Connect with us

Science

How to best filter your L.A. tap water based on your ZIP Code

Published

on

How to best filter your L.A. tap water based on your ZIP Code

Nearly a year ago, I scribbled “Replace Brita filter” on my to-do list. But the errand perpetually fell by the wayside. There were so many more pressing tasks to complete.

“Oh, it’s fine,” I thought. “How bad can it be?”

Let’s just say that a day into reporting this story, I ran out to the market and bought a three-pack.

We reach for our water taps more than almost any other object in our homes — to brush our teeth, wash our faces, make coffee or tea in the morning. To cook meals, rinse dishes and wipe countertops. To water the plants, do laundry and fill our pets’ bowls. To shower and shave. And most often for a drink.

Advertisement
The Big Wet Guide to Water

In L.A., water rules everything around us. Drink up, cool off and dive into our stories about hydrating and recreating in the city.

But how much do you really know about what’s in your tap water? And if you filter it, are you using the right technology? Many of us may not be fully aware of where our water even comes from.

That’s because the water that flows into our homes in the L.A. area can be surprisingly different, ZIP Code to ZIP Code. The level of arsenic found in Compton’s tap water may differ wildly from that found in Glendale. Malibu’s tap water may have more hexavalent chromium while Pasadena’s doesn’t have any. One tap does not fit all.

“Where you are, the location, it really makes a difference in your water quality,” said Tasha Stoiber, a senior scientist at the Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit research and advocacy group focusing on environmental health.

Advertisement

We went to the source, so to speak — experts in the realms of science, academia and water filtration — to help you navigate the often complicated, ever-fluid world of residential tap water, so that you can make smarter and more informed choices about how to purify your H20.

L.A.’s water sources | Federal and state protections | Determining your water quality | How to test | How to filter | The bare minimum

L.A.’s water sources

Like most major cities, the Greater Los Angeles area is served by a dizzying number of community water systems. In California, there are 2,913 of them to serve about 39.025 million people — and those are just the larger ones that operate year-round, according to the EWG’s Tap Water Database.

Each utility company treats the water in its assigned municipality differently before it flows through consumers’ faucets. That’s because each draws from different water sources. One area’s tap may be coming from rivers and lakes (otherwise categorized as “surface water”) while another’s could be pumped from wells from beneath layers of rock and sediment (categorized as “groundwater”).

Depending on where the water travels, it may pick up different undesirable contaminants. Surface water, for example, could have runoff that includes nitrate used to fertilize land in agricultural areas. Groundwater could have naturally occurring chemical elements, such as arsenic, that come from bedrock.

Advertisement

More often than not, L.A. area tap water comes from a mix of these sources. Our utility companies draw from different aqueducts, those large, often concrete ditches or canals that extend from the source to the water treatment plant. From there it flows through pipes, underground, to your home.

In 2023, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power — which serves about 4 million people throughout the city of Los Angeles — sourced its tap water from the Los Angeles Aqueduct, the California Aqueduct and the Colorado River Aqueduct as well as from local groundwater, according to its most recent drinking water quality report.

The specific geographic location of a water source also determines what ends up in your tap water. A lake near a highly industrial area risks containing more pollutants than water coming from a lake in the High Sierras.

Another reason the water might be different between ZIP Codes: Utility companies have different resources at their disposal.

“The size of the drinking water system can be an indicator of the drinking water quality,” Stoiber said. “It’s based on economy of scale. The larger ones have more resources for treatment. Smaller systems can be at a bit more of an economic disadvantage.”

Advertisement

Federal and state water protections

There are federal regulations that require utility companies to stay below maximum contaminant levels for more than 90 pollutants in drinking water. They’re also required to publish an annual consumer confidence report with information about contaminant levels and water sources.

“But many of our drinking water regulations were set in the ’70s and ’80 and are not as protective as they should be,” Stoiber said. “There are contaminants in your drinking water that don’t have regulations around them.”

How harmful these contaminants are, and how much you’d have to ingest over time to affect your health, is contested. But in general, however many pollutants you might find in L.A.’s tap water, there are not enough to make you seriously ill in one gulp.

