|
Did
research on health effects of disinfection byproducts take place?
Drinking
water disinfection, for example by chlorine, has decreased the number of
waterborne diseases dramatically. In the last thirty years the potential
health risk of chemical disinfectants for drinking water has gained a
lot of attention. Since the discovery of chloroform in chlorinated
drinking water, several epidemiological and laboratory studies have been
carried out. These studies show that chloroform is
carcinogenic for laboratory animals when exposure to large doses takes
place.
What are the research
themes?
Many disinfection byproducts are bio accumulative. They are not
destroyed by the body and can accumulate in body tissues. Research on health
effects of disinfection byproducts aims at the following themes:
- Health effects on humans that drink disinfected drinking water. The
research is carried out through epidemic studies. These are mostly
concerned with long-term effects. Humans are exposed to small
concentrations of disinfection byproducts for many years.
-Toxicity of separate disinfection byproducts and mixtures of
disinfection byproducts. This research is carried out on laboratory
animals.
What
research is carried out on laboratory animals?
The research on laboratory animals comes across several
difficulties. There is a great number of disinfection byproducts.
Cancer can develop in different ways. Various laboratory animals react
differently on disinfection byproducts. Research on laboratory
animals aims mainly on disinfection byproducts with the highest human
exposure rate and the highest toxicity rate.

Rats are used for research of health effects of
disinfection byproducts
Do
disinfection byproducts affect development and reproduction of
laboratory animals?
Most researches carried out on reproduction effects of disinfection
byproducts aim at birth defects and spontaneous abortion. Little
research has been carried out on effects on male reproduction. An
American research shows that bromodichloromethane (BDCM) and chloral
hydrate (CH) lower the speed and mobility of sperm in laboratory rats.
The effect of BDCM at low concentrations is stronger than the effect of
CH or other disinfection byproducts that lower sperm speed.
(Klinefelter, 1996)
Research of the effect of a combination of disinfection byproducts on rats
In 2002 American researchers looked at the carcinogenity of a
mixture of disinfection byproducts on rats. Aim of this research was to
see whether the carcinogenity of different disinfection byproducts would
be increased in a mixture and what the effect was of long-term exposure
to low concentrations disinfection byproducts. Eker rats, which are
sensitive to effects of renal carcinogenic substances, were used. Both
male and female rats were exposed to disinfection byproducts
dichloromethylhydroxyfuranone (MX), potassium bromate (KBrO3), chloroform (CHCl3) and
bromodichloromethane (BDCM) in drinking water during 4 to 10 months.
These disinfection byproducts were chosen, because they are proven
renal carcinogenic or poisonous to kidneys. Both low and high
concentrations were used. Mixtures of disinfection byproducts and
separate disinfection byproducts were used. There seemed to be a
relation between dosage and the origination of renal cancer. There was
no difference in the amount of tumors in kidneys, uterus or spleen
between the mixture of disinfection byproducts or the disinfection
byproduct with the largest effect. This research shows that a mixture of
these disinfection byproducts does not have a higher risk of cancer
than the disinfectant with the greatest effect (Hooth, 2002)
Effects of chlorine dioxide, chlorite and chlorate on
laboratory animals
A survey of available research results on acute and long time
exposure of rats, mice, chickens to chlorine dioxide, chlorate and
chlorite in drinking water show that all these animals experienced
alterations in their blood cells. These effects were dose related and occurred
only at high concentrations (up to 1g/L). With these long time studies
rats were supplied with chlorine dioxide concentrations up to 1 g/l and
sodium chlorite or -chlorate concentrations up to 100 mg/L during 30 or
60 days. At chlorite concentrations of 100 mg/l or more, the amount of
red blood cells and haemoglobin decreased. After exposure of 90 days
these effects decreased. The results for mice were comparable.
