Dangers Unbeknownst to Us

Anna Forsman

I stand up in these mountains Speaking solemn hues I am an honest muse Questioning solitude Never once alone — My mothers & sisters Share in life with my energy Endlessly I sip from their wells of knowledge Intrigued, humbled, learning depth through collectivism, unity, sisterhood & sharing We are never alone in our feelings & spirits I thank all of the women who brought me here

Who taught me here

We let the Water

Touch our Feet

And sit in the moments That were meant to be

There is a quiet wild in us That accounts for all days off As days off Often require stillness There is a fertile wilderness in us That speaks of Heart

Dangers Unbeknownst to Us

By: Angel Tello

harmaceutical and personal care products, or PPCPs, are extensively and ubiquitously used around the globe for personal health and cosmetic purposes. Unfortunately, these products have grown to become a significant component of the expanding group of chemical contaminants of emerging concern, as little is known about the impact of continuous exposure to these contaminants on the environment or human health. As we transition into 2022, our look-good liability has evolved to be more expansive than ever before.

The United States’ Environmental Protection Agency defines PPCPs as “any product used by individuals for personal health or cosmetic reasons or used by agribusiness to enhance growth or health of livestock” (Environmental Protection Agency). This definition consists of the thousands of synthetic and naturally occurring chemicals that encompass fragrances, cosmetics, prescription and over-thecounter drugs, and veterinary medicines. Highly recognizable examples of PPCPs include caffeine, Ibuprofen, Naproxen, and estrogens, and although these compounds may seem innocuous at first, little is known about the effects of their long-term and omnipresent exposure to human health. Studies conducted over the past few decades have detected contaminants such as antibiotics, prescription drugs, steroids, reproductive hormones, and personal care products in both surface water and ground water in the United States (Ebele et al., 2017). PPCPs typically enter the water system when passed through the body and into sewer lines or washed off the body and into the ground or sewage system through shower drains. Even unremarkable activities such as shaving, using lotions, or taking medication have been attributed to adding these chemicals to the water system (Cizmas et al., 2015). Other sources that may potentially introduce PPCPs into the environment include disposing expired or unused PPCPs in the toilet or sink, and through waste from domestic animals.

The water and wastewater treatment communities have been especially concerned about PPCP contamination because of the universal nature of PPCPs, as well as their ability to persist or only partially degrade in water and during wastewater treatment. PPCPs dissolve easily and do not evaporate at normal temperatures and pressures, so they are frequently found in aquatic environments, which may even include human drinking water sources (Ebele et al., 2017). Essentially, if PCPPs invade our water system, they are nearly impossible to avoid. For humans, consuming potable water that may contain trace concentrations of thousands of various PPCPs has been identified as a major route of exposure. Other primary exposure routes include the consumption of seafood containing PPCPs and their derivatives, as well as dermal contact with untreated water when bathing or showering. The primary concern to researchers is the fact that many of the compounds in these self-care products or medications contain compounds or metabolites that remain biologically active. Scientists have become increasingly worried that the presence of PPCPs in water supplies will expose individuals and ecosystems to endocrine-disrupting compounds

And promote antibiotic resistant bacteria. Studies have shown that certain PPCPs such as estrogen act as endocrine disruptors, which are compounds that alter the normal functioning of the hormone system and result in a variety of adverse health effects. According to the EPA, “The emerging contaminants may also demonstrate low acute toxicity but cause significant reproductive effects at very low levels of exposure” (Environmental Protection Agency). In addition, there exists a potential for the development of antibiotic resistant bacteria due to contamination from improper disposal of antibiotics. A study in Austria found “similarities in the antibiotic resistance patterns in Escherichia coli isolated from sewage sludge and patients under medical treatment in 2000 and 2009” (Cizmas et al., 2015). There is increasing proof that the production and accumulation of antibiotic resistance in the natural environment promotes antibiotic resistance in medical and urban settings. Therefore, it is vital that antibiotics are properly disposed of and are not exposed to the water system.

Little is known about the ultimate morbidity and mortality rate of PCPP pollution when it comes to humans, but a 2019 study showed that “nearly all aquatic ecosystems are affected by sublethal levels of anthropogenic chemical contamination” (Parrish et al., 2019). This same study found that mosquito predator consumption rates were drastically reduced when exposed to three different PCPPs (caffeine, DEET (N, N-diethyl-meta-toluamide), and triclosan). Therefore, we have tangible evidence that PCPP pollution is affecting the ecosystem, food webs, and predator-prey dynamics. With such dramatic changes happening on a micro scale with smaller creatures, scientists are justified to feel concerned about how these contaminants are affecting human bodies on a cellular level with consistent exposure, even to minimal concentrations.

As it stands, the research field of PCPP contaminants is not free from controversy. In 2016, scientists affiliated with the journal Science of the Total Environment argued that there is a low potential for adverse human health effects because the drugs detected in water systems had only been detected at very low concentrations (Serra et al., 2016). However, scientists affiliated with the EPA have warned the general public from adopting this particular way of thinking, as it dismisses the significance of human exposure to biologically active drugs in drinking water for people whom the pharmaceuticals are not intended or approved for. According to the California Department of Toxic Substances Control, there may be “the potential for non-target, unintended effects at sub-therapeutic doses; unknown additive or synergistic effects due to exposure to chemical mixtures; and the potential for effects following continual long-term exposure to low concentrations” (Government of California). The EPA has stated that drugs are designed intentionally to interact with receptors at very low concentrations to produce a biological effect, so it may be unwise to ignore the problem just because the concentrations seem insignificant (Environmental Protection Agency). Exposure risk for humans is still a major concern because humans are subject to continual, multi-generational exposure, as well as possible low-dose side effects that may be too subtle to be noticed by medical professionals and ultimately lead to a more lethal disease within the human body. There is a demand for research on the subtle effects of PPCA contamination because they may accumulate with continuous exposure and become more significant.