Some good news: In April, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency finalized new regulations around a family of about 15,000 chemicals known as PFAS. They’re often referred to as the “forever chemicals” because they don’t break down in the environment. California also voted in April to finalize a limit for hexavalent chromium, or “Chrome 6,” which many people know as the carcinogenic chemical that the Pacific Gas and Electric Co. contaminated residents’ groundwater with, from 1952 to 1966, in Hinkley, Calif. — the legal upshot of which was depicted in the film “Erin Brockovich.” But those changes won’t be immediate.

“Upgrading water treatment plants is expensive and takes years,” said USC’s Daniel McCurry, who researches water supply and treatment. “Most smaller utilities, especially, just won’t have the money to make the upgrades in the initial time frame.”

Advertisement

2027, McCurry notes, is the deadline for utilities to complete their “initial monitoring” before the new regulations for PFAS go into effect in 2029.

Photo illustration of a hose faucet on a blue background pouring water on the right, with dirt, grass and rocks on the left.

(Henry Hargreaves / For The Times)

How to determine your water quality

So where to start? It’s easier than it might seem. First, search for your consumer confidence report on your utility company’s website. You can then cross-reference that information with EWG’s free Tap Water Database, which allows you to type in your ZIP Code (look for the prompt “Is your water safe?”). It then will populate your water utility company and the number of people it serves. From there, you can click on “View Utility” to produce an easy-to-decipher report listing the source of your water and contaminants detected in it.

When I typed my own Silver Lake ZIP Code in for a water quality analysis, the results did not put me at ease. It listed nine contaminants detected in my water, among them bromate and uranium. Some of these were found at levels that far exceeded the standards of the EWG but were still below the legal limit.

I called the LADWP to make sense of what I’ve found.

Advertisement

“There’s no health concern,” LADWP’s director of water quality, Jonathan Leung, said of my findings, stressing that the contaminants were far below the federally mandated legal limit. “That’s where, collectively, all the toxicologists and water quality specialists and scientists have worked together to set national standards. As a water quality utility, that’s what we set our sights on. The public should take confidence that the legal limits are protective of public health — and we strive to do better than that.”

McCurry added that the EWG and EPA have different standards for the amount of contaminants found in water.

“When the EPA sets a water contaminant limit, it’s a balance between protecting public health while staying realistic about the treatment technology we have and how much it costs,” McCurry said. “Everyone’s perception or tolerance of risk is different, but for me, personally, I drink water straight from the tap and don’t worry about it. It’s very unlikely you’ll get sick from tap water, assuming the tap water meets federal regulations.”

How to test your water at home

Whatever your personal tolerance level, you can improve both the quality and taste of your tap water by choosing the right filter, experts say.

But, given the array of filtration products and techniques on the market, that’s easier said than done. Choosing from options like “ion-exchange demineralization,” “ultraviolet sterilization” and “chemical feed pumps” can be intimidating.

Advertisement

Take a breath. Then step back. Filtering should be a tailored approach, said Brian Campbell, founder of Water Filter Guru, which lab-tests and reports on residential water treatment methods and products.

“There’s no such thing as a one-size-fits-all water treatment solution,” Campbell said.

He added that even after reading utility consumer reports and nonprofit chemical analyses, you still may need to know more.

“[Those reports] will give you a general sense but not the whole picture, Campbell said. “Because water can be recontaminated after it leaves the treatment plant — like if your home has old plumbing with lead piping. But it’s a start.”

You can test your home’s water quality yourself using fairly affordable water test strips, available for about $15 in stores such as Home Depot. These, Campbell said, will “give you an indication of a handful of the most common 12 to 15 contaminants like lead, arsenic, chromium, nitrate possibly.” However it will only give you a range of those aforementioned contaminants, not the exact concentration in your water.

Advertisement

If you want specific information about the chemical levels, you can run a more in-depth test. The best way to do that, Campbell said, is through a certified lab, where the cost ranges from roughly $100 to more than $1,000 depending on how comprehensive you want to get.

How to choose a filter

Once you know what’s in your water, you’ll be able to choose the right filter technology to treat it, Campbell said. Here’s what he suggests using for some of the most common issues.

PFAS. This is the family of about 15,000 chemicals used for their water repellent and oil repellent properties, such as in nonstick pans or fast food packaging. “The most studied filtration method for this is activated carbon adsorption,” Campbell said. “It’s the most common technology used in pitcher filtration. Even the most simple water pitcher filters should theoretically reduce PFAS.” Reverse osmosis filtration systems also will address PFAS — it’s one of the most thorough techniques and includes activated carbon as one of its stages. Historically, these pricy systems were installed directly into sink pipes, but countertop versions now are available for renters.

Microplastics. “They get into the environment and break down into smaller and smaller pieces — so small you’d need a microscope to see them,” Campbell said. The best technique to address those — because they are suspended particles, floating in the water and not dissolved — is mechanical filtration, he said. The technology removes suspended particles, like pipe rust or sand and grit coming from a hot water heater. Reverse osmosis also would work. Distillation would be effective as well and is, per Campbell, one of the best to get rid of nearly all common contaminants. But, Campbell warned, “It requires a massive amount of energy and time to treat and distill a relatively small volume of water — so not the most practical.”

Disinfection byproducts. This is a group of chemicals created when common water disinfectants — typically chlorine — interact with organic matter (such as dirt or rust) that’s already present in the pipes that run from the distribution plant to your home or office, Campbell said. “Activated carbon adsorption is the best way to deal with this. Reverse osmosis will also deal with them because a component of that [technique] is activated carbon.”

Advertisement

Pesticides, herbicides and fertilizer. “This is more of an issue in agricultural areas,” Campbell said. Typically, he added, they can be treated using activated carbon and reverse osmosis.

Fluoride. Tap water is fluoridated in many areas because of its dental health benefits. But recent research suggests that prenatal exposure to fluoride may be linked to increased risk of neurobehavioral problems in children at age 3. “Reverse osmosis would be the best treatment for this, but there are a few adsorption media that can reduce fluoride, like a filter using bone char carbon (activated carbon that comes from animal bones) or a filter using activated alumina media, another adsorption media,” said Campbell.

Heavy metals. Lead is obviously the most infamous heavy metal water contaminant, but consumers also should watch out for arsenic (primarily from groundwater) and chromium 6 (which comes from industrial manufacturing). “Typically, for metals, reverse osmosis is the best option,” said Campbell. “Activated carbon works for chromium 6 but not for arsenic. Distillation, again, gets rid of everything but it’s not practical.”

Hard water. Hard water is caused by mineral buildup, which isn’t bad for your health but can create limescale on appliances like your water heater. It also can affect your beauty routine. “Soap doesn’t lather as well with hard water,” said Campbell. “Your hair might feel brittle and it can irritate skin issues like eczema.” He recommends treating the issue at the water point of entry to the home with cation exchange resin, a type of ion exchange.

The best way to know if a product is actually capable of doing what it claims to do, Campbell said, is to look up its performance certifications. “You can do that in databases through the Water Quality Assn., the National Sanitation Foundation and the International Assn. of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials.”

Advertisement

The bare minimum

If nothing else, Stoiber urged consumers to peruse the EWG’s guide to countertop filters — and to purchase one.

Though McCurry is content drinking from the tap, he agreed it couldn’t hurt. “If you have reason to believe there are, say, PFAS above the future regulation target, then yeah, get a Brita filter,” he said.

Needless to say, that task is no longer on my to-do list.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Science

California’s summer COVID wave shows signs of waning. What are the numbers in your community?

Published

on

California’s summer COVID wave shows signs of waning. What are the numbers in your community?

There are some encouraging signs that California’s summer COVID wave might be leveling off.

That’s not to say the seasonal spike is in the rearview mirror just yet, however. Coronavirus levels in California’s wastewater remain “very high,” according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, as they are in much of the country.

But while some COVID indicators are rising in the Golden State, others are starting to fall — a hint that the summer wave may soon start to decline.

