Skip to main content

Water, water, but is it safe to drink?

UEA launches €9 million project to improve drinking water safety in Europe

The University of East Anglia (UEA) will launch a €9 million EU-funded research project to improve the safety of European drinking water today.

Around 330,000 cases of water-related disease such as E.coli and the norovirus are reported yearly in Europe according to the World Health Organisation (WHO). Between  2000 and 2007 there were 354 outbreaks of waterborne diseases across 14 countries. Symptoms include diarrhoea, vomiting, stomach pains, nausea, headache, and fever.

The five-year Aquavalens project will develop and apply more rapid methods of detecting viruses, bacteria and parasites in water before they can make people sick.

Scientists, engineers, policy makers and public health practitioners from 39 organizations in 13 countries will come together today to launch the project in Sestri Levante, Italy. 

The research will be led by Prof Paul Hunter from UEA’s Norwich Medical School. Consortium partners include small businesses, industries, universities and research institutes. The project is funded by the European Union’s Framework Programme 7.

Prof Hunter said: “Although most European countries are fortunate to have some of the safest drinking water in the world, outbreaks of disease do still occur each year.

“Millions of Europeans drink water from very small supplies that are currently difficult to properly monitor and which have been shown to pose a risk – particularly to children who suffer the most from episodes of illness, with greater rates of hospitalization and higher mortality rates.

“With the technologies we currently have it can take two or more days to identify infectious risks in drinking water and by then the affected water is likely to have been consumed.

“This project will develop more rapid methods so that problems can be identified earlier. It will prevent people becoming sick by stopping them drinking contaminated water.”

The project will progress through four main phases. The first phase will focus on performing cutting edge science and genome research on the microbes that cause disease though drinking water such as Cryptosporidium, Campylobacter and Norovirus.

The second phase will develop and apply state-of-the-art technologies to detect these agents in water such as gene probes, nano-technologies and bio-sensors.

In the third phase, new technologies will be used to test the safety of European drinking water in large water utilities, small private supplies and in the food industry.

The fourth and final phase will focus on understanding how these technologies can be integrated into existing practices to protect the health and safety of people in Europe from the threats of water contamination including those associated with environmental change.

Throughout the project, close cooperation will be maintained with biotechnology companies, water providers and food producers so that new technologies will meet real needs and find strong markets. Links with national and international government agencies such as the European Commission and the World Health Organisation will ensure that the project’s findings will influence European policy.

For more information, visit www.aquavalens.org

Comments

  1. Hello, I love your blog. I think, nothing in the world is more flexible and yielding than water. Yet when it attacks the firm and the strong, none can withstand it, because they have no way to change it. So the flexible overcome the adamant, the yielding overcome the forceful. Everyone knows this, but no one can do it. thanks a lot!
    --------------------
    water purification

    ReplyDelete
  2. With that said, however, some of the more important things a filter should be capable of is eliminating chlorine, lead, VOCS, and a few others, but these are the most critical. If it's not effective at taking out chlorine, then forget about it. Some people prefer reverse osmosis, as it has proven effective to take out most of the negative substances in water, but it also has shown that it actually eliminates nutrients as well, and it also uses up a tremendous amount of water, and the estimates are that you really only get to use five to fifteen percent of the water you pour, which obviously will not do you any favors for your water bill each month. here

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

Mr Duncan-Smith offers a disingenuous and divisive comparison

Some time ago, actually it was a long time ago when I was in my early teens, someone close to me bought a table. It was an early flat pack variety. It came with a top and four legs. He followed the instructions to the letter screwing the legs into the top. But when he had completed it the table wobbled. One leg he explained was shorter than the other three; so he sawed a bit from each of the other legs. The table wobbled. One leg, he explained, was longer than the other three. So, he sawed a bit off. The table wobbled. He went on cutting the legs, but the table continued to wobble. Cut, cut, cut! By this time he had convinced himself there was no alternative to it.  He ended up with a very low table indeed, supported by four very stumpy legs and a bit of cardboard placed under one of them to stop it wobbling on the uneven floor.  Mr Duncan-Smith argues that we need a 1% cap on benefits to be 'fair to average earners'. Average  earners have seen their incomes rise by less tha

His way or none? Why I can't vote for Jeremy

There is an assumption that all would be well with the Labour Party if people hadn't expressed their genuine concern with what they consider the inadequacies of Jeremy Corbyn's leadership. If only, it is said, the Parliamentary Labour Party and his Shadow Cabinet had supported him, instead of undermining him, all would have been fine. If they had been quiet and towed the line, then the party would not have been in the mess it is in. So, should they have stayed silent, or speak of their concerns? There comes a point when the cost of staying silent outweighs the cost of speaking out. This is a judgment. Many call it a coup by the PLP. They paint a picture of a right-wing PLP out of touch with the membership.  This is the narrative of the Corbyn camp. But Jeremy Corbyn, over the decades he has been in politics, showed the way.  It was Jeremy Corbyn who opposed almost all Labour leaders and rarely held back from speaking out, or voting time and again against the party line. As