sign in sign up
<<
Home , Calcium, Mineral, Mineral (nutrient), Mineral water, Tap water

n=5

n=5

t s

Pickup 1 Pickup 2 Pickup West well West We

n=26

n=26 West West

n=10 n=10

South well South

South well South

4

h t

u

n=40 o

n=40 S

South

l

y. 2004. Third Edition, Edition, 2004. Third y.

el ll

n=2 w n=2

we

t

s

a

heast heast

e t

h

Calcium t

ort Nor

s

N

a

st n=26 e

a

n=26 h t e

th

r

Nor o

N

l

l

n=9 e w

n=9 est est

w

est well est

w

Mid id

Pickup 1 Pickup 2 t

s

M

e

n=25 w

n=25

Mid *Mean +/- SEM *Mean +/- Midwest 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

15 14 13 12 11 10 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

mg Na /100 g /100 Na mg mg Ca /100 g /100 Ca mg of the Human : Protection Drinking s in r Drinking-water Qualit r Drinking-water WHO Press, Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 186. Switzerland, Geneva, Press, WHO facial Research and the Nationalfacial and , Research Lung,

s, Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 340. Switzerland, s, Geneva,

l

l

n=5 e

w

Pickup 1 Pickup 2 Pickup t

l

l

e

w

n=5 Wes

Pickup 1 Pickup 2 Pickup t

es W

n=26 West

st e

n=26 W

ll e

Dietary Reference Intakes for Water, , , , Chloride, Sodium, for Water, Potassium, Intakes Reference Dietary

l

l n=10

e

w uth w uth

n=10

o

h

t S

ou

S

h n=40

South ut

n=40 So The authors gratefully acknowledge the work of F. Ella Greene for (0.22)

n=2

n=2 well t

s

east well east

thea

h r

No

Nort t

s ast

n=26 e

n=26 h

t thea

r

Nor No

l

l ll

e e

n=9 w

n=9 w t t

st st

e

w dwes

Mi

Mid

st

e

n=25 w

d n=25

Copper Sodium

Mi Midwest

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 mg Mg / 100g / Mg mg epidemiological suggested by magnesium and 10 mg/L mg/L the 20-30 research benefits. health for samples. and South Ca, Na). and (Mg, content recommendations. and resulting US the in important 0.040 0.035 0.030 0.025 0.020 0.015 0.010 0.005 0.000

World Health Organization (WHO). Guidelines fo (WHO). Guidelines Organization Health World 2005. (WHO). Organization Health World (IOM). Institute of Medicine Figure 2. Content of Water Samples by Region Water Content of Mineral Figure 2.

Third National Health and Examination Survey Survey (NHANES), and Nutrition Examination Health Third National 1988-1994. Volume 1 Recommendations. WHO Pres 1 Recommendations. Volume Health. and Environment–Water, Press. 2004. Academies National The and Sulfate. mg Cu /100 g /100 Cu mg Conclusions • the in drinking magnesium and calcium of the content On average, meets water •for lowest the were average, on values, magnesium and sodium The Northeast the • in mineral variability most the showed overall water well and West Midwest The • of intake to water drinking of contributions the of studies support data These References 1 2 3 4 Acknowledgement. the analysis with of the samples. The work Y3-HV-8839 Agreement by NIH was supported the National Institute of Dental and Cranio and Blood Institute, NIH. , the water the water , 8 11 3 2.3 420 700 0.90 DRI* 1000 4700 1500 mg/day (male 31-50y) 61 19 76 9.8 Avg 0.20 0.04 0.29 0.10 0.005 mg in in mg 2 liters 4.6 0.2 Max 20.4 10.0 39.1 0.065 0.075 0.4073 0.0099 0.0 0.0 0.1 ND ND ND ND ND ND Min tterson, and Charles Perry Charles and tterson, 2.7 0.8 1.9 0.2 ND 0.01 0.001 0.0017 0.0003 Median samples (mg/100g) samples 3.0 0.9 3.8 0.5 0.01 0.002 0.005 Mean 0.0002 0.0098 *Institute of Medicine (IOM), and Nutrition Board website: http://www.iom.edu/CMS/3788/4574.aspx Ca Cu Fe K Mg Mn Na P Zn (18%) were from and 118 (82%) were from from were and 118 (82%) wells from were (18%) municipal water supplies. would provide >1% of recommended intake for only four four only for intake recommended of >1% provide would 5%; magnesium, 6%; calcium, 10%; , minerals; 1). (Table 3% sodium, and of 33% and Zn, of 10% Mg, of 23% Ca, of 20% about supply however, would, Cu for value highest The Na. 400%. 2. Figure in shown are water only was value the pickup, second the For site. one the the been have may value high The first. the of 12% before pipes copper the of flushing insufficient of result the sample. taking v 0.44 2.73 median v. 2.0; 3.2 (mean softeners water (p<0.05). Ca and Mg for pickups between and mg/100g), a as observed were differences no (p<0.05); regions treatment. or source water time, collection of result no significant differences in overall mean mineral content water. well and municipal between Table 1. Mineral content of water water of content Mineral Table 1. Observations and ResultsObservations • 26 obtained, were samples water where sites 144 the Of •liters 2 to be water of intake a daily Assuming • only supply would concentration the maximum Even • of and type region Na Cu, and by Ca, Mg, for results The • at pickup on the first found only Cu was high very The • chemical with observed in Ca were decreases Significant • among different significantly was Na of variance The • were there results, model mixed weighted the on Based Pamela Pehrsson, Kristine Pa Pehrsson, Kristine Pamela outlets) selected in selected outlets) retail 058); K (0.029). Our quantitation g/ml concentration): Ca concentration): g/ml solution μ The Mineral Content of US Drinking and Municipal Water each sampled county (Figure 1) county each sampled Fe (0.020); Mg(0.0015); (0.0126); Cu(0.008); Mn (0.007); P (0.130); Zn (0.007); Na (0. times the DL. as 5 defined is limit zones, 1 county per zone selected, probability minimum minimum probability selected, per zone 1 county zones, (residential, 2 locations replacement, and incentives survey process, spectrometry). atomic emission sequential. were K, which Na and except mode simultaneous run directly and then nitric concentrated Figure 1. Counties sampled Figure 1. Step 2. Obtain study approval approval study Step 2. Obtain Analysis Step 6. Data Methods and Materials design sampling Step 1. Develop • 72 equal into and divided county by ordered population US • OMB by and approval announcement Register Federal participants Step 3. Recruit •clusters) (neighborhood recruitment call Phone • collection water in refusals to replace used list Substitution • Followup dates collection confirming letters • packs – emergency vehicle USDA incentive collection first (2 pickups) samples water Step 4. Obtain •surveys issued up samples, picked agents Contracted • sampling run for 3 minutes before Water was • – pickup water tap residential First 2003 February-March, • – pickup residential Second 2003 April-June, •water well and municipal included water Tap samples Analyze Step 5. • Leeman plasma coupled (inductively ICP-AES 3000 PS • in the run K: all Cu, Fe, Mg, Mn, Ca, P, Zn, Na and • mL 0.25 with acidified were samples analysis, to ICP Prior • (in (DL) limits Detection USDA, Agricultural Research Service, Research Center, Nutrient Data Laboratory, Beltsville, MD Laboratory, Data Nutrient Center, USDA, Agricultural Service, Human Nutrition Research Research , , and were were zinc and , phosphorus, ciated with at least 20-30 mg/l at least with ciated of the U.S. Daily Value (DV): Value of the U.S. Daily .05). The variance of sodium of sodium .05). The variance study of the mineral content of of the mineral study ative sampling of . water. of drinking sampling ative magnesium to the diet but the to the diet magnesium method was used. Participants used. method was intake trends and epidemiologic epidemiologic and intake trends mixed model results, there were results, mixed model ng with potential health health potential with nutrients ng regions (p<0.05); no differences regions dness, underline the importance of the underline dness, provide national data on important on data national provide buted by water and diet are: 1) and diet water by buted inking and food preparation and the and preparation and food inking e new current data for the USDA e new fteners and treatments. Samples fteners and water may contribute significant significant contribute may water VD), other chronic diseases, and diseases, other chronic VD), e results, the first nationally the first nationally e results, edian 2.73 v. 0.44 mg/100g), and 0.44 mg/100g), 2.73 v. edian agnesium, 5%; and sodium, 3%. 5%; and sodium, agnesium, was significantly different among significantly was source or time, water of collection result as a observed were treatment. the weighted Based on The sampling method involved: serpentine ordering of the US US of the ordering serpentine method involved: The sampling of division county; state and division, census region, by population of selection and random zones; size 72 equal into the population one (144 locations). county per residences two per zone and county Chromy’s ), (population probability-proportional-to-size of replacement minimum probability 6%; m 10%; calcium, copper, water chemical with observed were in calcium decreases Significant (mean 3.2 v. 2.0; m softeners Mg and Ca (p<0 for pickups between between content mineral overall in differences no significant Thes water. well and municipal water, drinking for municipal values of mineral dataset representative mineral of dietary information for assessment valuable provide will from water. including intake, Abstract of tap composition The mineral Nutrient intake. The USDA’s to dietary amounts of some minerals a (NDL) conducted Data Laboratory to generat tap water, residential calcium, potassium, Sodium, Database. Nutrient National , copper, magnesium, represent a nationally in determined and in time (winter points at two bottles HDPE in samples collected source (municipal, on water information provided and n=288) , so use of water and pipes well), emission atomic plasma coupled inductively by analyzed were model a mixed using analyzed data were spectrometry; resulting only daily, are consumed liters of tap water two Assuming approach. more than 1% provided four minerals Growing global research interests in the association between between in the association interests research global Growing balance with water har water with balance electrolyte The supplies. water US in current data on minerals expanded, contri of minerals benefits known electrolyte 2) sodium: health; CV and and magnesium: calcium and iron utilization, properties, and 3) copper: balance; and Europe, US, in the research Epidemiological health1. CV suggests health benefits may be asso cardiovascular (CV) disease (C (CV) disease cardiovascular calcium and 10 mg/l magnesium in drinking water1. water Hard water1. drinking mg/l in and 10 magnesium calcium and sometimes calcium contributes outcomes1. number of health a hardness and water between studies to was study of this The purpose Nutrient National USDA in the supply water US in the minerals Database for Standard Reference: www.ars.usda.gov/nutrientdata. concentrations and relative amounts vary widely according to levels to levels according widely amounts vary relative and concentrations dr through consumption of water occurri Naturally of water. sources treatment; water be removed some may with may be added benefits (e.g., bymembraneor removed deliberately or softening)2. filtration utilities (WHO) recommends water Organization Health World The and trace magnesium, for calcium, water their analyze regularly of assessment to support elements Background