Survey of U.S. Streams Finds Numerous Contaminants

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Many chemicals commonly used in medications such as over-the-counter painkillers or birth control pills end up far from their intended destination--in American streams. According to a new report, published online today by the journal Environmental Science and Technology, a number of the waterways contain complex cocktails of compounds.

The 30-state study, conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey, tested 139 streams for 95 organic contaminants--ranging from medications and hormones to insecticides and fire retardants--between 1999 and 2000. In 35 percent of the waterways, the researchers found 10 or more compounds and 80 percent of the sites harbored at least one chemical. In one particularly polluted stream, the team detected 38 contaminants. The most frequently encountered compounds included the steroids coprostanol and cholesterol, the insect repellant DEET, triclosan (the active ingredient in antimicrobial soaps) and caffeine.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Because this was the first attempt to clarify the distribution of these so-called pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs), the scientists specifically chose streams likely to display contamination such as those near urban areas or livestock production facilities. Thus, they should not be considered representative of all streams in the U.S. And although the plethora of pollutants is discouraging, most of their concentrations were low, often measuring less than one part per billion. The scientists note, however, that some hormones can affect aquatic life at exceedingly low concentrations and that the potential toxicological effects of many of the detected chemicals remain unclear.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe