cost, as well as public health.
While the goal is for the level of arsenic to be zero, because of "technical limitations" and cost, the goal cannot be met by water systems, the EPA said.
Therefore, the EPA's current maximum contaminant level is based on a "health risk reduction and cost analysis," ensuring public health has been considered, while giving water service bodies a more feasible target.
"California has some of the safest water in the nation, with 25 maximum contaminant levels that are set at more protective health levels than the federal levels, and 14 maximum contaminant levels for contaminants that have no federal equivalent," the California State Water Resources Control Board told Newsweek.
"This new study makes clear what California already understood-that maximum contaminant level should be revised to a level that is more protective of human health, especially for infant development. The state has been working to address this," the board added.
Sacramento County was one of the regions with higher levels of arsenic in public drinking water and the City of Sacramento Department of Utilities told Newsweek that it "closely monitors water quality and is committed to meeting or exceeding all state and federal drinking water standards, including those for arsenic."
In the city's most recent Consumer Confidence Report, arsenic levels in the drinking water system were below the EPA's maximum contaminant level, at an average of 2.3 micrograms per liter, while its groundwater levels ranged from non-detectable to 4.7 micrograms per liter.
"The City of Sacramento's drinking water meets or exceeds all federal and California state water quality standards," the city's Department of Utilities told Newsweek.
It added that it "supports California's existing and established science-based approach to setting or modifying drinking water quality standards."
Meanwhile, Sacramento County Water Agency told Newsweek: "We are in compliance with the state's standards. We do not dictate the guidelines."
According to the agency's 2024 Consumer Confidence Report, Northgate and Southwest Tract had ranges of arsenic in water that reached 5 micrograms per liter, while East Walnut Grove had levels that reached higher than the EPA guidance-at a range of non-detectable to 11 micrograms per liter.
Merced County was another area of the state that appeared to have higher levels of arsenic in drinking water, per the study's map.
A public information officer for the city of Merced told Newsweek that the city's drinking water is "routinely tested and remains in compliance with all state and federal safety standards, including those for arsenic."
"We monitor over 250 contaminants and collect thousands of samples annually to ensure water quality," they added. "While we can't comment on conditions outside city limits, we take emerging health research seriously and remain committed to providing safe, clean water to our residents."
When approached for comment, the California Department of Public Health pointed Newsweek to the state's Water Resources Control Board.
As arsenic is a natural element that can be found in soils, sediments and groundwater, it can feed into public drinking water systems, but some areas will have higher levels because of natural geology, certain human activities, irrigation practices and other factors.
Many community water systems in California "draw upon groundwater that is naturally elevated in arsenic, so it's not unusual-even with treatment or mixing of waters-that detectable arsenic remains once water is supplied to users," Bethany O'Shea, a professor in the environmental and ocean sciences department at the University of San Diego, told Newsweek.
The reason California's groundwater is higher in arsenic is a result of "geologic sources," Janet Hering, former director of the Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, told Newsweek.
Although, for the city of Los Angeles, water supply is affected by "inputs of geothermal water at Hot Creek in Owens Valley," she added.
In the Central Valley, arsenic originates in certain minerals in rocks of the Sierra Nevada foothills, Peggy A. O'Day, a professor in the Department of Life and Environmental Sciences at University of California, Merced, told Newsweek.
"Weathering and erosion of these rocks transported arsenic-bearing minerals to the Central Valley where they were deposited as sediments and buried mineral alteration and dissolution can eventually release arsenic into groundwater," she said.
Although, while the study specifically looks at public water systems, O'Shea warned that arsenic can be found in privately supplied water from wells.
"An abundance of research exists showing elevated arsenic in wells across states like Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont," she said.
She added that, as a result, "similar birth outcome risks may exist for people drinking from private wells containing arsenic."
"This underscores the need for more research to better understand how even small concentrations of arsenic in all types of drinking water, public or private, might lead to health risks such as adverse birth outcomes," O'Shea said.
Experts who spoke with Newsweek believed that the current maximum contaminant level for arsenic should be lowered in light of the findings of Columbia University's study but added that this might not be as simple as it sounds.
"The important finding of this study is that even those small concentrations of arsenic remaining may be harmful, suggesting that a lower water standard may be effective," O'Shea said.