Statewide, the rate at which coronavirus lab tests are coming back positive was 11.72% for the week that ended Sept. 6, the highest so far this season, and up from 10.8% the prior week. Still, viral levels in wastewater are significantly lower than during last summer’s peak.

The latest COVID hospital admission rate was 3.9 hospitalizations for every 100,000 residents. That’s a slight decline from 4.14 the prior week. Overall, COVID hospitalizations remain low statewide, particularly compared with earlier surges.

Advertisement

The number of newly admitted COVID hospital patients has declined slightly in Los Angeles County and Santa Clara County, but ticked up slightly up in Orange County. In San Francisco, some doctors believe the summer COVID wave is cresting.

“There are a few more people in the hospitals, but I think it’s less than last summer,” said Dr. Peter Chin-Hong, a UC San Francisco infectious diseases expert. “I feel like we are at a plateau.”

Those who are being hospitalized tend to be older people who didn’t get immunized against COVID within the last year, Chin-Hong said, and some have a secondary infection known as superimposed bacterial pneumonia.

Los Angeles County

In L.A. County, there are hints that COVID activity is either peaking or starting to decline. Viral levels in local wastewater are still rising, but the test positivity rate is declining.

For the week that ended Sept. 6, 12.2% of wastewater samples tested for COVID in the county were positive, down from 15.9% the prior week.

Advertisement

“Many indicators of COVID-19 activity in L.A. County declined in this week’s data,” the L.A. County Department of Public Health told The Times on Friday. “While it’s too early to know if we have passed the summer peak of COVID-19 activity this season, this suggests community transmission is slowing.”

Orange County

In Orange County, “we appear to be in the middle of a wave right now,” said Dr. Christopher Zimmerman, deputy medical director of the county’s Communicable Disease Control Division.

The test positivity rate has plateaued in recent weeks — it was 15.3% for the week that ended Sept. 6, up from 12.9% the prior week, but down from 17.9% the week before that.

COVID is still prompting people to seek urgent medical care, however. Countywide, 2.9% of emergency room visits were for COVID-like illness for the week that ended Sept. 6, the highest level this year, and up from 2.6% for the week that ended Aug. 30.

San Diego County

For the week that ended Sept. 6, 14.1% of coronavirus lab tests in San Diego County were positive for infection. That’s down from 15.5% the prior week, and 16.1% for the week that ended Aug. 23.

Advertisement

Ventura County

COVID is also still sending people to the emergency room in Ventura County. Countywide, 1.73% of ER patients for the week that ended Sept. 12 were there to seek treatment for COVID, up from 1.46% the prior week.

San Francisco

In San Francisco, the test positivity rate was 7.5% for the week that ended Sept. 7, down from 8.4% for the week that ended Aug. 31.

“COVID-19 activity in San Francisco remains elevated, but not as high as the previous summer’s peaks,” the local Department of Public Health said.

Silicon Valley

In Santa Clara County, the coronavirus remains at a “high” level in the sewershed of San José and Palo Alto.

Roughly 1.3% of ER visits for the week that ended Sunday were attributed to COVID in Santa Clara County, down from the prior week’s figure of 2%.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Science

Early adopters of ‘zone zero’ fared better in L.A. County fires, insurance-backed investigation finds

Published

on

Early adopters of ‘zone zero’ fared better in L.A. County fires, insurance-backed investigation finds

As the Eaton and Palisades fires rapidly jumped between tightly packed houses, the proactive steps some residents took to retrofit their homes with fire-resistant building materials and to clear flammable brush became a significant indicator of a home’s fate.

Early adopters who cleared vegetation and flammable materials within the first five feet of their houses’ walls — in line with draft rules for the state’s hotly debated “zone zero” regulations — fared better than those who didn’t, an on-the-ground investigation from the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety published Wednesday found.

Over a week in January, while the fires were still burning, the insurance team inspected more than 250 damaged, destroyed and unscathed homes in Altadena and Pacific Palisades.

On properties where the majority of zone zero land was covered in vegetation and flammable materials, the fires destroyed 27% of homes; On properties with less than a quarter of zone zero covered, only 9% were destroyed.

