Map Shows States Where Drinking Water Contamination is Highest
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
A new study by researchers at Columbia University has revealed the states that have higher rates of arsenic in public drinking water systems, most of which are in the West and Midwest.
Michigan, South Dakota, Nevada, and California were all states that had areas with levels of higher than 5 micrograms per liter of arsenic in the drinking water.
The study found that even low levels of arsenic in drinking water may increase the risk of below average birth weight and other adverse birth outcomes.
Why It Matters
Arsenic is a natural element that can be found in soils, sediments, and groundwater, meaning it can feed into public drinking water systems. Water sources in some parts of the U.S. have higher naturally occurring levels of inorganic arsenic than other areas, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
At high levels, exposure to arsenic can cause symptoms ranging from nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea to dehydration and shock. Long-term exposure has been associated with skin disorders and increased risks for diabetes, high blood pressure, and several types of cancer.
While EPA has determined that there is a safe level of exposure at less than 10 micrograms per liter, the new study suggests that the maximum level of accepted arsenic exposure may still be associated with health risks.
A map showing the levels of arsenic in drinking water in different locations.
A map showing the levels of arsenic in drinking water in different locations.
Uncredited/JAMA Network
What To Know
The study was conducted via review of 14,000 pregnancies across 35 cohort sites participating in the National Institutes of Health's Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) program, and its findings were published on the medical journal site JAMA Network earlier this week.
It also assessed the level of arsenic in public drinking water systems in various areas nationwide—based on data from 2017 to 2019, with the exception of Michigan, as data was not available in that time period for the state and instead was taken from 2009 to 2011.
The findings, as shown in the map above, revealed that Western and Midwestern states were more likely to have higher levels of arsenic in public drinking water.
The disparity is because some states "have elevated arsenic levels primarily due to natural geology, with some contribution from human activities," Vasilis Vasiliou, chair and professor of environmental health sciences at Yale School of Public Health, told Newsweek.
"Arsenic naturally leaches from rocks into groundwater in regions with volcanic, mineral-rich, or sedimentary formations," which is common in the Southwest, Midwest, and parts of California's Central Valley, he said.
"Many affected communities depend on groundwater-fed wells, which are more prone to arsenic contamination than surface water," he added.
Vasiliou said that agricultural runoff and irrigation practices were also factors at play, particularly in areas like California's Central Valley or Nebraska's farming regions.
"Small rural and Indigenous communities often bear the highest burden, especially those relying on underfunded or poorly monitored water systems," he added.
"Many small water systems lack the capacity for frequent testing or advanced arsenic removal. Without federal or state investment, meaningful reduction in exposure is unlikely," Vasiliou said.
While the EPA continues to maintain that exposure to arsenic in drinking water at a level of less than 10 micrograms per liter "protects public health based on the best available science and ensures that the cost of the standard is achievable," some states have taken measures into their own hands.
New Jersey and New Hampshire have since enacted stricter limits of 5 micrograms per liter.
"The 10 micrograms per liter limit is a political and economic compromise, not a health-based standard, and likely insufficient to fully protect the public, especially over a lifetime of exposure," Vasiliou said.
What People Are Saying
Vasilis Vasiliou, chair and professor of environmental health sciences at Yale School of Public Health, told Newsweek: "Even at low-to-moderate levels of chronic exposure (e.g., 5—10 µg/L), arsenic has been linked to cardiovascular disease, including increased risk of high blood pressure, atherosclerosis, and ischemic heart disease—possibly due to endothelial damage and oxidative stress. It has also been linked to type 2 diabetes, as arsenic can impair pancreatic β-cell function and glucose metabolism. Low-level exposure has also been associated with reduced cognitive performance, particularly in children, and possibly neurodegeneration in older adults. Chronic exposure, even at levels near or below the EPA maximum, has been linked to bladder, lung, skin, and possibly kidney and liver cancers. Arsenic disrupts immune function as well, increasing susceptibility to infections and possibly reducing vaccine effectiveness."
He added: "The current EPA maximum contaminant level of 10 µg/L was set in 2001, and enforced in 2006, based largely on cancer risk, balancing feasibility and cost. However, more recent studies suggest adverse health effects at levels well below 10 µg/L, especially for sensitive populations. A growing number of researchers argue that no safe threshold may exist for certain outcomes like prenatal exposure, cardiovascular disease, and cancer."
What Happens Next
The authors of the study called for further research to determine the influence of arsenic on public health, and stressed the importance of updating health-based water safety standards at both federal and state levels.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Map Shows Democrat States Rolling Back Health Care Benefits for Immigrants
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Multiple Democratic-led states, including California, Illinois and Minnesota, have moved to roll back or freeze health care coverage for undocumented immigrants. Others may follow suit. Why It Matters The rollback of state-funded health care access for undocumented immigrants could signal a significant policy shift with national implications. The developments come amid larger debates over immigration and health care policy at a time when state and federal budgets face significant pressures. What To Know These policy reversals have been attributed by the states' Democratic leaders to mounting budget deficits and rising program costs. While coverage for many undocumented residents had been expanded in recent years, governors announced measures to reduce benefits, freeze new enrollments or end programs entirely. Such changes could affect tens of thousands of individuals and counter notions of universal health care, backed by many Democrats, while prompting broader reassessment of similar programs in other states, including Colorado, New York and Washington. Some Democratic-run states are rolling back health care, or considering rolling it back, for undocumented immigrants because of tightened budgets. Some Democratic-run states are rolling back health care, or considering rolling it back, for undocumented immigrants because of tightened budgets. Flourish California: Enrollment Freeze and Possible Benefit Reductions California Governor Gavin Newsom has announced plans to freeze new enrollments in Medi-Cal, the state's Medicaid program, for undocumented adults. Existing recipients would remain covered but could face reduced benefits in the future. Starting in 2027, the state plans to introduce a $100 monthly premium for adults without satisfactory immigration status, attributed to higher-than-expected spending and a multi-billion-dollar budget shortfall. The pause in California is for undocumented adults who haven't already enrolled in Medi-Cal, not people already enrolled. It does not apply to those under age 19, as even those who turn 19 and are on Medi-Cal and remain income eligible will keep their coverage. In May, Newsom said: "We are not cutting or rolling back those that are already enrolled in our Medi-Cal system, we're just capping state has done more than the state of California, no state will continue to more than the state of California by a long shot. That's a point of pride and that's a point of privilege to be governor that's been part of that effort." Under Newsom, California became the first state to offer full-scope Medi-Cal to all low-income adults, regardless of immigration status—expanding access in phases to young adults in 2020, older adults in 2022 and all remaining adults in 2024. "Governor Newsom championed these expansions and remains committed to protecting the immigrant communities who contribute to the fabric and economy of California," Elana Ross, deputy communications director for Newsom's office, told Newsweek on Friday. "He refuses to turn his back on hard-working Californians, especially when it comes to their basic health care needs. "But because of the $16 billion Trump Slump and higher-than-expected health care utilization, the state must take difficult but necessary steps to ensure fiscal stability and preserve the long-term viability of Medi-Cal for all Californians." Proposed adjustments in California's 2025-26 budget would include a $100 monthly premium for certain adults, effective January 1, 2027, and applies to Medi-Cal enrollees age 19 and older with "unsatisfactory immigration status—in line with the average subsidized covered California premium, which is about $135 per month in 2025. The estimated general fund savings would be $2.1 billion by 2028-29. California Governor Gavin Newsom speaks at East Los Angeles College on February 26, 2025, in Monterey Park, California. California Governor Gavin Newsom speaks at East Los Angeles College on February 26, 2025, in Monterey Park, enrollment freeze for full-scope Medi-Cal for undocumented adults, effective no sooner than January 1, 2026, applies only to new adult applicants over 19. Nobody under such a freeze would be kicked off their health care. There would be no impact on limited-scope coverage (emergency, pregnancy services, etc.) and children would remain unaffected. The state, which has previously frozen a publicly sponsored coverage program during difficult budget years, has estimated general-fund savings to be $3.3 billion by 2028-29. Illinois: Full Program Termination Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker has proposed ending the Health Benefits for Immigrant Adults program as of July 1. The program, launched in 2021, provided state-funded health coverage to more than 30,000 low-income undocumented adults. The decision is a response to higher-than-anticipated costs, aligning with broader deficit reduction efforts. Those previously enrolled will be left without similar coverage options. Newsweek reached out to Pritzker's office for comment. Minnesota: Removal From MinnesotaCare Pritzker specifically related his in-state efforts to what is happening in neighboring states like Minnesota, where Governor Tim Walz said he would sign a bill removing undocumented adults from MinnesotaCare, a state-funded program, by year's end. While coverage for undocumented adults will end, eligibility will continue for undocumented children. The bill reversed a major health policy expansion from 2023. Newsweek reached out to Walz's office for comment. Broader National Trend and Political Debate Congressional Republicans in Colorado, one of seven states offering health care regardless of immigration status, are urging Democratic Governor Jared Polis to rescind Medicaid eligibility for undocumented immigrants. A letter co-signed by Representatives Lauren Boebert, Jeff Crank and Gabe Evans referenced recent rollbacks in California and Minnesota, and cited concerns over rising costs and effects on the state's Medicaid program. The letter, in part, says that each new dollar invested in care for illegal immigrants is a dollar that could go to supporting long-term care for seniors or keeping rural hospitals open. "Congressman Gabe Evans believes Governor Polis should prioritize taxpayer-funded health care for citizens who need it most: single mothers, children and people with disabilities," a spokesperson for Evans told Newsweek on Friday. "Additionally, every dollar that Colorado hands out for free health care for illegal immigrants is money that can't be spent on seniors and rural hospitals." Newsweek reached out to Polis' office for comment. What Happens Next Debate in other states, such as New York and Washington, suggests that similar policy shifts could spread. Democratic governors pointed to financial constraints and anticipated federal funding cuts as primary reasons for reversing course. Pressures from federal proposals, such as a Trump-endorsed bill to reduce Medicaid support for states offering coverage to undocumented immigrants, are shaping state policies. States like New York and Washington are reviewing their own policies, signaling that further changes may be forthcoming as budget negotiations and federal actions continue.
Miami Herald
3 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Tens of Thousands In California Told To Stay Indoors
Tens of thousands of people in southern California have been advised to remain indoors as "emergency" air quality conditions impact parts of the Coachella Valley on Friday. The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) AirNow map, which provides a real-time snapshot of air quality, shows that air pollution levels around Cathedral City and Thousands Palms are "very unhealthy" to "hazardous" on Friday morning. The warnings mean that the risk of negative health effects from air pollution is increased for everyone, not just vulnerable populations. Air pollution and extreme heat pose significant health risks to the general public, in particular for the young, seniors and vulnerable populations such as those with underlying respiratory or cardiovascular conditions. The EPA warns that the current air pollution levels can lead to serious health issues, including reduced lung function, severe respiratory symptoms including chest pain and aggravated coughs, and increased hospital admissions. The AirNow Map shows that a maroon warning - the highest category - is in force for Cathedral city, which has a population of more than 50,000 people. A "hazardous" maroon warning means that pollution levels are of "emergency conditions," and that "everyone is more likely to be affected," the AirNow website says. A "very unhealthy" purple warning - the second highest category - covers Desert Edge, Sky Valley, Thousand Palms and Sunair. AirNow says that the risk of health effects are "increased for everyone" in these areas. Meanwhile, red warnings are also in force in the Coachella Valley in Rancho Mirage and parts of Palm Desert, along with a large area along the California-Arizona border including Yuma. Red warnings mean that "some members of the general public may experience health effects; members of sensitive groups may experience more serious health effects." The EPA said that residents should stay inside wherever possible while the air quality is so poor. "Everyone: Avoid all physical activity outdoors. Sensitive groups: remain indoors and keep activity levels low. Follow tips for keep