A number of countries, like Denmark, and some U.S. states, such as New Jersey and New Hampshire, have set water standards at 5 micrograms per liter, lower than the 10 microgram per liter level set by the EPA.
"Setting that goal of zero as a standard-or even lowering the standard by half, to 5 micrograms per liter-may help alleviate health risks," O'Shea said.
O'Day said the study supports a "history of evidence" indicating that the current level for arsenic "may not provide a sufficient level of protection from adverse health impacts for all segments of the population."
"Federal drinking water standards should be reviewed and updated based on new, reliable scientific information," she said.
Although O'Day added that lowering the maximum contaminant level for any contaminant is "a long process and does not necessarily ensure that public water suppliers have the resources to meet it without an undue cost burden on their customers."
Ultimately, "more funding needs to be directed towards rural and underserved communities to improve their infrastructure and testing to provide safe drinking water that meets health-based standards for arsenic, lead and other contaminants," she said.
Hering also cautioned that "legally, lowering the [maximum contaminant level] has to reflect practical considerations and economic feasibility."
"Personally, I think it makes sense to try to prioritize potential adverse exposures and consider other possible contaminants as well as arsenic," she said.
Related Articles
Pregnant Women Issued Drinking Water WarningRFK Jr. Says 'More Cavities' Due to No Fluoride in Water Is 'a Balance'Hidden Danger in Drinking Water Revealed in New StudyUS States Issued Drinking Water Warning
2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
7 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Trump's EPA has terminated over $15 million in funding for 'forever chemicals' research
In the onslaught of legal action and activism that followed, the EPA during President Donald Trump's first term took an assertive stance, vowing to combat the spread of PFAS nationwide. Advertisement In its big-picture By the time Trump was sworn in for his second term, many of the plan's suggestions had been put in place. After his first administration said Advertisement But now, the second Trump administration is pulling back. The EPA said in May that it will These EPA decisions under Trump are part of a slew of delays and course changes to PFAS policies that had been supported in his first term. Even though his earlier EPA pursued a measure that would help hold polluters accountable for cleaning up PFAS, the EPA of his second term has not yet committed to it. The agency also slowed down a process for finding out how industries have used the chemicals, a step prompted by a law signed by Trump in 2019. At the same time, the EPA is hampering its ability to research pollutants — the kind of research that made it possible for its own scientists to investigate GenX. As the Trump administration seeks severe reductions in the EPA's budget, the agency has terminated grants for PFAS studies and paralyzed its scientists with spending restrictions. Pointing to 'If anything,' the agency added, 'the Trump administration's historic PFAS plan in 2019 laid the groundwork for the first steps to comprehensively address this contamination across media and we will continue to do so this term.' Advertisement In public appearances, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has pushed back on the suggestion that his agency weakened the drinking water limits on GenX and similar compounds. Future regulations imposed by his agency, he said, could be more or less stringent. 'What we want to do is follow the science, period,' he has said. That sentiment perplexes scientists and environmental advocates, who say there is already persuasive evidence on the dangers of these chemicals that linger in the environment. Scientists and advocates also said it's unclear what it means for the EPA to follow the science while diminishing its own ability to conduct research. 'I don't understand why we would want to hamstring the agency that is designed to make sure we have clean air and clean water,' said Jamie DeWitt, a toxicologist in Oregon who worked with other scientists on Cape Fear River research. 'I don't understand it.' Delays, Confusion Over PFAS Favored for their nonstick and liquid-resistant qualities, synthetic PFAS chemicals are widely used in products like raincoats, cookware and fast food wrappers. Advertisement The chemicals persist in soil and water too, making them complicated and costly to clean up, leading to a yearslong push to get such sites covered by the EPA's Superfund program, which is designed to handle toxic swaths of land. During the first Trump administration, the EPA said it was taking steps toward designating the two legacy compounds, PFOA and PFOS, as 'hazardous substances' under the Superfund program. Its liability provisions would help hold polluters responsible for the cost of cleaning up. Moving forward with this designation process was a priority, according to the PFAS plan from Trump's first term. Zeldin's EPA The designation became official under Biden. But business groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and organizations representing the construction, recycling and chemical industries, sued. Project 