Suit claims contamination in eight bottled water brands

[Guest guest]

Isn't it kind of corporations to want to protect the consumer from

information or reports that are " unnecessarily alarming to consumers. "

Shucks, they just might protect us to death unless we find ways to stop

them.

http://www.sacbee.com/news/calreport/calrep_story.cgi?N140.HTML

Suit claims contamination in eight bottled water brands

By BOB EGELKO

Associated Press Writer

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- As an environmental group's national study found some

bottled water not as pure as advertised, a California group sued eight

bottled-water companies Tuesday, claiming contamination from arsenic and

other cancer-causing substances.

The suit by the Environmental Law Foundation did not say that any of the

products was dangerous. But it said they violated California's standards,

the nation's strictest, for chemicals known to cause cancer or birth

defects -- while the companies made huge profits by advertising their water

as " pure " and " natural. "

" This is not a big public health threat but it is, in some cases, a consumer

ripoff, " said attorney Wheaton, the foundation's executive director.

" You're paying more for something that's supposed to be better, and in some

cases it's not. "

The Superior Court suit seeks a ban on misleading advertising, mandatory

warning labels on products that exceed state anti-toxics standards, and a

ban on bottled water that violates state standards for a chlorine byproduct

or a type of bacterial contamination. It also seeks a refund of any profits

made through illegal business practices or false advertising.

Californians drank more than one-third of the 3.4 billion gallons of bottled

water consumed nationwide last year, the suit said.

One of the companies, Crystal Geyser, accused in the suit of exceeding

California standards for arsenic content in two of its products, denied

violating state or federal standards and called the suit " unnecessarily

alarming to consumers. "

The company said its Alpine Spring Water and Sparkling Mineral Water, the

products cited, were bottled under an annually renewed state license " based

on rigorous, independent laboratory testing. "

McKesson Corp., which sells Alhambra Mountain Springwater, also named in the

suit, said all of its products were safe. Spokeswoman -Lowe said

a type of bacteria allegedly found in the product at levels above state

standards was " naturally occurring and not harmful. "

The suit said, however, that the state standard in question indicated the

presence of heterotrophic bacteria, a broad category of bacteria that

includes some dangerous microorganisms.

Telephone calls to the Safeway and Ralphs market chains were not returned.

The suit said some bottled water sold under the stores' brands violated

state standards.

Besides the two Crystal Geyser products, the suit alleged illegal arsenic

levels in one product each sold by Apollinaris, Vittel and Volvic. Excessive

levels of cancer-causing trihalomethanes, produced by a reaction of chlorine

with organic materials, were alleged in three brands sold under the Lucky

store label, one of Ralphs and five of Safeway.

Indications of excessive levels of heterotrophic bacteria were found in

three Safeway brands and in Alhambra Mountain Springwater, the suit said.

California law allows sale of products that exceed the state's arsenic

standard if a warning label is attached, but forbids sale of products that

violate standards for trihalomethanes or heterotrophic bacteria, Wheaton

said.

He also said the presence of trihalomethanes indicates that water came from

a chlorinated public water supply rather than from a spring, as some

companies claimed in their advertising.

The suit's allegations were based on a national study of 103 bottled-water

brands by the Natural Resources Defense Council, released Tuesday. The

council found no health risks, but said one-third exceeded purity standards

set by the industry or states -- including 22 percent that violated

California standards for arsenic and trihalomethanes.

The council said its findings raise questions about the industry's marketing

claims, and called for tighter U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulation.

Copyright © The Sacramento Bee