EPA Finally Says Hormones in Water Are Worth Doing Something About
- Posted by: Siobhan O'Connor
- on September 30, 2009 at 9:25 am
The EPA is finally—finally!—considering cracking down on some of the other pharmaceuticals, chemicals and (ew) hormones that contaminate our water. There are 104 on their new list, and eight of them are forms of estrogen. Considering what we know about estrogen overloading, this could be good news for women in particular, but really for all of us on the foodchain—”intersex” fish included.
We know that there are many kinds of contaminants the EPA does look out for. We also know that watchdog groups think that list is woefully incomplete. That’s because it is. Estrogen overload, besides conjuring images of a man-breast epidemic, can have pretty dangerous effects on women’s bodies. Is our tap water actually capable of wreaking this kind of havoc? Skeptics will say of course not. I say: Really? Prove it.
Considering we’re already exposing ourselves to a host of chemicals and contaminants in our bottled water, our tap water, and through the personal-care products we use every single day, we should applaud any effort to reduce the crap our bodies have to deal without us knowing it.
Also on the list were different pesticides, the potent carcinogen 1,4-Dioxane (which is a contaminant in many a beauty product), formaldehyde (ditto), and others. Click on the link above for the complete list they’re considering banning. It’s currently open for public review.

DISCUSSION: 2 Comments
I was so ready to dismiss the concern about drugs in our water as paranoia, but after reading a few articles I am, while not quite concerned, a little skeptical that the government has done enough to protect our rivers and streams. That said, isn’t our drinking water subject to much more stringent testing?
I’m really happy to hear this. Finally!It’s a slight concern for humans, but Andrew, the real issue is for wildlife. Fish and amphibians are much smaller and much more sensitive to chemicals than we tend to be. There have already been many studies showing how it effects them negatively, the loss for us then, would be in our ecosystems.