Advertisement

The Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety, an independent research nonprofit funded by the insurance industry, performed similar investigations for Colorado’s 2012 Waldo Canyon fire, Hawaii’s 2023 Lahaina fire and California’s Tubbs, Camp and Woolsey fires of 2017 and 2018.

While a handful of recent studies have found homes with sparse vegetation in zone zero were more likely to survive fires, skeptics say it does not yet amount to a scientific consensus.

Travis Longcore, senior associate director and an adjunct professor at the UCLA Institute of the Environment and Sustainability, cautioned that the insurance nonprofit’s results are only exploratory: The team did not analyze whether other factors, such as the age of the homes, were influencing their zone zero analysis, and how the nonprofit characterizes zone zero for its report, he noted, does not exactly mirror California’s draft regulations.

Meanwhile, Michael Gollner, an associate professor of mechanical engineering at UC Berkeley who studies how wildfires destroy and damage homes, noted that the nonprofit’s sample does not perfectly represent the entire burn areas, since the group focused specifically on damaged properties and were constrained by the active firefight.

Nonetheless, the nonprofit’s findings help tie together growing evidence of zone zero’s effectiveness from tests in the lab — aimed at identifying the pathways fire can use to enter a home — with the real-world analyses of which measures protected homes in wildfires, Gollner said.

Advertisement

A recent study from Gollner looking at more than 47,000 structures in five major California fires (which did not include the Eaton and Palisades fires) found that of the properties that removed vegetation from zone zero, 37% survived, compared with 20% that did not.

Once a fire spills from the wildlands into an urban area, homes become the primary fuel. When a home catches fire, it increases the chance nearby homes burn, too. That is especially true when homes are tightly packed.

When looking at California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection data for the entirety of the two fires, the insurance team found that “hardened” homes in Altadena and the Palisades that had noncombustable roofs, fire-resistant siding, double-pane windows and closed eaves survived undamaged at least 66% of the time, if they were at least 20 feet away from other structures.

But when the distance was less than 10 feet, only 45% of the hardened homes escaped with no damage.

“The spacing between structures, it’s the most definitive way to differentiate what survives and what doesn’t,” said Roy Wright, president and chief executive of the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety. At the same time, said Wright, “it’s not feasible to change that.”

Advertisement

Looking at steps that residents are more likely to be able to take, the insurance nonprofit found that the best approach is for homeowners to apply however many home hardening and defensible space measures that they can. Each one can shave a few percentage points off the risk of a home burning, and combined, the effect can be significant.

As for zone zero, the insurance team found a number of examples of how vegetation and flammable materials near a home could aid the destruction of a property.

At one home, embers appeared to have ignited some hedges a few feet away from the structure. That heat was enough to shatter a single pane window, creating the perfect opportunity for embers to enter and burn the house from the inside out. It miraculously survived.

At others, embers from the blazes landed on trash and recycling bins close to the houses, sometimes burning holes through the plastic lids and igniting the material inside. In one instance, the fire in the bin spread to a nearby garage door, but the house was spared.

Wooden decks and fences were also common accomplices that helped embers ignite a structure.

Advertisement

California’s current zone zero draft regulations take some of those risks into account. They prohibit wooden fences within the first five feet of a home; the state’s zone zero committee is also considering whether to prohibit virtually all vegetation in the zone or to just limit it (regardless, well-maintained trees are allowed).

On the other hand, the draft regulations do not prohibit keeping trash bins in the zone, which the committee determined would be difficult to enforce. They also do not mandate homeowners replace wooden decks.

The controversy around the draft regulations center around the proposal to remove virtually all healthy vegetation, including shrubs and grasses, from the zone.

Critics argue that, given the financial burden zone zero would place on homeowners, the state should instead focus on measures with lower costs and a significant proven benefit.

“A focus on vegetation is misguided,” said David Lefkowith, president of the Mandeville Canyon Assn.

Advertisement

At its most recent zone zero meeting, the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection directed staff to further research the draft regulations’ affordability.

