Connect with us

The Bridge

Millions of people across the US use well water, but very few test it often enough to make sure it’s safe

Published

on

water
Serious water contaminants such as nitrate may not have any detectable taste or odor. Willie B. Thomas/Digital Vision via Getty Images

Gabriel Lade, Macalester College

About 23 million U.S. households depend on private wells as their primary drinking water source. These homeowners are entirely responsible for ensuring that the water from their wells is safe for human consumption.

Multiple studies show that, at best, half of private well owners are testing with any frequency, and very few households test once or more yearly, as public health officials recommend. Even in Iowa, which has some of the strongest state-level policies for protecting private well users, state funds for free private water quality testing regularly go unspent.

Is the water these households are drinking safe? There’s not much systematic evidence, but the risks may be large.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency still relies on a 15-year-old study showing that among 2,000 households, 1 in 5 households’ well water contained at least one contaminant at levels above the thresholds that public water systems must meet. While other researchers have studied this issue, most rely on limited data or data collected over decades to draw conclusions.

I’m an economist studying energy and agriculture issues. In a recent study, I worked with colleagues at Iowa State University, the University of Massachusetts Amherst and Cornell University to understand drinking water-related behaviors and perceptions of households that use private wells. We focused on rural Iowa, where runoff from agricultural production regularly contaminates public and private drinking water sources.

Diagram of a private well showing the aquifer below the home and pipes connecting the well to an indoor tank.
Basic components of a private water well. EPA

We found that few households followed public health guidance on testing their well water, but a simple intervention – sending them basic information about drinking water hazards and easy-to-use testing materials – increased testing rates. The burden of dealing with contamination, however, falls largely on individual households.

Nitrate risks

We focused on nitrate, one of the main well water pollutants in rural areas. Major sources include chemical fertilizers, animal waste and human sewage.

Drinking water that contains nitrate can harm human health. Using contaminated water to prepare infant formula can cause “blue baby syndrome,” a condition in which infants’ hands and lips turn bluish because nitrate interferes with oxygen transport in the babies’ blood. Severe cases can cause lethargy, seizures and even death. The EPA limits nitrate levels in public water systems to 10 milligrams per liter to prevent this effect.

Advertisement
image 101376000 12222003

Studies have also found that for people of all ages, drinking water with low nitrate concentrations over long periods of time is strongly associated with chronic health diseases, including colorectal cancer and thyroid disease, as well as neural tube defects in developing fetuses.

Nitrate pollution is pervasive across the continental U.S. Fortunately, it is relatively easy to determine whether water contains unsafe nitrate concentrations. Test strips, similar to those used in swimming pools, are cheap and readily available.

US map showing high risk of nitrate contamination in drinking water in the Midwest and central Plains
Heavily agricultural areas are vulnerable to nitrate pollution in water, especially where aquifers are shallow. Areas at the highest risk of nitrate contamination in shallow groundwater generally have high nitrogen inputs to the land, well-drained soils and high ratios of croplands to woodlands. USGS

The water’s fine … or not

Mailing lists of households with private wells are hard to come by, so for our study we digitized over 22,000 addresses using maps from 14 Iowa counties. We targeted counties where public water systems had struggled to meet EPA safety standards for nitrate in drinking water, and where private wells that had been tested over the past 20 years showed nitrate concentrations at concerning levels.

We received responses from over half of the households we surveyed. Of those, just over 8,100 (37%) used private wells.

Map of Iowa with dots showing state findings for nitrate levels in private wells.
Nitrate measurements in domestic wells in Iowa from 2002 to 2022, from the Iowa Department of Natural Resources public water-testing program. Counties targeted in Lade et al.’s 2024 review are highlighted in red. Lade et al., 2024, CC BY-ND

Although the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends testing annually for nitrate, just 9% of these households had tested their water quality in the past year.

