Water from improved sources is not consistently safe

May 6, 2014

Although water from improved sources (such as piped water and bore holes) is less likely to contain fecal contamination than water from unimproved sources, improved sources in low- and middle-income countries are not consistently safe, according to a study by US and UK researchers, published in this week's PLOS Medicine.

These findings are important as WHO and UNICEF track progress towards the Millennium Development Goals water target using the indicator "use of an improved source": this study shows that assuming that "improved" are safe greatly overestimates the number of people thought to have access to water from a safe source, suggesting that a large proportion of the world's population still use unsafe water.

The authors, led by Robert Bain and Jamie Bartram from The Water Institute at University of North Carolina, reached these conclusions by comprehensively searching the literature to find appropriate studies that investigated of all types of drinking water in low- and middle-income countries. The authors then investigated the risk factors and settings where fecal contamination of water sources was most common.

319 studies reporting on 96,737 water samples were included in the analysis and the authors found that overall, although the odds (chance) of fecal contamination were considerably lower for "improved" sources than "unimproved" sources, in 38% of 191 studies, over a quarter of samples from improved sources contained fecal contamination. Protected dug wells in particular were rarely free of fecal contamination. Water sources in low-income countries and rural areas were more likely to be contaminated (each with an odds ratio of 2.37).

As included studies rarely reported stored water quality or sanitary risks, these findings may understate the number of people drinking unsafe water and have profound implications for public health policy.

The authors propose alternative indicators of safe water such as sanitary measures and water quality and say: "Our review provides strong evidence that by equating "improved" with "safe," the number of people with access to a safe water source has been greatly overstated, and suggests that a large number and proportion of the world's population use unsafe ."

Explore further: Access to improved water and sanitation varies widely within sub-Saharan Africa

More information: Bain R, Cronk R, Wright J, Yang H, Slaymaker T, et al. (2014) Fecal Contamination of Drinking-Water in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. PLoS Med 11(5): e1001644. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001644

Related Stories

Recommended for you

Can nicotine protect the aging brain?

September 20, 2016

Everyone knows that tobacco products are bad for your health, and even the new e-cigarettes may have harmful toxins. However, according to research at Texas A&M, it turns out the nicotine itself—when given independently ...

Science can shape healthy city planning

September 23, 2016

Previous studies have shown a correlation between the design of cities and growing epidemics of injuries and non-communicable diseases such as heart disease, diabetes and cancer. A three-part series published in The Lancet ...

50-country comparison of child and youth fitness levels

September 21, 2016

An international research team co-led from the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario (CHEO) and the University of North Dakota studied the aerobic fitness levels of children and youth across 50 countries. The results are ...

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.