Birth Control Pills Threaten Fish Stocks

BarbaraHudson writes Experimental research has shown that small amounts of estrogen in waste water can lead to rapid large-scale changes in fish populations. From the article: "The lead researcher of a new study is calling for improvements to some of Canada's waste water treatment facilities after finding that introducing the birth control pill in waterways created a chain reaction in a lake ecosystem that nearly wiped out a freshwater fish. 'Right away, the male fish started to respond to the estrogen exposure by producing egg yolk proteins and shortly after that they started to develop eggs,' she said in an interview from Saint John, N.B. 'They were being feminized.' Kidd said shortly after introducing the estrogen, the number of fathead minnow crashed, reducing numbers to just one per cent of the population. 'It was really unexpected that they would react so quickly and so dramatically,' she said. 'The crash in the population was very evident and very dramatic and very rapid and related directly to the estrogen addition.'" Estrogen pollution in waterways has been an issue for over a decade now.

Comments

Can't be good for humans either

[wcrowe]

This might explain why grown men are more and more behaving like frightened old women these days.

Cities

[bill_mcgonigle]

One of the problems with cities is that they concentrate pollution. One of the dirty secrets of cities is that their governments do the bare minimum required to get rid of their waste. I remember growing up on the Jersey Shore and some days the beaches would be littered with tampon tubes because NYC just dumped their sewage offshore. When you're five, you just don't understand what's happening - I'm surprised our parents let us spend the day in that water.

The trouble is, these governments do everything they can to externalize the costs of living in the city onto the people (and apparently minnows) who don't. The wastewater treatment plants discussed here could absolutely destroy the estrogen before releasing it into the environment - but the sewage bills might have to double to make that happen. The city folks would undoubtedly scream about "unfairness" if their water was effectively treated before discharge.

Re:Cities

[ColdWetDog]

Modern wastewater treatment is certainly one of western civilization's major achievements. It cuts down on communicable diseases, enhances human and animal lifetimes and makes the place smell better. However, the technology is perhaps 100 years old at it's core and was never imagined to get rid of the multitude of chemicals that we are currently dumping in the water.

As an AC in a post below this one states "We know that a whole host of chemicals do this, estrogen from birth control pills being just one chemical out of literally hundreds." Some are likely to have noticeable biological effects, others perhaps not. And we certainly have the technology to rid the water of these chemicals, but likely not the political and financial will.

The EPA is constantly changing their requirements for wastewater, typically tightening up on some chemical or another. They are usually hounded left and right when they do that for reasons of economics and politics. Hopefully they can continue doing so, but I'm doubtful of their ability to push for major changes in the current climate (pun intended).

Re:Cities

[PPH]

How well does anaerobic bacterial processing of sewage waste decompose the estrogen? The cited study reports the effects of releasing municipal wste into waterways. But it isn't clear about how this waste was treated or what they mean by 'better' waste water treatment.

Some Canadian municipalities are infamous for their lack of waste water treatment.

Re:Cities

[hey!]

You got it exactly right. Cities *concentrate* polution. Spreading the same populatioh over a wider area *disperses* the pollution.

Civil engineers used to say "dilution is the solution to pollution", but no longer -- except ironically. That's because there can be offsetting mechanmisms that concentrate a pollutant -- e.g. collecting in streams.

Cities actually make processing pollution and waste more financially efficient, although the price tag in absolute (rather than per capita) terms can be eye-popping. Here in Boston we went through a major shock about 25 years ago. We had had the lowest water and sewer rates in the country, living off massive infrastructure investments made generations prior; but we were dumping minimally treated sewage and sludge into the harbor. A lawsuit forced us to disband the agency which was running the sewage and water system, but also recreation like parks and skating rinks, and form a new quasi-independent authority . After 6.8 billion dollars spent on new treatment plants, we had more expensive than average water. 6.8 billion spread over 2.5 million ratepayers is a LOT of money $2750 / person over a decade or so. But it's cheaper than if those 2.5 million people were spread out evenly along the coast for a few hundred miles.

It's not just estrogen.

[Anonymous Coward]

We know that a whole host of chemicals do this, estrogen from birth control pills being just one chemical out of literally hundreds.

Birth control pills signifcant contributor?

[butchersong]

This is a problem but it seems like we might have multiple contributors of estrogens in drinking water with birth control pills not the most significant. Not the best source but: http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...