More concerning, 40% of this group used their wells for drinking water, had not tested it in the past year, and did not filter the water or use other sources such as bottled water. They were drinking straight from the tap without knowing whether their water was safe.

Our survey also showed that, despite living in high-risk areas, 77% of households classified their well water quality as “good” or “great.” This may be driven by a “not in my backyard” mentality. Households in our survey were more likely to agree with the statement that nitrate is a problem in the state of Iowa than to perceive nitrates as a problem in their local area.

Climate change is likely to worsen nitrate contamination in well water. In regions including the Great Lakes basin, increases in heavy rainfall are projected to carry rising amounts of nutrients from farmlands into waterways and groundwater. https://www.youtube.com/embed/yDaaIo3JBNw?wmode=transparent&start=0 Nitrate contamination is often thought of as a rural problem, but in California it also has shown up in urban areas.

Providing information and tools helps

To see whether education and access to testing materials could change views about well water, we sent a mailer containing a nitrate test strip, information about risks associated with nitrate in drinking water, and contact information for a free water quality testing program run by the state of Iowa to a random 50% of respondents from our first survey. We then resurveyed all households, whether or not they received the mailer.

Advertisement
image 101376000 12222003

Over 40% of households that received test strips reported that they had tested their water, compared with 24% of those that did not receive the mailer. The number of respondents who reported using Iowa’s free testing program also increased, from 10% to 13%, a small but statistically meaningful impact.

Less encouragingly, households that received the mailer were no more likely to report filtering or avoiding their water than those that did not receive the mailer.

Households bear the burden

Our results show that lack of information makes people less likely to test their well water for nitrate or other contaminants. At least for nitrate, helping households overcome this barrier is cheap. We asked respondents about their willingness to pay for the program and found that the average household was willing to pay as much as US$13 for a program that would cost the state roughly $5 to implement.

However, we could not determine whether our outreach decreased households’ exposure to contaminated drinking water. It’s also not clear whether people would be as willing to test their well water in states such as Wisconsin or Oregon, where testing would cost them up to a few hundred dollars.

As of 2024, just 24 states offered well water testing kits for at least one contaminant that were free or cost $100 or less. And while most states offer information about well water safety, some simply post a brochure online.

The upshot is that rural households are bearing the costs associated with unsafe well water, either through health care burdens or spending for treatment and testing. Policymakers have been slow to address the main source of this problem: nitrate pollution from agriculture.

In one exception, state agencies in southeastern Minnesota are providing free well water quality testing and offering a few households filtration systems in cases where their wells are laden with nitrate from local agricultural sources. However, this effort began only after environmental advocates petitioned the EPA.

Advertisement
image 101376000 12222003

If state and federal agencies tracked more systematically the costs to households of dealing with contaminated water, the scale of the burden would be clearer. Government agencies could use this information in cost-benefit assessments of conservation programs.

On a broader scale, I agree with experts who have called for rethinking agricultural policies that encourage expanding crops associated with high nutrient pollution, such as corn. More restoration of wetlands and prairies, which filter nutrients from surface water, could also help. Finally, while the Environmental Protection Agency can’t force well owners to test or treat their water, it could provide better support for households when pollutants turn up in their drinking water.

Gabriel Lade, Associate Professor of Economics, Macalester College

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

STM Daily News is a vibrant news blog dedicated to sharing the brighter side of human experiences. Emphasizing positive, uplifting stories, the site focuses on delivering inspiring, informative, and well-researched content. With a commitment to accurate, fair, and responsible journalism, STM Daily News aims to foster a community of readers passionate about positive change and engaged in meaningful conversations. Join the movement and explore stories that celebrate the positive impacts shaping our world.

https://stmdailynews.com/

Advertisement
image 101376000 12222003

Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Blog

Nourishing Our Heroes: Eight Years of Impact at Phoenix VA’s Veggies for Veterans

Published

on

Veggies For Veterans

Veggies forVeterans Phoenix VA, May 14, 2025 Image Credit: Rod Washington

In a powerful display of community support and health advocacy, the Phoenix VA Hospital hosted another landmark Veggies for Veterans event yesterday, May 14, 2025. This milestone event, marking eight years of service since April 2017, continues to transform lives through the collaborative efforts of Gregory’s Fresh Market and the VA Health Care System. Yesterday’s distribution saw 600 veterans receiving fresh produce at the Carl T. Hayden VA Medical Center, adding to the impressive total of over 22,000 veterans served since the program’s inception.

