4.6 Article

Monitoring of Pollutants Content in Bottled and Tap Drinking Water in Italy

Journal

MOLECULES
Volume 27, Issue 13, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/molecules27133990

Keywords

drinking water; endocrine disruptors; bisphenols; DEHP; water monitoring; heavy metals

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The concentration levels of thirteen organic pollutants and selected heavy metals were investigated in plastics bottled and tap water samples. Some of the selected contaminants have endocrine disrupting activity. The most frequently detected pollutants were Bisphenol AF, DEHP, and BPA, with higher concentration levels found in tap waters. The health impact of continuous intake of xenobiotics from various sources is complex and still not fully understood.
The concentration levels of thirteen organic pollutants and selected heavy metals were investigated in 40 plastics bottled and tap water samples. Some of the selected contaminants have an ascertained or suspected endocrine disrupting activity, such as Bisphenol A (BPA) and its analogs, and Bis 2-ethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP), which are used by industries as plasticizers. The most frequently detected pollutants were Bisphenol AF (BPAF) (detection frequency (DF) = 67.5%, mean 387.21 ng L-1), DEHP (DF = 62.5%, mean 46.19 mu g L-1) and BPA (DF = 60.0%, mean 458.57 ng L-1), with higher concentration levels found in tap waters. Furthermore, a possible level of exposure to thirteen pollutants via drinking water intake was calculated. Our findings show that, even though the occurrence of contaminants and heavy metals in drinking waters does not pose an immediate, acute health risk for the population, their levels should be constantly monitored and hard-wired into everyday practice. Indeed, the health impact to the continuous and simultaneous intake of a huge variety of xenobiotics from various sources by humans is complex and still not fully understood.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available