Furthermore chlorine dioxide, chlorite and chlorate alter DNA in testes
and kidneys. This may imply that these substances have effects on
reproduction. The outcome of these researches can not directly be
transferred to people. More research has to be carried out. (Couri, 1982)
Chloroform
Chloroform, a disinfection byproduct of chlorine, is one of the
most investigated trihalomethanes. Toxicological research (Larson, 1994a)
shows that chloroform causes damage to liver and finally causes cancer
when it is daily directly applied into the stomach of laboratory
animals. The amount of chloroform is too big for the liver to break down
completely. The liver is damaged and death of cells and regenerative
cell growth occur. The risk on cell mutation and cancer in exposed
organs is increased. Another research was carried out in which
laboratory animals were exposed to the same amount of chloroform
dissolved in
drinking water. They did not develop cancer. This was probably due to
the fact that throughout the day animals were exposed to small amounts
of drinking water with chloroform. The liver was able to break down
the chloroform without getting damaged. (Larson et al., 1994b) Butterworth et al., 1998).
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concludes that as long as
exposure to chloroform remains under given threshold values that cause
cell damage, the risk for cancer is very low. Standards set for
chloroform in drinking water are far below these values.
(EPA, 1998)
Did
research of health effects of disinfection byproducts on humans take
place?
Besides experiments with laboratory animals (rats and mice) there are
also epidemical studies on effects of exposure of humans to disinfection
byproducts in drinking water. At first the relation of death because of
cancer and the use of chlorinated or non-chlorinated drinking water were
investigated.
Subsequently studies showed that chlorinated drinking water increases
the risk on bladder and anal cancer. The risk did not decrease when
other factors, smoking, residence and work were investigated as well.
The risk of intestinal cancer was not significant, but increased at
higher concentrations disinfection byproducts.
(Morris , 1992)

At first the relationship of drinking chlorinated
water and cancer.
The health effects of halogenated disinfection byproducts can be
divided in two groups. They can be carcinogenic or have effects on
reproduction and development:
Are
disinfection byproducts carcinogenic?
In the 1960's new methods, gas chromatography and mass spectrometry,
were developed to identify chemical substances at very low
concentrations. Awareness of the large amount and diversity of chemical
substances in air and water was born. In 1974 EPA enacted a list of 187
organic substances that are found in drinking water. Some of these
substances are carcinogenic or mutagenic. Only a few substances,
including trihalomethanes
chloroform, bromoform, dichloromethane and dibromomethane, were found in
all chlorinated
drinking water. A large amount of studies were carried out on the
development of cancer caused by drinking water. Most studies use
population data to find a relation between geographical drinking water
distribution and the risk on death as a result of cancer. Other studies
investigated water sources that were used by people who developed cancer
and water sources that were used by people who died as a result of
another disease. Because no direct measurements were used, variables
were taken for surface water versus groundwater, chlorinated versus
non-chlorinated water and river water carrying industrial pollutions
versus river water without pollutions. These studies show there is a
relation between drinking water quality and bladder-, intestinal- and
anal cancer.
(Cantor, 1980)
Disinfection byproducts are non-carcinogenic according to World
Health Organization (WHO)
In 1991 the WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)
evaluated the carcinogenic health risk of chlorinated drinking water
based on toxicological laboratory studies and human epidemical
researches. This study showed that it is hard to find a relation between
the development of cancer and drinking of chlorinated water. The risk is
small and cannot be proved with epidemical evidence. With all researches
the estimations of exposure to disinfection byproducts were inaccurate.
Furthermore, all kinds of factors are important for developing cancer,
for example smoking, food, alcohol, socio-economic status and hereditary
predisposition. (Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts, WHO,2001)
Can
disinfection byproducts cause bladder cancer?
A meta-analysis of several researches shows that there is a positive
correlation between exposure to disinfection byproducts in drinking
water and human bladder and anal cancer. Nine percent of all cases of
bladder cancer and fifteen percent of anal cancer are attributed to
chlorinated drinking water and disinfection byproducts. This comes down
to 10,000 cases annually.