2025, The Heritage Foundation's playbook for the new administration, also questioned it. Zeldin has said repeatedly that he wants to hold polluters accountable for PFAS, but his EPA requested three delays in the court case challenging the Superfund designation that helps make it possible. The agency said in a recent motion it needed the latest pause because new leadership is still reviewing the issues and evaluating the designation in context of its 'comprehensive strategy to address PFOA and PFOS.' The EPA also Advertisement Businesses were supposed to start reporting this month. But in a May 2 letter, a coalition of chemical companies When the EPA delayed the rule less than two weeks later, it said it needed time to prepare for data collection and to consider changes to aspects of the rule. In an email to ProPublica, the agency said it will address PFAS in many ways. Its approach, the agency said, is to give more time for compliance and to work with water systems to reduce PFAS exposure as quickly as feasible, 'rather than issue violations and collect fees that don't benefit public health.' The court expects an update from the EPA in the Superfund designation case by Wednesday, and in the legal challenges to the drinking water standards by July 21. The EPA could continue defending the rules. It could ask the court for permission to reverse its position or to send the rules back to the agency for reconsideration. Or it could also ask for further pauses. 'It's just a big unanswered question whether this administration and this EPA is going to be serious about enforcing anything,' said Robert Sussman, a former EPA official from the administrations of Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. As a lawyer, he now represents environmental groups that filed an amicus brief in PFAS cases. Advertisement Back in North Carolina, problems caused by the chemicals continue to play out. A consent order between the state and Chemours required the manufacturer to drastically reduce the release of GenX and other PFAS into the environment. (The chemicals commonly called GenX refer to HFPO-DA and its ammonium salt, which are involved in the GenX processing aid technology owned by Chemours.) Chemours told ProPublica that it invested more than $400 million to remediate and reduce PFAS emissions. It also noted that there are hundreds of PFAS users in North Carolina, 'as evidenced by PFAS seen upstream and hundreds of miles away' from its Fayetteville plant 'that cannot be traced back to the site.' PFAS-riddled sea foam continues to wash up on the coastal beaches. Chemours and water utilities, meanwhile, are battling in court about who should cover the cost of upgrades to remove the chemicals from drinking water. Community forums about PFAS draw triple-digit crowds, even when they're held on a weeknight, said Emily Donovan, co-founder of the volunteer group Clean Cape Fear, which has intervened in federal litigation. In the fast-growing region, new residents are just learning about the chemicals, she said, and they're angry. 'I feel like we're walking backwards,' Donovan said. Pulling back from the drinking water standards, in particular, is 'disrespectful to this community.' 'It's one thing to say you're going to focus on PFAS,' she added. 'It's another thing to never let it cross the finish line and become any meaningful regulation.' Research Under Fire The EPA of Trump's first term didn't just call for more regulation of PFAS, it also stressed the importance of better understanding the forever chemicals through research and testing. In a Zeldin, too, has boasted about advancing PFAS research in an At about the same time, though, the agency terminated a host of congressionally appropriated grants for PFAS research, including over $15 million for Scientists at Michigan State University, for example, were investigating how PFAS interacts with water, soil, crops, livestock and biosolids, which are used for fertilizer. They timed their latest study to this year's growing season, hired staff and partnered with a farm. Then the EPA canceled two grants. In virtually identical letters, the agency said that each grant 'no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities. The objectives of the award are no longer consistent with EPA funding priorities.' The contrast between the agency's words and actions raises questions about the process behind its decisions, said Cheryl Murphy, head of Michigan State's Center for PFAS Research and co-lead of one of the projects. 'If you halt it right now,' she said, 'what we're doing is we're undermining our ability to translate the science that we're developing into some policy and guidance to help people minimize their exposure to PFAS.' At least some of the researchers are appealing the terminations. About a month after PFAS grants to research teams in Maine and Virginia were terminated for not being aligned with agency priorities, the agency reinstated them. The EPA told ProPublica that 'there will be more updates on research-related grants in the future.' Even if the Michigan State grants are reinstated, there could be lasting consequences, said Hui Li, the soil scientist who led both projects. 