������Ƶ

Water is an essential part of life. From tap water to bottled water, it’s something everyone needs to survive. So, wondering what’s in the water we drink is an obvious thing to think about, especially when it comes to tap water.

A group of ������Ƶ pharmacy students is diving in to answer that question when it comes to our local water supplies.

With the help of Assistant Professor Katie Edwards, fourth-year pharmacy students Rachel Barrett, Sarah Benedict, Erin Wong and Haris Music are exploring the quality of local municipal water and the effectiveness of common household filtration systems for their capstone research project.

Edwards said the original intent of the project was to measure drug residues in municipal drinking water using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS), but when technical difficulties arose, the students pivoted.

“Instead, they began examining water quality differences across municipalities, common household filters and how those influenced antioxidant capacity in tea,” Edwards said. “What struck me most was the clear difference between municipalities and filters in retaining antioxidants.”

The group collected tap water samples from Binghamton, Johnson City, Vestal and Endicott, finding notable differences in water quality among neighboring municipalities. Binghamton ranked the highest in quality, while Johnson City ranked the lowest in quality.

Music said it’s difficult to make conclusive claims about health impacts when it comes to water quality, since so many lifestyle factors are involved.

“Studies are inconclusive about the long-term health effects of trace pharmaceuticals in drinking water,” Music said. “Still, we did note things like sodium content could pose concerns for people with existing conditions. It’s definitely an area that calls for more research.”

Barrett noted they also looked into disinfection methods like chlorination, which the federal Environmental Protection Agency suggests for households if needed.

“It was interesting to see how that changed water samples, but ultimately, I don’t think people should panic,” she said. “It’s more about giving the community information they can use for awareness and future choices.”

The group also tested three popular filters: Culligan, Brita and Pure. They put local tap water through each of the filters and brewed tea with the filtered water to test how effective each filter was at removing particles from tap water while preserving tea’s antioxidants.

Their research showed that Culligan was the best out of the three.

“The most interesting part for me was comparing the water filters,” Barrett said. “It was striking to see how much more effective Culligan was at removing particles. You could even see a difference when we brewed tea, as the Culligan tea was noticeably lighter in color compared to the Brita and Pure samples. That was eye-opening, seeing such a clear, visible result.”

Benedict was also surprised by how drastically Culligan outperformed the other two, despite them costing about the same. She added that this project shifted her perspective when it comes to local tap water and filters.

“As a consumer, you might expect Brita to be the best because of how heavily it’s advertised, but that wasn’t the case at all,” she said. “Looking at municipal differences, Binghamton’s water ranked the best, while Johnson City’s was significantly worse. That was eye-opening. It showed just how much quality can vary even in neighboring towns.”

Overall, the group agreed that this project taught them valuable lessons that they can carry with them into future research.

“This experience showed me that research isn’t just a straight line,” Music said. It’s about designing trials, hitting roadblocks and pivoting to new directions while still finding meaningful results. That’s something I’ll take with me into my future career in industry.”

Edward shared that the students were able to see the trial-and-error side of research, and she couldn’t be happier with how the students adapted to the situation.

“I’m incredibly proud of the students,” she said. “They had no prior lab experience, yet they learned quickly, adapted when plans didn’t work and even helped establish new assays that my lab can now continue to use.”