Re:Birth control pills signifcant contributor?

[slashmydots]

According to a former slashdot story, that is absolutely where the estrogen is coming from. The primary point of the story was that tap water processing plants do absolutely nothing to filter it out. This is why I don't drink tap water.

Re:Birth control pills signifcant contributor?

[BarbaraHudson]

That study refers to estrogen and estrogen mimickers found in the drinking water, from all sources. Stuff that's treated, filtered, etc. This study was done in a controlled lake environment maintained by the Canadian government for such studies, and the only variable was dosing the lake with a low level of estrogen (probably estradiol). So, if we assume that source of estrogen is a small amount in comparison to others in the water environment, it's impact is demonstrably huge. Not all pollutants have the same effect per unit dose.

There might be a synergistic effect, or fish may just be more sensitive to human estrogen, but concentrations of the pill in waterways has been known to have an effect on fish and amphibians for a couple of decades. The only question was, can we see an actual cause and effect relationship "in the wild", and now we can state that there is definitely one.

Re:Birth control pills signifcant contributor?

[kick6]

The primary point of the story was that tap water processing plants do absolutely nothing to filter it out. This is why I don't drink tap water.

Do you only drink well water? Cuz guess what: bottled water is tap water.

Re:Birth control pills signifcant contributor?

[Immerman]

I recall reading elsewhere that we are finding substantial levels of synthetic estrogen and other pharmaceuticals even in fresh rainwater in remote areas. We're running the most far-reaching biochemical experiment in the history of the planet, and we're doing it without any hint of controls or knowledgeable oversight. May we live in interesting times indeed...

And incidentally well-water is just water from an underground river. Considering that typically 70-90% of the water flow from your average surface river is flowing underground to begin with that doesn't breed confidence in non-mixing. Your well water may have diverged from the surface river tens or hundreds of miles upstream, but you've got to ask yourself, what's upstream from there? The water has likely passed through a lot of miles of sand-filter between there and here, but does that really do much to remove fully dissolved chemical contaminants?

Re:Take your pick, fish

[i kan reed]

Well, "one day fish" is a bit silly. But larger populations of us humans do cause greater ecological harm.

In places where wastewater treatement isn't up to snuff, the fecal coliform bacteria causing complete ecosystem collapse. Which is more than a little worse than the stressors placed by estrogen.

That's just bullshit, not estrogen from the "Pill"

[Demonoid-Penguin]

"Estrogens ain't estrogens (Sol)"
http://www.arhp.org/publicatio...

@butchersong
And why is this not "the best source" - peer reviewed... did I miss some bad science?

I thought an experiment based on a false belief that estrogen from the Pill is the same estrogen that is found in waterways was bad science - like the flawed UK research it was "based on".

The researcher refers to "estrogen-like" in the science press, but the term "birth control pills" is quoted in the non-science press. Need for publicity, bad reporting, or both?

cough*Dairy farmers*cough(??)

Good thing this isn't a US story.

[GungaDan]

It could result in a monumental political battle between fluke and Fluke.

Should we start dumping Viagra?

[martiniturbide]

Maybe Viagra on the seas is the solution. More horny fishes will reproduce more.... damn.... I just found my master's thesis.

I don't think they're calling for ban of the pill

[beschra]

From TFA "It's a problem that we can certainly resolve with better waste water treatment,"

Low dose birth control pills?

[JDevers]

Seems that the slow switch to low dose birth control pills will have a side effect of helping this sort of pollution as well. It won't prevent it of course, but there is a big different between 1970s pills and those prescribed today, now just to get those who have been on the pills for 20+ years to switch to something different. Has the side effect of lowering cancer rates as well.

Re:So add testosterone too

[matbury]

These stories have been circulating for decades. I've yet to see any that correlate estrogen in contraceptive pills with the quantities of estrogen in waste water. Modern contraceptive pills use minute amounts. Additionally, our bodies produce estrogen in the liver,adrenal glands, breasts (in women), and fat cells (are increased obesity rates producing more waste estrogen?). We put far larger amounts into some cosmetics and shampoos. We also use synthetic estrogen compounds in substantial amounts plastics in our food packaging and containers. They've long been known to leech into our food and are harmful endocrine disruptors which can have effects that are passed on to our offspring, including infertiility and cancers.

So, have they established that contraceptive pills are the source of the estrogen theyr'e finding in the water? Anyone have a link to the study handy?