'We will miss the season for this year,' he said in an email, 'and could lose the livestock on the farm for the research.' Federal researchers are also in limbo. Uncertainty, lost capacity and spending restrictions have stunted the work at an EPA lab in Duluth, Minnesota, that investigates PFAS and other potential hazards, according to several sources connected to it. As one source who works at the lab put it, 'We don't know how much longer we will be operating as is.' The EPA told ProPublica that it's 'continuing to invest in research and labs, including Duluth, to advance the mission of protecting human health and the environment.' Meanwhile, the agency is asking Congress to eliminate more than half of its own budget. That includes massive staffing cuts, and it would slash nearly all the money for two major programs that help states fund water and wastewater infrastructure. One dates back to President Ronald Reagan's administration. The other was The EPA lost 727 employees in voluntary separations between Jan. 1 and late June, according to numbers the agency provided to ProPublica. It said it received more than 2,600 applications for the second round of deferred resignations and voluntary early retirements. 'These are really technical, difficult jobs,' said Melanie Benesh, vice president for government affairs at the nonprofit Environmental Working Group. 'And the EPA, by encouraging so many employees to leave, is also losing a lot of institutional knowledge and a lot of technical expertise.' The shake-up also worries DeWitt, who was one of the scientists who helped investigate the Cape Fear River contamination and who has served on an EPA science advisory board. Her voice shook as she reflected on the EPA's workforce, 'some of the finest scientists I know,' and what their loss means for public well-being. 'Taking away this talent from our federal sector,' she said, will have 'profound effects on the agency's ability to protect people in the United States from hazardous chemicals in air, in water, in soil and potentially in food.'
Newsweek
9 hours ago
- Newsweek
Woman Has Sore Throat While Pregnant, Then Comes Shock Diagnosis
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. After finding out she was pregnant in November 2022, Mariana Bom should have been filled with excitement and anticipation. But instead, she couldn't shake the feeling there was something seriously wrong. In the first trimester, Bom, 25, noticed multiple white patches and an ulcer on the back of her tongue. Shortly after, Bom, of Germany, also developed a sore throat and earache too. She told Newsweek that she wondered if they were side effects of the COVID vaccine at the time, but doctors "always dismissed this theory." But when she noticed a small blister at the back of her tongue that hadn't gone away for two weeks, Bom grew concerned. She visited an ear, nose and throat (ENT) specialist to get a second opinion Bom said: "The ENT told me it was nothing serious, that it would go away, and there was no sign of danger. A month later, I went back, and they said it could be due to pregnancy as dental issues or oral thrush are common." Mariana Bom laying in a hospital bed after her diagnosis. Mariana Bom laying in a hospital bed after her diagnosis. @mariana___1999 / TikTok The mouth ulcer continued to grow and that area of her mouth became really swollen. The more it pressed against her teeth, simple acts like eating and talking became excruciating. As the weeks went by and her symptoms persisted, Bom took matters into her own hands. She did some research and was horrified to learn that her symptoms aligned with tongue cancer. "One evening, I went to the emergency room. My belly was already visible by then and I told them that I suspected tongue cancer. At the ER reception, I was laughed at because I was too 'young to have cancer' in their view," Bom said. "In the treatment room, the doctor dismissed me and told me to put baking soda on my tongue and that it would go away." That wasn't good enough for Bom, who decided to see another ENT two weeks later. She was determined to get answers and needed to be heard. The next ENT decided to do a biopsy and check for any signs of malignancy. Just a week later, everything changed. "That's when I got the call—it was an aggressive tongue carcinoma," Bom said. Cancer is devastating for anyone, but being pregnant made it even more complicated. Bom hadn't even told her family she was pregnant because it was still so early. But now she had to tell them that not only was she expecting, but she had cancer too. Her mom, who had battled cervical cancer in 2019, instantly took her daughter's hand and supported her. "Since I was pregnant, our biggest concern was the baby. Would it have to come early? What were the options?" Bom told Newsweek. "After many discussions between the specialist doctors, we decided, for the sake of my baby and my health, that I would undergo surgery while pregnant to remove as much of the tumor as possible." Surgery to remove the tumor lasted between five and seven hours. The cancer had already spread to the lymph nodes in her neck, so they too were removed. Bom's recovery involved spending two weeks in hospital, unable to eat or speak, and with drains coming out of her neck. It was a living nightmare, and she didn't know if she'd ever feel the same. Mariana Bom while pregnant in 2022. Mariana Bom while pregnant in 2022. @mariana___1999 / TikTok "After two weeks, the ENT specialists and the OB-GYNs discussed whether my daughter should be delivered early so I could start