(Morris, 1992)
Risk of bladder cancer increases after lengthy exposure to
chlorinated drinking water
In 1990 and 1991 in Colorado (United States) a population
research was carried out on the relation between disinfection of
drinking water with chlorine or chloramines and the occurrence of
bladder cancer. 327 people with bladder cancer were compared to 261
people suffering from another type of cancer. On the basis of interviews
and data of the Health Organization a drinking water exposure profile
was created. This study showed that a relation exists between years of
exposure to chlorinated drinking water and the development of bladder
cancer. This risk increased after more years of exposure. After exposure
of thirty years the risk on bladder cancer was 1.8 times bigger than
when no exposure had occurred. The concentration trihalomethanes,
nitrate and residual chlorine were not associated with the risk on
bladder cancer.
(McGeehin, 1993)
Fourteen to sixteen percent of bladder cancer cases is caused
by disinfection byproducts
Research on lengthy exposure to disinfection byproducts in drinking
water and the occurrence of bladder cancer carried out in Ontario
(Canada) shows that there is a relation between lengthy exposure to
disinfection byproducts and the risk on bladder cancer. The risk
increased after lengthy exposure and trihalomethane concentrations of 50 μg/L
or more. Fourteen to sixteen percent of all bladder cancer cases can be
attributed to exposure to disinfection byproducts.
(King, 1996)
Connection between exposure to disinfection byproducts and
bladder cancer
In Finland research is carried out on the connection of lengthy exposure
to mutagenic and carcinogenic substances in drinking water and cancer.
For this study the exposure of 732 bladder cancer patients, 703 renal
cancer patients and 914 other people to drinking water was
determined on data on residence, water sources and historical data on
water quality and water treatment. For men there was a relation between
exposure and the risk on renal cancer. For women this relation was
non-significant. For both men and women the connection between exposure
and bladder cancer was significant.
(Koivusalo, 1998)
Risk of bladder cancer is important because of the large amount of
people exposed to chlorinated drinking water
A comparison of different studies to individual consumption of
chlorinated drinking water and the association of bladder cancer shows
there is a connection between lengthy exposure to chlorinated drinking
water and bladder cancer. This risk increases after exposure for many
years. This risk is not very big, but because many people are exposed to
chlorinated drinking water for many years, this risk is significant
because cases of bladder cancer can be attributed to disinfection
byproducts.
(Kogevinas, 2003)
Is
there a risk of intestinal cancer due to the formation of disinfection
byproducts?
Research on the connection of intestinal cancer and disinfection
byproducts in drinking water show that there is an elevated risk on
intestinal cancer when chlorinated drinking water is used. Marret and
King examined 5000 people in Ontario (Canada), of which 950 were
bladder-, intestinal or anal cancer. Data on the concentration of
trihalomethanes in water were used. Other factors, including eating
habits were investigated as well. This study proved that people who were
exposed to concentrations of 50 μg/L or more had 1.5 times bigger
risk to develop intestinal cancer. (Marret en King, 1995).
Too little evidence on elevated risk of intestinal cancer
In 1998 a study was carried out on 685 intestinal cancer patients in
Iowa (Canada). 2400 people suffering from another form of cancer were
used as a control group. The concentration of trihalomethanes in
drinking water were estimated. These estimations were adjusted on basis
of other factors. This study showed no elevated risk on intestinal
cancer. The different result of these studies can be a coincidence or be
caused by another composition of the drinking water or other factors. In
this study there is too little evidence for a relation between exposure
to disinfection byproducts and an elevated risk on intestinal cancer.
(Mills, 1998)
Do disinfection byproducts elevate the risk of anal cancer
after long-period exposure to chlorinated drinking water?
A study carried out in Iowa (USA) in 1986 and 1989 with data from
intestinal and anal cancer patients shows there is no elevated risk on
intestinal cancer after long time exposure to chlorinated drinking water
or trihalomethanes. For anal cancer there is an elevated risk however.
This risk is even bigger for people who eat little fibrous food. A lack
of physical exercise also elevates the risk on anal cancer.
(Hildesheim, 1998)
Do
disinfection byproducts influence the reproduction and
development of humans?
Most attention on health effects of disinfection byproducts is
on cancer caused by lengthy exposure to disinfection byproducts in
drinking water. Standards that are being used for permitted
concentrations of disinfection byproducts are based on carcinogenic
abilities of these substances. (Singer, 1999)
Is there a connection between affects on laboratory animals
and humans?
Laboratory tests with animals show that exposure to disinfection
byproducts during pregnancy influence reproduction and development and
induce birth-defects and spontaneous abortion. With humans these effects
have been investigated with population data on drinking water quality,
water treatment and birth data. The concentrations disinfection
byproducts that cause these effects are in most cases many times bigger
than concentrations that can cause cancer after lengthy exposure. To
regulate disinfection byproducts in drinking water all potential health
effects have to be considered. (Singer, 1999)
Did research of the effects on reproduction and
development of humans take place?
The number of epidemiological studies on exposure to disinfection
byproducts and the influence on reproduction and birth defects is
small. However, these studies show there is a connection between
exposure to trihalomethanes and spontaneous abortion, birth defects and
growth delay.
(Wigle, 1998)
Is there a connection between chlorine dioxide byproducts, low
birth-weight and premature birth?
To prevent the formation of chlorinated carcinogenic disinfection
byproducts, other disinfectants are used. These disinfectants also
produce disinfection byproducts that can be harmful for human health.
Chlorine dioxide for example produces disinfection byproducts chlorite
and chlorate, which have health effects on vulnerable people as newborn
babies. Disease and death rates of newborns in two communities were
studied. In one community water was disinfected with chlorine, the other
used water disinfected with chlorine dioxide. The relation between
exposure to water treated with chlorine dioxide of the mother during
pregnancy, premature birth and a low birth weight was significant. There
was no difference in the number of birth defects and still births.
(Tuthill, R. 1982)
Must the exposure rate has be determined more adequately?
On the basis of available epidemiological data research has been carried
out on the relation between disinfection byproducts in drinking water
and effects on reproduction and development. The epidemiological
evidence on a relation between exposure to disinfection byproducts and
development is weak. If a connection is found, one has to be careful in
drawing any conclusions. The research methods being used are very
diverse and it is difficult to compare results. Future studies have to
use enhanced methods to determine exposure. This can be achieved by
using exposure markers and taking seasonal and annual differences in
concentrations of disinfection byproducts through different
transmission routes into account. Furthermore population research is
required to determine male and female fertility, growth delay and
specific birth defects.
(Reif, 1996)
Is there a connection between exposure to chlorinated drinking
water and low birth weight?
A research was carried out on exposure during pregnancy to chlorinated
drinking water with a high amount of natural organic matter and
non-chlorinated drinking water with a small amount of natural organic
matter. Birth data from 137,145 Norwegian births between 1993 and 1995
were used. The study showed no connection between exposure to
chlorinated drinking water and a risk for low birth weight and small
body length. The risk on premature birth was slightly smaller with
exposure to chlorinated drinking water than non-chlorinated drinking
water.
(Jaakkola, 2001)
Is there a risk of birth defects after exposure to disinfection
byproducts in drinking water?
In Norway a research was carried out on the relation between specific
birth defects and the occurrence of natural organic matter and
disinfection byproducts in drinking water. Birth data from 285,631
births in Norway from 1993-1998 were used. The risk on birth-defects and
more specific heart-, breathing and urine tract defects were associated
with exposure to disinfection byproduct during pregnancy. The risk on
abdominal wall defects increases significantly after higher exposure.
(Bing-Fang, 2002)
What are the effects of exposure to trihalomethanes in drinking
water on foetal development?
Data from 56,513 births in Massachusetts (USA) in 1990 were used to
investigate the effect of exposure to trihalomethanes in drinking water
on foetal development. Exposure causes a low birth weight and small body
length, also known as foetal growth delay. Comparison of trihalomethane
concentration show that 80µg/l or more lower the birth weight with 32 gram.