“As the Board and subcommittee consider which set of options best balance safety, urgency, and public feasibility, we are also shifting our focus to implementation and looking to state leaders to identify resources for delivering on this first-in-the-nation regulation,” Tony Andersen, executive officer of the board, said in a statement. “The need is urgent, but we also want to invest the time necessary to get this right.”

Home hardening and defensible space are just two of many strategies used to protect lives and property. The insurance team suspects that many of the close calls they studied in the field — homes that almost burned but didn’t — ultimately survived thanks to firefighters who stepped in. Wildfire experts also recommend programs to prevent ignitions in the first place and to manage wildlands to prevent intense spread of a fire that does ignite.

For Wright, the report is a reminder of the importance of community. The fate of any individual home is tied to that of those nearby — it takes a whole neighborhood hardening their homes and maintaining their lawns to reach herd immunity protection against fire’s contagious spread.

“When there is collective action, it changes the outcomes,” Wright said. “Wildfire is insidious. It doesn’t stop at the fence line.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Science

Notorious ‘winter vomiting bug’ rising in California. A new norovirus strain could make it worse

Published

on

Notorious ‘winter vomiting bug’ rising in California. A new norovirus strain could make it worse

The dreaded norovirus — the “vomiting bug” that often causes stomach flu symptoms — is climbing again in California, and doctors warn that a new subvariant could make even more people sick this season.

In L.A. County, concentrations of norovirus are already on the rise in wastewater, indicating increased circulation of the disease, the local Department of Public Health told the Los Angeles Times.

Norovirus levels are increasing across California, and the rise is especially notable in the San Francisco Bay Area and L.A., according to the California Department of Public Health.

And the rate at which norovirus tests are confirming infection is rising nationally and in the Western U.S. For the week that ended Nov. 22, the test positivity rate nationally was 11.69%, up from 8.66% two months earlier. In the West, it was even worse: 14.08%, up from 9.59%, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Norovirus is extraordinarily contagious, and is America’s leading cause of vomiting and diarrhea, according to the CDC. Outbreaks typically happen in the cooler months between November and April.

Advertisement

Clouding the picture is the recent emergence of a new norovirus strain — GII.17. Such a development can result in 50% more norovirus illness than typical, the CDC says.

“If your immune system isn’t used to something that comes around, a lot of people get infected,” said Dr. Peter Chin-Hong, an infectious diseases expert at UC San Francisco.

During the 2024-25 winter season, GII.17 overthrew the previous dominant norovirus strain, GII.4, that had been responsible for more than half of national norovirus outbreaks over the preceding decade. The ancestor of the GII.17 strain probably came from a subvariant that triggered an outbreak in Romania in 2021, according to CDC scientists.

GII.17 vaulted in prominence during last winter’s norovirus surge and was ultimately responsible for about 75% of outbreaks of the disease nationally.

The strain’s emergence coincided with a particularly bad year for norovirus, one that started unusually early in October 2024, peaked earlier than normal the following January and stretched into the summer, according to CDC scientists writing in the journal Emerging Infectious Diseases.

Advertisement

During the three prior seasons, when GII.4 was dominant, norovirus activity had been relatively stable, Chin-Hong said.

Norovirus can cause substantial disruptions — as many parents know all too well. An elementary school in Massachusetts was forced to cancel all classes on Thursday and Friday because of the “high volume of stomach illness cases,” which was suspected to be driven by norovirus.

More than 130 students at Roberts Elementary School in Medford, Mass., were absent Wednesday, and administrators said there probably wouldn’t be a “reasonable number of students and staff” to resume classes Friday. A company was hired to perform a deep clean of the school’s classrooms, doorknobs and kitchen equipment.

Some places in California, however, aren’t seeing major norovirus activity so far this season. Statewide, while norovirus levels in wastewater are increasing, they still remain low, the California Department of Public Health said.

There have been 32 lab-confirmed norovirus outbreaks reported to the California Department of Public Health so far this year. Last year, there were 69.

Advertisement

Officials caution the numbers don’t necessarily reflect how bad norovirus is in a particular year, as many outbreaks are not lab-confirmed, and an outbreak can affect either a small or large number of people.

