Contracepting the Environment

  • Thread starter Thread starter BK80734
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BK80734

Guest
ncregister.com/site/article/3151

Quote:
Scientists in western Washington found that synthetic estrogen — a common ingredient in oral contraceptives — drastically reduces the fertility of male rainbow trout.

Quote:
This summer, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and the American Pharmacists Association will begin a major public awareness campaign regarding contamination that’s resulting from soaps and pharmaceuticals, including birth control.
What the Boulder scientists discovered, however, is that few people care.


The article goes on to point out the vastly different reaction to this threat as opposed to, for example, spraying mosquitos to prevent West Nile Virus. I love the quote further down in the article about not going near a genetically modified corn chip, but considering it an inviolable right to chemically contracept.
 
I could say that as I am not a rainbow trout, I am not overly concerned:D

However, if it applies to us humans the question remains can we get this stuff filtered out of our water supply?
 
I could say that as I am not a rainbow trout, I am not overly concerned:D

However, if it applies to us humans the question remains can we get this stuff filtered out of our water supply?
Did you read the article? The ramifications seem to go beyond trout – and nothing is known of the long term effects on humans.
 
Would it be too wacky of me to whisper “conspiracy”?

Methinks that the women’s lib movement in general would not be displeased at this turn of events…and dare I suggest that this is in line with their core political beliefs…The emasculation of the male gender, by any means?

tiptoes out of the room
 
Did you read the article? The ramifications seem to go beyond trout – and nothing is known of the long term effects on humans.
This is old news, very old news. It has been in the literature as early as 1971. The new spin is trying to blame oral contraceptives. You see, there will always be female hormones in urine, regardless of using the pill. Utimately, population centers discharging their treated waste water to streams is the root cause.
Oestrogens derived from human urine are excreted with domestic wastewater and hence may be discharged into the aquatic environment. **A less significant source **is synthetic hormones derived from contraceptive pills. [emphasis mine]
mex.dk/uk/vis_nyhed_uk.asp?id=4892&nyhedsbrev_id=661

Nohome
 
This is old news, very old news. It has been in the literature as early as 1971. The new spin is trying to blame oral contraceptives. You see, there will always be female hormones in urine, regardless of using the pill. Utimately, population centers discharging their treated waste water to streams is the root cause.
That’s as may be, but it is certainly true that there is a LOT of estrogen being discharged into our water table, and more of it coming, as we “civilized nations” are in such a hurry to put every girl on the planet on the pill… :rolleyes:
 
That’s as may be, but it is certainly true that there is a LOT of estrogen being discharged into our water table, and more of it coming, as we “civilized nations” are in such a hurry to put every girl on the planet on the pill… :rolleyes:
Maybe, maybe not. But lets not confuse issues. The fact is the pill is not the environmental disaster that these religiously motivated stories would like you to believe.

Nohome
 
Would it be too wacky of me to whisper “conspiracy”?

Methinks that the women’s lib movement in general would not be displeased at this turn of events…and dare I suggest that this is in line with their core political beliefs…The emasculation of the male gender, by any means?

tiptoes out of the room
The thought actually occured to me. Many libs would probably see it as a way of population control.

And if hormones by chance happen to get into the water and cause little boys to be attracted to other boys, well that’s all the better in their view. :rolleyes:
 
You see, there will always be female hormones in urine, regardless of using the pill.
And there will always be pollution in my water but that doesn’t mean I’m going to add some of my rabbit’s pellets to it before I drink it and then just say ‘oh well, my water will always be polluted’
Utimately, population centers discharging their treated waste water to streams is the root cause.
Wwwwhhhhhhaaaaa?!?!?!?! That’s almost like saying it’s not my fault Frank is dead. I shot him but he didn’t get out of the way!
 
And there will always be pollution in my water but that doesn’t mean I’m going to add some of my rabbit’s pellets to it before I drink it and then just say ‘oh well, my water will always be polluted’
You obviously know precious little about waste water treatment. Saying that the pill is hurting the environment is like saying birthday candles contribute to global warming. It is technically true but such a minor contributor compared to larger issues that it becomes nonsense. If you are truly concerned about the environment (and this story isn’t) you would invest in advancing the treatment of waste water to reduce ALL female hormones released in water, not just the synthetic ones.
Wwwwhhhhhhaaaaa?!?!?!?! That’s almost like saying it’s not my fault Frank is dead. I shot him but he didn’t get out of the way!
No, it is like saying Frank is dead. I shot him with a BB gun but it was the canon that killed him.
 
I’m interested in hearing what Nohome knows about wastewater treatment. I have a bit of background, namely and civil and environmental engineering degree including introductory coursework on the subject. I’ve never practiced in the field and the subject of human hormone resistance to the biological treatment process surely never came up in class!

However, I am highly suspicious of the claims that natural human hormones are not affected by the highly enhanced treatment systems to which sewage is subjected.

First oil, grit and debris is removed from the sewage and it enters the primary aerobic reactors. This is basically a series of tanks vigorously aerated to replenish the oxygen that is rapidly used up in a hyper speed bateriological feast. This process breaks almost all naturally occurring organic substances down into much simpler molecules. Next, the effluent is transferred to clarifiers where the dying bacteria settle to the bottom and the much cleansed water trickles out around the surface edges of the pond. The sludge from the bottoms of these clarifiers are transported to sludge digesters where anearobic bacteria further beat the daylights out of any remaining big molecules, eat them and turn them into simpler ones. The remaining sludge is either applied to non-food lands as fertilizer or landfilled. The cleansed water is then chlorinated to kill pathogens surviving the process, smetimes then DEchlorinated and discharged, usually to a local river.

From what I do know of the processes, I find it hard to believe that ordinary human hormones survive the process, but I wouldn’t be so surprised if functionally similar chemicals not found in nature were immune to the treatment process.

So tell me where I have it wrong.
 
You obviously know precious little about waste water treatment.
I’m interested in hearing what Nohome knows about wastewater treatment.
:rotfl: Actually, I am too manualman. I worked for a while in the industry of automating waste water facilities.
It is technically true but such a minor contributor compared to larger issues that it becomes nonsense.
Well then that makes it ok. I’ll go downtown and rob $2 from the poor guy because really he’s got bigger issues that me taking his $2.
If you are truly concerned about the environment (and this story isn’t) you would invest in advancing the treatment of waste water to reduce ALL female hormones released in water, not just the synthetic ones.
I think what you may be missing is that when one takes a drug, most of it is expelled in one’s urine. Sure a women may release some of her natural hormones in her urine - but with the pill, there’s a whole bunch more {thus my rabbit pellet analogy above}

No one’s saying that female hormones are the biggest pollution problem in the world. But when fish in the stream next to the plant are as messed up as they are, there’s a problem there.
 
This process breaks almost all naturally occurring organic substances down into much simpler molecules.
Since artificial birth control is not natural nor organic I’d be interested to know if it actually did break down in the process. Since it’s a known fact that artificial substances do not break down as readily as natural ones do, I’d suspect that birth control does not either.
 
I’m interested in hearing what Nohome knows about wastewater treatment.
Plenty! Practiced in the treatment of domestic and industrial waste waters for years before going into academia. I have lots of degrees and certifications too, but I won’t bore you with the details.
I’ve never practiced in the field and the subject of human hormone resistance to the biological treatment process surely never came up in class!
I comes up in class now, though other pharaceuticals, such as antibiotics are of greater concern and are often the topic of research.
However, I am highly suspicious of the claims that natural human hormones are not affected by the highly enhanced treatment systems to which sewage is subjected.
Of course it is affected, just not eliminated. Some studies show that conventional treatment eliminates 95% of the hormone in wastewater. The problem is billions of gallons of water with that 5%!
First oil, grit and debris is removed from the sewage and it enters the primary aerobic reactors etc. etc. etc.
You described the classic system for the treatment of suspended solids and biochemical oxygen demand. You pretty much skipped the treatment of ammonia and other nitrogenous waste and we are trying to shift to other methods of disinfection such as ozone and UV, but you recall the basics quite well.
From what I do know of the processes, I find it hard to believe that ordinary human hormones survive the process, but I wouldn’t be so surprised if functionally similar chemicals not found in nature were immune to the treatment process.
Actually, the persistence of both synthetic and natural hormones is nearly identical. They are the exact chemical compound except that the synthetic ones are made in a lab instead of an ovary. These are sometimes referred to as “bioidentical”. Both break down completely within a few weeks of there introduction to surface waters. The problem is that new hormones are constantly introduced.
So tell me where I have it wrong.
I don’t think you have it wrong, but the article sure does. If you could magically eliminate all sources of synthetic estrogen (remember HRT is actually a larger source than BCPs) we would still have the problem due to natural estrogen, estrogen mimicing compounds and a whole host of other natural and synthetic compounds.

Nohome
 
Since artificial birth control is not natural nor organic I’d be interested to know if it actually did break down in the process.
Both natural and synthetic estrogen are organic. What else would it be? Inorganic? A salt or something? As mentioned in another post, conventional waste water (also spelled wastewater) treatment can break down as much as 95%. Many studies only show 40%, but in the end these chemicals completely break down within a few weeks.
Since it’s a known fact that artificial substances do not break down as readily as natural ones do, I’d suspect that birth control does not either.
You suspect wrong. Not everything artificial is persistent and not everything natural breaks down quickly. Crude oil is 100% natural and it took years to clean up Prince William Sound. Pine aromatics are carcinogenic and lethal (ever notice that nothing growns under pine trees?) Glyphosate, a synthetic herbicide breaks down into carbon dioxide and water in just a few days.

Nohome
 
A little more fun reading for all of you. Since it comes from “Sin City” I would think this is a worst case senario.
The levels of natural estrogen in Las Vegas’ wastewater is 10 times higher than synthetic estrogen used to make birth-control pills, Snyder points out. “There’s not much we can do about that; it’s not like an industrial chemical that you can ban or restrict.”
66.23.131.98/archive/2006/sep/drugs.txt

Nohome
 
Estradiol and estrone were detected in all samples in concentrations of 1- 48 ng/l and 1 – 76 ng/l, respectively while ethinylestradiol was detected in three effluents at concentrations of 0.2 – 7.0 ng/l. These levels have led to the conclusion that most effects on freshwater feral fish observed in English rivers are a result of natural estrogens excreted from women.
www2.mst.dk/common/Udgivramme/Frame.asp?pg=http://www2.mst.dk/udgiv/publications/2002/87-7972-305-5/html/kap04_eng.htm

Tell me when you get the point and I’ll stop adding links.

Nohome
 
originally posted by nohome
This is old news, very old news. It has been in the literature as early as 1971.
The birth control pill has been readily available since the 1960’s so yes this is ongoing news.

Some paragraphs from July 2007 issue of Bass Times …

“Feminizing” fish across North American by Robert Montgomery

“We knew male fish were becoming feminized because of the estrogens that are in sewage effluent.” said Karen Kidd, a University of New Brunswick biology professor and one of the scientists involved in the seven year study, funded by Fisheries and Oceans Canada."

"The addition of the slightest amount of estrogen into a small, unpolluted lake in northwestern Ontario obliterated the population of this important forage fish.(fathead minnow)

“First. the males stopped looking like males, losing the distinct colors and bumps they acquire during spawning.”

“When we opened them up, their testes were much smaller than they should have been,” Kidd told the National Post.

“predatory species such as bass and pike also become vunerable as estrogen overdose persists in their system.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top