No evidence was found on exposure to trihalomethanes and premature
birth. (Wright, 2003)
Is there evidence for an influence of disinfection byproducts on
reproduction?
For this research the epidemiological and toxicological evidence of
studies on effects of disinfection byproducts on reproduction were
weighed. There was too little evidence on a relation between exposure to
disinfection byproducts in drinking water during pregnancy and effects
on foetal development. Effects that were investigated were birth weight,
premature delivery, some congenital defects and early death of the
newborn. There was little evidence for defects on the central nervous
system, spinal cord, spontaneous abortion and stillbirth. There was
sufficient evidence for a relation between growth delay, and defects on
urine tracts and exposure to disinfection byproducts. The
epidemiological research that has been carried out so far is
in-efficient in proving a connection between disinfection byproducts
and reproduction effects. To see if there is an evidence the true amount
of water and disinfection byproducts that women consume has to be
measured.
(Graves, 2001) Other scientists reached this same conclusion.
(Nieuwenhuijsen, 2000)
Is the risk of environmental pollutions on birth defects
measurable?
Research on the development of birth defects as a result of exposure to
chemical environmental pollutions (drinking water pollutions,
pesticides, waste, industrial pollutions, food pollutions and disasters
with a large emission of chemical pollutions) show that it very
difficult to determine the potential risk for birth defects caused by
exposure to environmental pollutions. To prevent birth defects exposure
to all chemical environmental pollutions should be prevented. (Dolk, 2003)
Is there a relation between exposure to bromodichlormethane,
chloroform and birth defects?
On the basis of birth data of births in Nova Scotia (Canada) from 1988
to 1995 and results of water monitoring tests research has been carried
out on birth effects of bromodichlormethane and chloroform. Exposure
during pregnancy to bromodichloromethane concentrations of 20 or more µg/l
were associated with an elevated risk on defects on the neural tube.
Exposure to chloroform points out to an elevated risk of chromosomal
defects. The results of this study show that research on the relation
between specific disinfection byproducts and birth defects is
needed. (Dodds, 2001)
Is there a relation between exposure to trihalomethanes and
chlorine dioxide and birth defects?
In 2001 in Sweden a research was carried out on the relation
between heart- and artery defects in children and trihalomethane
concentrations in drinking water before and during pregnancy. 753 out of
59,422 children suffered from heart and artery defects. The risk on
these effects was elevated when both chlorine dioxide and hypochlorite
were used. This risk was more high than when solely hypochlorite was
used. Chlorine dioxide seems to increase the risk on heart and artery
defects. This can also be caused by the composition of the water, which
might have been more polluted. All water investigated had trihalomethane
levels lower than the standard levels. This points out that even below
these concentrations effects on reproduction take place.
(Cedergren, 2001)
Do chlorine dioxide or hypochlorite influence physical
parameters?
In Italy research was carried out on physical parameters at
birth and the relation with drinking water disinfected with chlorine
dioxide or hypochlorite. This research was done because of earlier
publications on birth effects of disinfectants and disinfection
byproducts. Data of 548 women from Genua (Italy) giving birth from 1988
or 1989 and using water disinfected with sodium hypochlorite or chlorine
dioxide were used. Data from 128 women from nearby Chiavari, were used
as a control group. Their drinking water was not disinfected. Other
factors influencing birth-defects were also investigated. There was a
relation between drinking water disinfected with chlorine dioxide and
small body length and cranial span. A hypothesis for this result is that
the immunity of women exposed to chlorine dioxide is decreased.
(Kanitz, 1996)
The outcome of this study can be questioned, because most Italians use
bottled water, which is disinfected with ozone. The chlorine dioxide,
chlorite and chlorate concentration has not been measured, and no
dose-effect relationship can be established.
Are
the studies of reproduction effects reliable?
The results of these studies show that there is probably a relation
between exposure to (chlorinated) disinfection byproducts before and
during pregnancy and birth-defects. A low birth weight and growth delay
are mostly found. The evidence for spontaneous abortion, birth-defects
and still-birth is not very consequent. The evidence is not strong
enough to show a dose effect relation. This can be caused by research
methods and techniques being used.