radiation therapy—to be sure we destroyed any remaining cancer cells. Eventually, they decided to deliver her one month after my surgery via C-section," Bom continued. Bom's daughter was delivered at 30 weeks and immediately taken to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). She was placed on a ventilator as she was struggling to breathe and given a feeding tube. Just a few weeks after welcoming her daughter, Bom began radiation. For the next eight weeks, she'd go to the hospital for treatment and then visit her daughter in the NICU after. Her battle was certainly not over because the radiation side effects were so intense. It was "nearly impossible" to eat anything, she lost her sense of taste and felt exhausted. "For the first few weeks, I could only consume liquid. I lost a lot of weight, and I felt extreme fatigue. I think it was a combination of postpartum exhaustion and the toll that the cancer treatment took on my body," she said. Thankfully, Bom and her daughter are doing much better now. While there are some lasting effects, Bom is glad to have her life and to still be here for her family. She still gets inflammation in her mouth frequently, and on some occasions, it feels as though her body has "been beaten up." While healing, Bom has documented her experience on TikTok (@mariana___1999) to raise awareness and encourage others to seek answers. She didn't even know tongue cancer existed before her diagnosis, and what little information she found online left her without hope. Now, she wants to be a beacon of light for others. For anyone experiencing symptoms, Bom urges them to listen to their body and push for answers. "You always hear about common cancers, but I had never heard of tongue cancer," Bom said. "The only thing that kept me going was thinking about my children and my husband. Without them, I don't think I would've gotten through it. I wanted to show that there are different outcomes and it's possible to survive." Is there a health issue that's worrying you? Let us know via health@ We can ask experts for advice, and your story could be featured on Newsweek.
Miami Herald
12 hours ago
- Miami Herald
California Has a Drinking Water Problem
California's drinking water has elevated levels of a certain contaminant found to be associated with adverse birth outcomes, causing experts to advise that safe water advisories need to be updated. According to a nationwide study led by researchers at Columbia University, parts of the state have levels of arsenic in public drinking water higher than 5 micrograms per liter. While the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) currently maintains that levels of arsenic in drinking water are safe at 10 micrograms per liter or less, the study found certain health risks were associated with lower levels. Researchers found that consumption of drinking water with levels of arsenic of 10 micrograms or less were connected to a higher chance of babies being born preterm, with lower birth weights, or smaller than expected for their gestational age. Other research has found that cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes have been linked to low levels arsenic exposure, while chronic exposure to the mineral has been associated with heightened cancer risks. An EPA spokesperson previously told Newsweek that the maximum contaminant level for arsenic in drinking water was based on an assessment of implementation and cost, as well as public health. While the goal is for the level of arsenic to be zero, because of "technical limitations" and cost, the goal cannot be met by water systems, the EPA said. Therefore, the EPA's current maximum contaminant level is based on a "health risk reduction and cost analysis," ensuring public health has been considered, while giving water service bodies a more feasible target. "California has some of the safest water in the nation, with 25 maximum contaminant levels that are set at more protective health levels than the federal levels, and 14 maximum contaminant levels for contaminants that have no federal equivalent," the California State Water Resources Control Board told Newsweek. "This new study makes clear what California already understood-that maximum contaminant level should be revised to a level that is more protective of human health, especially for infant development. The state has been working to address this," the board added. Sacramento County was one of the regions with higher levels of arsenic in public drinking water and the City of Sacramento Department of Utilities told Newsweek that it "closely monitors water quality and is committed to meeting or exceeding all state and federal drinking water standards, including those for arsenic." In the city's most recent Consumer Confidence Report, arsenic levels in the drinking water system were below the EPA's maximum contaminant level, at an average of 2.3 micrograms per liter, while its groundwater levels ranged from non-detectable to 4.7 micrograms per liter. "The City of Sacramento's drinking water meets or exceeds all federal and California state water quality standards," the city's Department of Utilities told Newsweek. It added that it "supports California's existing and established science-based approach to setting or modifying drinking water quality standards." Meanwhile, Sacramento County Water Agency told Newsweek: "We are in compliance