“This is a way to thank them for their service,” explains Diana Gregory, founder of Gregory’s Fresh Market. This sentiment resonates deeply with veterans like Bobby Smith, who shared, “This helps with my wife and my budget because food is getting more expensive. It really has added to our diet, we were able to have healthy food.”

Yesterday’s distribution featured carefully curated bags filled with seasonal favorites including apples, oranges, zucchini, potatoes, bell peppers, and onions. The program, funded through Gregory’s 501(c)(3) organization and supported by key sponsors including Arizona Complete Health, Peddler’s Son, and Fry’s, has become a model for veteran support programs nationwide.

What makes this initiative particularly impactful is its dual benefit: while veterans receive access to fresh, nutrient-dense foods, local farmers and suppliers also gain support through the program’s commitment to sourcing produce locally. This approach creates a sustainable cycle of community support that extends beyond the immediate benefits to veterans.

The dedication of participants like David Eberly, who waited since 6 a.m. to participate, demonstrates the program’s significance to the veteran community. Phoenix VA Nurse Practitioner Isabel Kozak, who has witnessed the program’s impact firsthand, noted, “I just absolutely love being able to hear Veterans’ stories about how this event is so helpful to them.”

Corporate volunteers and VA staff worked side by side to distribute the produce, creating an atmosphere of genuine care and community engagement. Veterans don’t need to be enrolled in VA care to participate, making the program accessible to all who have served. This inclusive approach aligns perfectly with President Lincoln’s promise to care for those who have served our nation’s military, their families, caregivers, and survivors.

The Future for Veggies for Veterans

The Veggies for Veterans program continues to grow, with regular distribution events scheduled throughout the year. For veterans interested in participating, the program will return to the Phoenix VA Hospital on September 10 and November 5, 2025. This consistent presence ensures that veterans have reliable access to fresh, healthy food options while fostering a stronger sense of community support.

As this initiative enters its ninth year, it stands as a testament to how community partnerships can create meaningful impact in the lives of those who have served our country, one bag of fresh produce at a time.

Related links:

Veggies for Veterans Continues to be a Successful Event: https://www.va.gov/phoenix-health-care/stories/veggies-for-veterans-continues-to-be-a-successful-event/ Diana Gregory Outreach Services: https://dianagregory.com/veggies-for-veterans/

STM Daily News is a vibrant news blog dedicated to sharing the brighter side of human experiences. Emphasizing positive, uplifting stories, the site focuses on delivering inspiring, informative, and well-researched content. With a commitment to accurate, fair, and responsible journalism, STM Daily News aims to foster a community of readers passionate about positive change and engaged in meaningful conversations. Join the movement and explore stories that celebrate the positive impacts shaping our world.

Advertisement
image 101376000 12222003

https://stmdailynews.com/ Bridge is to connect the divides that separate us, fostering understanding and empathy among different groups. By highlighting positive initiatives and inspirational actions, The Bridge aims to create a sense of unity and shared purpose. This section brings to light stories of individuals and organizations working tirelessly to promote inclusivity, equality, and mutual respect. Through these narratives, readers are encouraged to appreciate the richness of diverse perspectives and to participate actively in building stronger, more cohesive communities. https://stmdailynews.com/the-bridge


Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Continue Reading

The Bridge

Japanese women have long sacrificed their surnames in marriage − politics and demographics might change that

Published

on

Japanese women

A record number of female candidates stood in the 2024 Japanese election.
Richard A. Brooks/AFP via Getty Images