What do new studies imply?
The amount of water that women use has to measured. Then the
concentration disinfection byproducts can be determined more
accurately. It would even be better to determine the concentration
disinfection byproducts from the tap. The composition and concentration
of disinfection byproducts can be changed under influence of pH,
temperature and contact time in water distribution network compared to
the concentration and composition at the water company.
It is not clear yet whether all disinfection byproducts cause health
effects and whether their effects differ. Further research is required.
Other factors, like smoking and exposure to environmental pollutions
have to be investigated as well.
What
recommendations can be made for future research on health risks of
disinfection byproducts in drinking water?
The microbiological quality of drinking water should be maintained while
preventing the formation of disinfection byproducts. Efficient
disinfection is preferred. Health risks of disinfection byproducts are
small compared to health risks of waterborne diseases. This is proven by
the cholera-epidemic that occurred in Peru in 1991. This epidemic was
caused by inadequate drinking water disinfection. Worldwide attention
for disinfection byproducts and the great number of scientific articles on
disinfection byproducts caused many drinking water suppliers in South-America
to stop drinking water chlorination. The acute health risk of
pathogenic micro-organisms in drinking water is much higher, about
100.000 to 1.000.000 times higher than the risk of long-term exposure to
disinfection byproducts. The cholera-epidemic spread to all 19
South-American countries and caused 1.200.000 patients and 40.000
deaths. (WHO, 1994)
Health risks of disinfection byproducts are very low at concentrations
found in drinking water. Nevertheless these risks can not be ignored,
because of the large number of people exposed to disinfection
byproducts. There are still a lot of disinfection byproducts that must be identified. Health risks
must be researched, as well. The effects
of mixtures of disinfection byproducts must be researched. Some
disinfection byproducts may be mutagenic and must be researched, as well.
What
methods can be used to control disinfection byproducts?
Changing the point of disinfectant application, using an
alternative disinfectant, removing natural organic matter that produces
disinfection byproducts in combination with disinfectants and removal
of disinfection byproducts after disinfection can be used to control
disinfection byproducts.
In general it is best to remove as much organic matter as possible from water, before disinfection is
applied. This can be achieved with existing
water treatment techniques. Coagulation is used to remove particles and
turbidity. Active coal can be used to absorb organic substances.
Membranes can be applied to remove organic matter from water.
Alternative disinfectants, for example ozone,
chlorine dioxide,
potassium permanganate and chloramines can also be used to prevent the
formation of disinfection byproducts. However all disinfectants produce
disinfection byproducts. Chlorinated disinfection byproducts are
researched more thoroughly than other byproducts.
(Singer, 1999)
What
are the standards for disinfection byproducts?
Some disinfection byproducts are considered harmful for public
health
(chloroform, dibromochloromethane and bromoform are probably
carcinogenic and dichlorobromomethane, dichloroacetonitrile and chloral
hydrates are possibly carcinogenic). Health institutions worldwide have
set standards for the maximum concentration of disinfection byproducts
in drinking water.
EU
In the European Drinking Water Directive 98/83/EC (1998) the
maximum standard for trihalomethanes is set to 100 μg/L. If
possible countries should strive for lower concentrations.
WHO
The WHO describes separate standards for three trihalomethanes:
- bromodichloromethane (BDCM) 60 μg/L
- bromoform 100 μg/L
- chloroform 200 μg/L.
USA
The EPA is concerned with regulation on disinfection byproducts in the
United States since 1979. In 1996 the
Safe Drinking Water Act was revised and the Congress asked EPA to
set new standards for disinfectants and disinfection byproducts. This
revision aims at lowering the health risk of disinfection byproducts,
while protecting microbiological quality of the water. In 1998, EPA
promulgated the
Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule. The
standard on total trihalomethane concentration is 80 μg/L and for
halogenated acidic acid 60 μg/L. The guideline also states that advanced
coagulation must be used to remove organic matter. (EPA, 2001)
|