with the state's standards. We do not dictate the guidelines." According to the agency's 2024 Consumer Confidence Report, Northgate and Southwest Tract had ranges of arsenic in water that reached 5 micrograms per liter, while East Walnut Grove had levels that reached higher than the EPA guidance-at a range of non-detectable to 11 micrograms per liter. Merced County was another area of the state that appeared to have higher levels of arsenic in drinking water, per the study's map. A public information officer for the city of Merced told Newsweek that the city's drinking water is "routinely tested and remains in compliance with all state and federal safety standards, including those for arsenic." "We monitor over 250 contaminants and collect thousands of samples annually to ensure water quality," they added. "While we can't comment on conditions outside city limits, we take emerging health research seriously and remain committed to providing safe, clean water to our residents." When approached for comment, the California Department of Public Health pointed Newsweek to the state's Water Resources Control Board. As arsenic is a natural element that can be found in soils, sediments and groundwater, it can feed into public drinking water systems, but some areas will have higher levels because of natural geology, certain human activities, irrigation practices and other factors. Many community water systems in California "draw upon groundwater that is naturally elevated in arsenic, so it's not unusual-even with treatment or mixing of waters-that detectable arsenic remains once water is supplied to users," Bethany O'Shea, a professor in the environmental and ocean sciences department at the University of San Diego, told Newsweek. The reason California's groundwater is higher in arsenic is a result of "geologic sources," Janet Hering, former director of the Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, told Newsweek. Although, for the city of Los Angeles, water supply is affected by "inputs of geothermal water at Hot Creek in Owens Valley," she added. In the Central Valley, arsenic originates in certain minerals in rocks of the Sierra Nevada foothills, Peggy A. O'Day, a professor in the Department of Life and Environmental Sciences at University of California, Merced, told Newsweek. "Weathering and erosion of these rocks transported arsenic-bearing minerals to the Central Valley where they were deposited as sediments and buried mineral alteration and dissolution can eventually release arsenic into groundwater," she said. Although, while the study specifically looks at public water systems, O'Shea warned that arsenic can be found in privately supplied water from wells. "An abundance of research exists showing elevated arsenic in wells across states like Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont," she said. She added that, as a result, "similar birth outcome risks may exist for people drinking from private wells containing arsenic." "This underscores the need for more research to better understand how even small concentrations of arsenic in all types of drinking water, public or private, might lead to health risks such as adverse birth outcomes," O'Shea said. Experts who spoke with Newsweek believed that the current maximum contaminant level for arsenic should be lowered in light of the findings of Columbia University's study but added that this might not be as simple as it sounds. "The important finding of this study is that even those small concentrations of arsenic remaining may be harmful, suggesting that a lower water standard may be effective," O'Shea said. A number of countries, like Denmark, and some U.S. states, such as New Jersey and New Hampshire, have set water standards at 5 micrograms per liter, lower than the 10 microgram per liter level set by the EPA. "Setting that goal of zero as a standard-or even lowering the standard by half, to 5 micrograms per liter-may help alleviate health risks," O'Shea said. O'Day said the study supports a "history of evidence" indicating that the current level for arsenic "may not provide a sufficient level of protection from adverse health impacts for all segments of the population." "Federal drinking water standards should be reviewed and updated based on new, reliable scientific information," she said. Although O'Day added that lowering the maximum contaminant level for any contaminant is "a long process and does not necessarily ensure that public water suppliers have the resources to meet it without an undue cost burden on their customers." Ultimately, "more funding needs to be directed towards rural and underserved communities to improve their infrastructure and testing to provide safe drinking water that meets health-based standards for arsenic, lead and other contaminants," she said. Hering also cautioned that "legally, lowering the [maximum contaminant level] has to reflect practical considerations and economic feasibility." "Personally, I think it makes sense to try to prioritize potential adverse exposures and consider other possible contaminants as well as arsenic," she said. Related Articles Pregnant Women Issued Drinking Water WarningRFK Jr. Says 'More Cavities' Due to No Fluoride in Water Is 'a Balance'Hidden Danger in Drinking Water Revealed in New StudyUS States Issued Drinking Water Warning 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