Linda E. White, Middlebury For centuries, women entering marriage in Japan have been bound by the Confucian notion of personal sacrifice for the good of the family – and that has extended to their names. Encouraged by a sexual double standard and shaped by a general perception of Japan as a society made for men, most women abandon their maiden names when tying the knot. The law doesn’t give them much leeway on the issue. Since 1947, Japanese Civil Code has stipulated that all married couples must share a common surname. Although in theory that name could be that of the husband or wife, in practice it is almost always the man’s. Indeed, around 95% of all marriages in Japan are registered under a husband’s surname. But there are signs that things could be changing. A 2025 Jiji Press survey found that a rising percentage of lawmakers – about 44% – back a system that would allow for dual surnames. This, along with Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba’s stated openness to a selective separate surname option, has given fresh hope that married women will be able to keep their names. As a scholar of gender relations and family law in Japan, I know a change would be welcomed by many across the nation. In interviews carried out during the past 15 years, many women have told me of their strong desire to keep their maiden names.

Barriers to change

Today, around 60% of Japanese people – both men and women alike – approve of a change in the law to allow husbands and wives to have separate surnames. But to date, lawmakers have failed in their attempts to change a Civil Code that is seemingly at odds with the Constitution, which guarantees equality between men and women and between a husband and wife in marriage. The main barrier has been the conservative Liberal Democratic Party, or LDP, which has been in power for much of the post-World War II era. LDP lawmakers have repeatedly squashed proposals, stating that a legal change would threaten the traditional family structure. Since Japan’s Supreme Court in a 2015 decision sent the question of separate surnames back to the National Diet, the LDP has prevented legislation from reaching the parliamentary floor. But despite a largely male and conservative legislature, the government is facing increasing pressure from opposition members in parliament, who argue that separate surnames should be permitted in marriage. In Ishiba, the leader of the Liberal Democratic Party as well as the country’s leader, they finally have a powerful ally on the LDP side of the ledger.

What’s in a name?

In Japan, a surname links a woman, or a man, to siblings, parents and grandparents, as well as to the places where their ancestors lived and worked. It’s a meaningful part of one’s identity. As a married woman I interviewed told me: “When they call me by my husband’s name at the bank, I feel they are referring to someone else. It doesn’t feel like me.” A woman in a hard hat works with a robotic arm.A woman technician checks a robot arm on the assembly line in Kitakyushu, Japan. Katsumi Kasahara/Gamma-Rapho via Getty ImagesBut beyond the symbolism and sense of identity, changing a surname has broader social consequences, especially in the workplace. The average age at marriage in Japan is 29.7 for women and 31 for men. By the time many women marry, they have been in the workforce for 10 or more years and have developed a professional identity using their maiden names. In Japan, work relationships are usually conducted using last names. As one interviewee explained to me: “We just don’t use first names at work in Japan.” Another interviewee said she wanted to have the same ease as her husband after marriage, to continue her profession with her own name. Contacting clients, co-workers, administrators and bosses about a name change draws attention to private matters that would not necessarily be discussed at work, she said. The concern among some women I spoke with is that once alerted to the change in marital status, bosses and colleagues will no longer take their commitment to the job as seriously as they did when they were single. Such feelings reveal the negative impact that marriage often has on a woman’s career – an effect some hope to avoid by not telling co-workers and clients of their changed status.

Demographic time bomb

Conservative lawmakers decry a change of the surname rule in the Civil Code as an attack on traditional values and tie it to concerns over a looming demographic crisis. They argue that Japan must work to maintain the traditional family system and to encourage more marriages and babies. Certainly, Japan is facing a demographic crisis. With a fertility rate of around 1.2 babies per woman, Japan has one of the world’s oldest and fastest-shrinking populations. But Japanese scholars have argued that if women had more equality in the workplace, and at home, they would be more likely to choose to have children and continue working. Sociologist Aya Ezawa noted in 2019 that “a culture of long work hours, combined with a persistent gendered division of labour in the home, and high expectations toward motherhood mean that work and family remain very difficult to combine for women in contemporary Japan.” Former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, also a conservative LDP member, encouraged higher employment for women – married or unmarried – to help grow the Japanese economy in the early part of the 21st century. But his “Womenomics” plan bore little fruit. Without more policies addressing unequal treatment in the workplace, many educated and dedicated female workers will continue to be routed into dead-end jobs as their elder male bosses wait in vain for them to leave the workforce to have children. A woman poses for a wedding photo shoot in front of cherry blossom trees.The vast majority of Japanese women give up their surnames upon marriage. Philip Fong/AFP via Getty Images

Finding a balance

Certainly, changing the surname rule will prove a major turn in Japan’s progress toward gender equality. The Civil Code limiting married couples to one surname is inextricably linked to the 150-year-old “modern” koseki, or household register, system. A single surname for each family is a central pillar of the koseki – recalling an era when a male head of household was responsible for not only key family financial and marital decisions but also the family name. For many older Japanese, the koseki stands in for the family itself. If someone is listed in a koseki, through notification of birth, adoption or marriage, they are legally and symbolically part of the family and share a surname. Invoking this tradition, some conservative lawmakers have argued that a multiple surname system is unworkable. Yet advocates of the change say that modern digitization of all koseki records means that there is no real logistical challenge to having dual surname households. And, clearly, many in Japan are ready to recognize that a family with two surnames is still a family. Moreover, many Japanese believe greater gender equality in the workplace will have a positive effect not only on the low birth rate, but on many other aspects of life, too. At present, elder care, child care and community participation tend to be left to people without jobs or with flexible jobs – in other words, mostly women. And Japanese workplaces have failed to adopt flexible work hours that would allow full-time employees to take on more family and community roles.

More women in parliament

In the end, popular support and political necessity may play a role in changing the surname law. It is clear from the latest surveys that more and more voters in Japan are in favor of loosening the one-surname rule. And despite still being underrepresented in politics, women are increasingly taking up political positions in Japan – last year’s election saw a record number of female candidates and a record number elected. Given those currents, Ishiba may need to convince more in his party that the time has come to accept social change and embrace a woman’s choice of surname. If not, his party may lose the dominant position in parliament it has enjoyed for most of the past 70 years.The Conversation Linda E. White, Professor of Japanese Studies, Middlebury This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Author


Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Continue Reading

Lifestyle

Connected Communities: Reducing the Impact of Isolation in Rural Areas

Published

on

isolation (Family Features) Throughout history, humans’ ability to rely on one another has been crucial to survival. Despite modern developments that help individuals live with minimal human engagement, the human need to connect remains. However, in many parts of America, a trend toward isolation is emerging. Over the past two decades, people are spending more time alone and less time engaging with others in person, according to data from the Office of the U.S. Surgeon General. One segment of Americans at particular risk of social isolation, loneliness and their negative impacts are select populations who live in rural areas. “There is an urgent need to take action and improve mental health in rural America,” said Jeff Winton, dairy farmer and founder and chairman of Rural Minds, a nonprofit mental health advocacy organization that partnered with Pfizer to raise awareness about the physical and mental risks of social isolation. “Challenges to mental health can be inherent in a rural lifestyle, including a belief in self-reliance as a virtue, fear of judgment and difficulty getting an appointment with a limited number of mental health professionals, among others.” Many Americans are increasingly spending more time alone according to the American Time Use Survey. They are increasingly more likely to take meetings, shop, eat and enjoy entertainment at home, making it easier for them to stay within their own four walls and avoid social interactions. Authentic human connection is a basic but often unacknowledged necessity for health, “as essential to survival as food, water and shelter,” according to the U.S. Surgeon General’s Advisory on the Health Effects of Social Connection and Community. Understanding Social Isolation According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), about one-third of U.S. adults reported feeling lonely and about one-fourth said they don’t have social and emotional support (the basis of social isolation). The concepts of social isolation and loneliness can go hand-in-hand, but the two are actually quite different. Social isolation is defined by an absence of relationships or contact with others. Someone experiencing loneliness may or may not have social connections, but lacks feelings of closeness, support or belonging. Despite the distinction, both can have a negative impact on a person’s mental and even physical health. Several factors can influence a person’s risk for social isolation and loneliness. “Social connection is a dynamic that changes over time,” said Nikki Shaffer, senior director, occupational health and wellness, Pfizer. “Transient feelings of loneliness or solitude may be beneficial because they can serve as motivation to reconnect. However, chronic loneliness (even if someone is not isolated) and isolation (even if someone is not lonely) can represent significant health concerns.” 17384 detail image embed1 Isolation in Rural America Compared to people who live in urban areas, many rural Americans experience higher rates of depression and suicide but are less likely to access mental health care services, according to the “Health Disparities in Rural America: Current Challenges and Future Solutions” study published in “Clinical Advisor.” What’s more, CDC data shows suicide rates among people living in rural areas can be 64-68% higher than those in large urban areas. Rural areas have 20% fewer primary care providers compared to urban areas, according to a report in JAMA, and the Health Resources and Services Administration reports more than 25 million rural Americans, more than half of rural residents, live in mental health professional shortage areas. Among rural counties, 65% lack a psychiatrist. Nearly 30% of rural Americans don’t have internet access in their homes, which complicates the option for telehealth. These figures from Rural Minds exemplify the challenges facing rural America. “Some people in rural communities still don’t understand or accept that mental illness is a disease,” said Winton, who grew up on a rural farm. “Rather, a mental illness can often be viewed as a personal weakness or character flaw. A lot of the stigma around mental illness results in unwarranted shame, which adds to the burden for someone already suffering from mental illness.” Health Impacts of Social Isolation Loneliness is far more than just a bad feeling; it harms both individual and societal health. In fact, loneliness and social isolation can increase the risk for premature death by 26% and 29%, respectively. Lacking social connection can increase the risk for premature death as much as smoking up to 15 cigarettes a day or drinking six alcoholic drinks daily. In addition, poor or insufficient social connection is associated with increased risk of disease, including a 29% increased risk of heart disease and a 32% increased risk of stroke. Social isolation is also associated with increased risk for anxiety, depression and dementia. Additionally, a lack of social connection may increase susceptibility to viruses and respiratory illness. Learn more about the impact of social isolation, especially on residents of rural areas, and the steps you can take to reduce isolation and loneliness by visiting ruralminds.org.

Boost Your Social Connections

Take a proactive approach to combatting social isolation and loneliness with these everyday actions that can promote stronger social ties.
  • Invest time in nurturing your relationships through consistent, frequent and high-quality engagement with others. Take time each day to reach out to a friend or family member.
  • Minimize distractions during conversation to increase the quality of the time you spend with others. For instance, don’t check your phone during meals with friends, important conversations and family time.
  • Seek out opportunities to serve and support others, either by helping your family, co-workers, friends or people in your community or by participating in community service.
  • Be responsive, supportive and practice gratitude. As you practice these behaviors, others are more likely to reciprocate, strengthening social bonds, improving relationship satisfaction and building social capital.
  • Participate in social and community groups such as religious, hobby, fitness, professional and community service organizations to help foster a sense of belonging, meaning and purpose.
  • Seek help during times of struggle with loneliness or isolation by reaching out to a family member, friend, counselor, health care provider or the 988 crisis line.
  Photos courtesy of Shutterstock   collect?v=1&tid=UA 482330 7&cid=1955551e 1975 5e52 0cdb 8516071094cd&sc=start&t=pageview&dl=http%3A%2F%2Ftrack.familyfeatures SOURCE: Rural Minds and Pfizer

Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Continue Reading

Trending