Between Aug. 1 and Nov. 13, there were 153 norovirus outbreaks publicly reported nationally, according to the CDC. During the same period last year, there were 235.

UCLA hasn’t reported an increase in the number of norovirus tests ordered, nor has it seen a significant increase in test positivity rates. Chin-Hong said he likewise hasn’t seen a big increase at UC San Francisco.

“Things are relatively still stable clinically in California, but I think it’s just some amount of time before it comes here,” Chin-Hong said.

In a typical year, norovirus causes 2.27 million outpatient clinic visits, mostly young children; 465,000 emergency department visits, 109,000 hospitalizations, and 900 deaths, mostly among seniors age 65 and older.

Advertisement

People with severe ongoing vomiting, profound diarrhea and dehydration may need to seek medical attention to get hydration intravenously.

“Children who are dehydrated may cry with few or no tears and be unusually sleepy or fussy,” the CDC says. Sports drinks can help with mild dehydration, but what may be more helpful are oral rehydration fluids that can be bought over the counter.

Children under the age of 5 and adults 85 and older are most likely to need to visit an emergency room or clinic because of norovirus, and should not hesitate to seek care, experts say.

“Everyone’s at risk, but the people who you worry about, the ones that we see in the hospital, are the very young and very old,” Chin-Hong said.

Those at highest risk are babies, because it doesn’t take much to cause potentially serious problems. Newborns are at risk for necrotizing enterocolitis, a life-threatening inflammation of the intestine that virtually only affects new babies, according to the National Library of Medicine.

Advertisement

Whereas healthy people generally clear the virus in one to three days, immune-compromised individuals can continue to have diarrhea for a long time “because their body’s immune system can’t neutralize the virus as effectively,” Chin-Hong said.

The main way people get norovirus is by accidentally drinking water or eating food contaminated with fecal matter, or touching a contaminated surface and then placing their fingers in their mouths.

People usually develop symptoms 12 to 48 hours after they’re exposed to the virus.

Hand sanitizer does not work well against norovirus — meaning that proper handwashing is vital, experts say.

People should lather their hands with soap and scrub for at least 20 seconds, including the back of their hands, between their fingers and under their nails, before rinsing and drying, the CDC says.

Advertisement

One helpful way to keep track of time is to hum the “Happy Birthday” song from beginning to end twice, the CDC says. Chin-Hong says his favorite is the chorus of Kelly Clarkson’s “Since U Been Gone.”

If you’re living with someone with norovirus, “you really have to clean surfaces and stuff if they’re touching it,” Chin-Hong said. Contamination is shockingly easy. Even just breathing out little saliva droplets on food that is later consumed by someone else can spread infection.

Throw out food that might be contaminated with norovirus, the CDC says. Noroviruses are relatively resistant to heat and can survive temperatures as high as 145 degrees.

Norovirus is so contagious that even just 10 viral particles are enough to cause infection. By contrast, it takes ingesting thousands of salmonella particles to get sick from that bacterium.

People are most contagious when they are sick with norovirus — but they can still be infectious even after they feel better, the CDC says.

Advertisement

The CDC advises staying home for 48 hours after infection. Some studies have even shown that “you can still spread norovirus for two weeks or more after you feel better,” according to the CDC.

The CDC also recommends washing laundry in hot water.

Besides schools, other places where norovirus can spread quickly are cruise ships, day-care centers and prisons, Chin-Hong said.

The most recent norovirus outbreak on a cruise ship reported by the CDC is on the ship AIDAdiva, which set sail on Nov. 10 from Germany. Out of 2,007 passengers on board, 4.8% have reported being ill. The outbreak was first reported on Nov. 30 following stops that month at the Isle of Portland, England; Halifax, Canada; Boston; New York City; Charleston, S.C.; and Miami.

According to CruiseMapper, the ship was set to make stops in Puerto Vallarta on Saturday, San Diego on Tuesday, Los Angeles on Wednesday, Santa Barbara on Thursday and San Francisco between Dec. 19-21.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending