How one simple change will ensure your drinking water is clean if you’re worried about cancer scare – as expert gives reassuring advice

An expert has called for calm after fears were raised that almost two million Australians may have been exposed to cancer-causing chemicals in their drinking water.

A major investigation by the Sydney Morning Herald found that ‘forever chemicals’ have been found in tap water in every state and territory across the country since 2010, affecting up to 1.8 million people.

In recent months the World Health Organisation has concluded that the chemical perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) is forever carcinogenic to humans, while the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has determined that there are no safe levels of PFOA or perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) in water.

The chemicals are linked to kidney and liver disease, thyroid and insulin dysregulation, reproductive and developmental problems in children and cancer.

But UNSW professor Denis O’Carroll told Daily Mail Australia Australia had strict regulations making drinking water safe and warned against residents taking drastic measures such as switching to bottled water.

His reassuring message hasn’t stopped other experts from urging Australians to make a change in their kitchen and either invest in a water filter or have one installed, even calling on the government to subsidize the purchases .

Nearly two million Australians could have been exposed to cancer-causing chemicals found in their tap water, but an expert in the field said there is no need to panic and switch to bottled water. Stock image of a woman drinking a glass of water

Prof O’Carroll said whether someone drinks tap or bottled water would make no difference to exposure to perpetual chemicals.

“I don’t think there’s any reason to believe that bottled water would be better, because bottled water has to come from somewhere,” he said.

‘To assume that bottled water is treated differently or to a greater extent than tap waterwould be misleading.

“It could be (treated differently), but just making that assumption would be incorrect.”

The professor, director of UNSW’s water research laboratory, said someone had to be exposed to chemicals for a long period of time to get sick.

“It’s a long-term, chronic exposure that you would be concerned about,” he said.

“(That would be the case) decades from now, I would say, at a low level of consumption, but to which most people would be exposed. It would take a long time to be sick.

The photo shows a water filtration plant in North Richmond where chemicals were detected forever in January

‘The Australian guidelines are not as strict as the US EPA, or those of Canada or the European Unionbut they are still regulated to quite low limits.”

A 2011 University of Queensland report showed where Australia’s drinking water was affected by perennial chemicals, but Prof O’Carroll said ‘only a select number (examples) of that tap water would have exceeded US EPA guidelines.

“If you look at it today, that 2011 article would in no way say that all tap water in Australia is bad from the US EPA’s perspective,” he said.

‘That would be completely incorrect.

“A small number of those samples — it could be less than 5 percent — may exceed U.S. EPA guidelines.”

As an expert in this field, the professor has received many questions about water safety in recent days.

‘I have had many of my colleagues as examples. They are very nervous and as a society we have to pay attention to what we consume broadly.’

Dr. International Pollutant Elimination Network executive committee member Mariann Lloyd-Smith urged Australians to “do the best they can” and invest in a water filter.

“The makers of these chemicals have had to pay many millions of dollars in the US to people who have been exposed to them and who have suffered from cancer,” she said.

“However, it is incredible that our regulators here in Australia are dismissing all this evidence and saying there is no clear evidence that they cause disease, which is quite frankly unbelievable.”

An inexpensive option for purifying water is a pitcher filter, but the gold standard is one that is installed under the sink or a whole-house filtration system.

The US non-profit Environmental Working Group found that the best filter to remove contaminants was one that relied on a reverse osmosis system.

An inexpensive option to clean your water is a pitcher filter, but the gold standard is one that installs under the sink or a whole-house filtration system

The system must be installed and forces the water at high pressure through an extremely thin membrane that separates chemicals from the water.

This type of filter is the most expensive and requires maintenance, although the filters do not need to be replaced as often as carbon or resin filters.

Granular activated carbon filters are also another option, but a study from Duke and North Carolina State universities shows that some brands make no difference at all.

Professor O’Carroll said residents need to be aware of the wide range of chemicals they are exposed to throughout their lives – and used alcohol as an example.

“Health Canada suggests you should only drink two glasses of alcohol per week,” he said.

‘And I have a hard time with that and I’m sure many Australians and (other) Canadians do too.

“So there are all kinds of things that we knowingly expose ourselves to, and PFOS is one that we don’t want to expose ourselves to, but it’s not. the poison.

“There are many other things we would be concerned about, including PFOS.”

Prof O’Carroll said people can limit their exposure to chemicals forever by paying attention to the labels in consumer products, including old cookware such as Teflon pans.

Professor Denis O’Carroll (pictured) said it makes no difference whether someone drinks tap or bottled water to their exposure to perpetual chemicals

“It’s difficult because a lot of these chemicals are outdated,” he said.

‘In Australia we’re trying to get away from our exposure, so the government would try to limit what comes in (now).

‘But if you have older stuff in the house, which we all do, it can be part of it, it can be used in stain-resistant carpet or chairs.

‘It could have been used in it old cooking utensil(s) in water-repellent clothing.

‘Those are the items where you get exposure.’