particle levels low indoors." It added: "The biggest health threat from smoke is from fine particles... [which] aggravate chronic heart and lung diseases - and even are linked to premature deaths in people with these conditions." Jonathan Grigg, professor of pediatric respiratory and environmental medicine at Queen Mary University of London, told Newsweek previously: "There are very clear links between inhaling particles and earlier death from both respiratory and cardiovascular diseases." Air quality warnings are updated regularly by the EPA and National Weather Service. Residents in affected areas can access daily forecasts and health guidance via and local agencies, with officials providing current information as environmental conditions develop. Related Articles What Is A Heat Dome? Millions To Face Scorching Temperatures This WeekendRare Summer 'Winter' Storm To Strike With Two Feet of SnowUS Heat Wave Warnings: Live Tracker Maps 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Newsweek
3 hours ago
- Newsweek
New York Boomers Lose Medicare Battle
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. New York's highest court has rejected a legal challenge by retired city workers seeking to block a plan to move them from traditional Medicare - with city-funded supplemental coverage - to private Medicare Advantage plans. Newsweek has contacted the New York City Law Department for comment via email. Why It Matters New York City is required by law to provide health insurance coverage for retirees formerly employed by the city. The roots of the policy go back to 2021, when city officials and leaders of major public employee unions agreed to cut $600 million annually from the city's healthcare spending. The agreed-upon solution was to shift roughly 250,000 retirees and their dependents to a Medicare Advantage plan - an alternative to traditional Medicare that typically offers lower premiums. At the time, City Hall, then under the helm of former New York Mayor Bill De Blasio, argued in favour of the change because of the annual savings it would generate. The current Mayor Eric Adams has since embraced the idea. But critics have said the plan would mean more out-of-pocket costs for former New York government employees. What To Know In a unanimous decision issued Wednesday, June 18, Judge Shirley Troutman of the State of New York Court of Appeals said the retirees failed to provide adequate evidence that the shift would reduce their health benefits. The court also found no legally binding agreement ensuring the city would maintain their existing coverage. Stock image/file photo: Medicare enrollment form. Stock image/file photo: Medicare enrollment form. GETTY "If forced into a Medicare Advantage plan, retirees will lose access to many of the doctors they depend on for life-saving treatment and will routinely be denied coverage for medical care. That is because, unlike traditional Medicare (a publicly run program), private Medicare Advantage plans limit access to medical providers and medical care in order to maximize profits," the Organization of Public Service Retirees said in a statement following the decision. Medicare Advantage plans are private insurance options approved by Medicare. They replace traditional Medicare Parts A and B, covering hospital and outpatient care — except hospice. Most also include prescription drug coverage (Part D). Insurance companies offering these plans get a set payment from Medicare for each person enrolled. They also charge patients out-of-pocket costs and often require them to use doctors in their network or get referrals to see specialists. What People Are Saying The Council of the City of New York Common Sense Council said in a statement: "While we are extremely disappointed with the Court of Appeals decision today, it only strengthens our resolve to fight for our municipal retirees and ensure they are provided the supplemental Medicare insurance they were promised. We encourage our colleagues to join us in supporting Intro 1096, which would prevent this administration and any future administration from taking away this fundamental right and forcing retirees into a lesser health insurance plan." Marianne Pizzitola, president of the NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees, said in a press release: "On behalf of 250,000 retirees, we call on the City Council and the next mayor to prevent us from being forced into a privatized Medicare Advantage plan and to let us continue receiving the health insurance we were promised and desperately need: traditional Medicare plus a supplemental plan." Justin Brannan, New York City Council Finance Committee Chair and Democratic candidate for city comptroller, said on X: "The City of New York should never, ever be screwing over retirees – and neither should the courts. Nobody will ever want to work for New York City again. Zero trust. Medicare Advantage is a bait and switch scam & betrayal. Enough! City Hall clearly doesn't care about retirees." What Happens Next While the Court of Appeals dismissed the retirees' primary claims, it sent the case back to a lower court to resolve remaining legal issues.
