Artificial Sweeteners Stay in the Water Supply

Wednesday, July 01, 2009 by: Michael Jolliffe, citizen journalist

(NaturalNews) A new study investigating the ability of water treatment facilities to remove artificial sweeteners from municipal water supplies has found that significant amounts remain despite the implementation of high-tech industrial water purification.

Researchers from the Water Technology Centre in Karlsruhe, Germany examined levels of seven common sweeteners - acesulfame, saccharin, aspartame, cyclamate (currently banned in the US and Canada), sucralose, neotame and NHDC - using a new method that enables detection of the substances simultaneously. Analysis of the water samples revealed that up to 80% and 59% of sucralose and acesulfame remained respectively, despite treatment and advanced filtration. Acesulfame was found to be the most treatment resistant sweetener, with several hundred nanograms of saccharin and cyclamate also remaining.

"The persistence of some artificial sweeteners during soil aquifer treatment was demonstrated and confirmed their environmental relevance", wrote the scientific team in the journal Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry, before expressing concern that "the occurrence of such sweeteners in the aquatic environment may become an issue for consumers." [1]

The study authors cited the lack of research on the levels of artificial sweeteners in water as being a motivating factor behind their investigation. One previous study on sucralose, conducted by scientists from the Swedish Environmental Research Institute, also found industrial water treatment to be of limited efficacy in removing the sweetener from the municipal water supply with significant sucralose concentrations being found in each sample analyzed and at each of twenty-five treatment faculties investigated throughout Sweden. Writing in a report entitled 'Sucralose in surface waters and STP Samples', the Scandinavian team expressed particular anxiety that water levels may continue to build substantially over a long period of time due to the extremely slow rate at which sucralose breaks down in the environment. [2]

The sweeteners under investigation in the current study have been claimed to be related to a number of persistent health concerns. Of the five substances legally available for use in the US, acesulfame and saccharin have caused concerns over being linked to cancer with the former also cited as a cause of excessive insulin secretion. Aspartame and neotame have been linked with neurological illness, while sucralose has been studied in relation to migraine symptoms. Of the banned substances, there are concerns that cyclamate may decrease fertility in men. [3]

Lead researcher Marco Scheurer, along with co-researchers Frank Thomas and Heinz-Jurgen Brauch, conceded that the effect of such treatment-resistance substances on drinking water remains unknown but could be significantly influenced by potential metabolites of the sweetener pollutants.

[1] Scheurer et al. Analysis and occurrence of seven artificial sweeteners in German waste water and surface water and in soil aquifer treatment (SAT). Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry. 2009 July. 394; 6: 1585-1594.
[2] Brorstrn et al. Measurements of Sucralose in the Swedish Screening Program 2007, Part I; Sucralose in surface waters and STP samples. IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute, 2007.
[3] Takayama et al. Long-Term Toxicity and Carcinogenicity Study of Cyclamate in Nonhuman Primates. Toxicological Sciences. 2000. 53: 33-39 (2000)

About the author

Michael Jolliffe is a freelance writer based in Oxford, UK.
http://www.naturalnews.com/026527_water_sweeteners_artificial_sweeteners.html

Food rationing a possibility unless consumers cut back on 'water footprint'...WTF??

Here we go...the global robber barons are striking while the iron is hot! And you can be sure that the same warnings will hit the shores of the U.S. very soon...who the f*ck do they think they are...God? You can bet they won't be rationing their food and water!!!! Only the peasants must fall in line...

Households face the prospect of rationing unless they stop rampant consumption of dairy products, meat and soft drinks, according to a senior Government food adviser, who has warned about Britain's "water footprint".

By Harry Wallop, Consumer Affairs Editor
Last Updated: 11:41AM GMT 21 Mar 2009

Prof Tim Lang said people needed to wake up to how much water farmers and food factories use in producing staple goods, particularly meat, coffee and milk, saying the threat to Britain's food chain from its water footprint is just as great as its carbon footprint.

A return to rationing, though "almost unthinkable" in peace time, cannot be ruled out, he warns. While such direct Government intervention would be a very last resort, indirect "editing" of people's diets by supermarkets and central Government is essential, he said.

Prof Lang, speaking to The Daily Telegraph on the publication of his latest book 'Food Policy', is mid-way through a project to ascertain what constitutes the perfect "sustainable diet".

His team at City University London is trying to come up with a system to help consumers navigate the minefield of shopping for food that is nutritious, ethical and sustainable.

He is aiming to definitively ascertain whether, for example, a Fair Trade banana from Costa Rica is as "sustainable" as a lamb shank from Wales, or a high-fat ready meal.

Prof Lang, who coined the term "food miles" more than a decade ago, now believes that overuse of water is the biggest threat facing Britain's food chain.

"Huge amounts of water is being used as irrigation or fed directly to animals. It is a nightmare. Water stress is huge across huge swathes of the globe.

"We think that we are liberally supplied by God's water. But that's not true."

According to the World Wide Fund, the production of a simple pint of milk uses up more than 550 litres (968 pints) of water – the equivalent of running six full baths.

A cut of coffee uses up 140 litres (246 pints), while a hamburger uses an astonishing 1,800 (3,168).

These figures take into account the amount of water used from the start to the end of the food chain, including the irrigation on the farm, the processing of the food, such as washing the coffee beans, and the cooking of the product. Meat uses so much because of the water needed to irrigate the crops that end up as animal feed.

"We cannot carry on consuming the same amount of meat and dairy that we do currently. We are convinced about that now. It is absolutely madness."

Prof Lang backs a call from Australian academics who have called for people to eat no more than 90g (3.17oz) of meat a day – nearly half the current level of 170g that the average British adult consumes.

The UK has become the sixth largest net importer of water in the world, the environment group WWF estimates, with every consumer indirectly responsible for the use of thousands of litres a day. Only a third of the UK's total water use comes from its own resources; the rest depends on the water systems of other countries, some of which are already facing serious shortages.

While rationing, as experienced during and after the Second World War, is very unlikely, Prof Lang says supermarkets and the Government will need to "choice edit", the products on sale to reduce shoppers water footprint.

"Don't think it doesn't already go on. It is a myth that consumers have free choice," he said, pointing out that food companies frequently change the formula of food to cut out salt or additives – under pressure from campaigners or legislation.

While coffee, African-grown vegetables, milk and meat all use up vast quantities of water, Prof Lang points out that some products are far more "sustainable", including tea, home-grown apples, porridge and British seafood, such as mussels and oysters.

"I have porridge every morning," he said.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/greenerliving/5023730/Food-rationing-a-possibility-unless-consumers-cut-back-on-water-footprint.html

Also read:

London imposes de-facto 9PM curfew on under-16s

Corporate Water Barons Indifferent to Running Water But Not Security at World Water Forum

Posted by Wenonah Hauter, Food & Water Watch at 5:15 AM on March 19, 2009

It's unbelievable to think that over 20,000 people traveled thousands of miles to hear shortsighted corporate spin.

Istanbul -- Now into its third day, the World Water Forum has an incredible police presence, and the security is downright oppressive. So much so that there are special VIP entrances and areas – including the restrooms. Yet despite the painstaking attention afforded to security, the forum is lax on certain other logistical details. Last night, one of the buildings that housed panel discussions and workshops did not have water for flushing the toilets or washing hands -- a sad but fitting metaphor for the inefficiencies of privatized water systems that the World Water Forum promotes.

Indeed, it is security, not access to water, that reigns as the top concern here. Forum attendees must have their access badges scanned at multiple security checkpoints. Our whereabouts are tracked throughout the forum, following which building we are in and what workshops we are going to. Security intervenes if we try to ask questions at panels or ask to present information that is contrary to what is being promoted.  Even the bathrooms have security. What, do you suppose, are they so afraid of?

Earlier today, Maude Barlow and I were walking with two journalists when some VIPs were coming in the door from a fancy car and a woman shoved us aside, almost knocking Maude over. Being here gives one a sense of what its like to live in a police state where there is no freedom of speech.

Security is especially tight at the finance sessions. This is where the forum lays out its plans for profiting from water. Once we managed to get in, the corporate water barons enlightened us on the solutions to delivering water to the world's poorest populations -- which apparently is to get them to pay for the service. It's unbelievable to think that over 20,000 people traveled thousands of miles to hear such shortsighted corporate spin.

We did manage to voice our side of the debate at the Sustainable Financing panel, where I challenged a panel of speakers, including Jim Winpenny from the OECD Global Forum on Sustainable Development, on the merits of public-private financing for water infrastructure projects.

Despite these barriers, journalists are still interested in what we have to say and we will continue to advocate for clean, affordable water as a universal human right.

Wenonah Hauter is the executive director of Food & Water Watch. She has worked extensively on energy, food, water and environmental issues at the national, state and local level.

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/water/132359/corporate_water_barons_indifferent_to_running_water_but_not_security_at_world_water_forum/

Violent Clash Against Peaceful Protesters at World Water Forum 

Activists against privatization plans at the forum were met with police aggression.

READ: World Water Forum diary

Anita McNaught, Al Jazeera's reporter in Istanbul, will be writing daily dispatches from the World Water Forum held in Istanbul from Monday, March 16 to Friday, March 20.  http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2009/03/200931991913230444.html

Campaigners vow to disrupt world water forum

Political leaders, specialists and activists will today attend a vast gathering in Istanbul officially aimed at averting an impending world water shortage but denounced by critics as a front for multinational companies seeking profits and promoting privatisation. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/16/istanbul-water-forum

World Water Forum: the world's largest water event

The World Water Forum is the main water-related event in the world, aimed at putting water firmly on the international agenda. A stepping stone towards global collaboration on water problems, the Forum offers the water community and policy-and-decision-makers from all over the world the unique opportunity to come together to create links, debate and attempts to find solutions to achieve water security. It is organised every three year by the World Water Council, in collaboration with the host country. http://www.worldwaterforum5.org/index.php?id=1870&L=0