Pixel-Shot // Shutterstock
Many people pay close attention to what they eat, how they sleep and how often they exercise as part of a more intentional approach to wellness. The quality of the water they drink, however, often escapes the same consideration. In a recent survey of 2,000 U.S. adults conducted by Talker Research on behalf of Culligan, 76% said they were more intentional about their health than ever, yet 35% had not thought about their tap water quality during the previous year.
That gap may be partly rooted in an oversimplified assumption: If tap water meets current regulations, there is nothing else to consider in terms of its safety. Yet while regulations provide important public health protections, they do not cover every substance or concern, including some contaminants that are still being studied or are not federally regulated.
For consumers trying to make sense of this sometimes-confusing landscape, it helps to know what regulations cover—and where their scope ends.
What water regulations cover
The survey found that 20% of respondents believed water that meets government regulations contains no contaminants. However, not every substance that can impact drinking water has an enforceable standard.
In the U.S., the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates more than 90 contaminants in public water systems, while its Contaminant Candidate List identifies unregulated substances that may warrant further research and possible regulation. However, inclusion on the list does not create a standard, nor does it establish that every detected level poses a risk.
When creating standards, the EPA first establishes a nonenforceable public health goal. It then sets an enforceable standard as close to that goal as feasible, taking into account factors such as treatment technology, measurement capabilities and cost.
Implementing new requirements also takes time and funding. Under the EPA’s lead rule, for example, most systems have 10 years to replace lead service lines. Overall, the agency estimates that U.S. systems need $625 billion over 20 years for drinking-water infrastructure maintenance and upgrades.
Canada follows a different model. Health Canada develops national guidelines with the provinces and territories, but each jurisdiction decides how to establish its own requirements. Municipalities usually manage treatment and distribution, so no single federal code applies identically nationwide.
Why appearance, taste and smell are not enough
One likely contributor to misconceptions about water quality is that people tend to trust their senses. In the survey, half of respondents said they believed water that tasted fine was safe to drink. However, many contaminants that may be present in water, including lead, PFAS and others, can’t be seen, tasted or smelled. Targeted laboratory testing is often the only way to identify them.
Still, other survey responses showed that consumers do recognize water quality as a potential unseen concern. When asked to rank their top “invisible risks” (concerns not easily judged through the senses), respondents ranked contaminants in water first at 45%, followed by air pollution at 43% and food additives at 42%.
Three common tap water myths
Common misunderstandings extend beyond regulations and the limits of our senses. The survey also surfaced three common myths that can shape how people respond to water-quality concerns.
Myth 1: Boiling water removes every contaminant.
Boiling is useful when a water utility or public-health authority issues a boil-water advisory because it can inactivate disease-causing microorganisms. However, the limitations of boiling are less widely understood. While 36% of survey respondents believed boiling removes all contaminants, that isn’t the case. Boiling does not make water safe when chemical or radiological contamination is suspected and may concentrate certain substances as water evaporates.
Myth 2: Single-use bottled water follows stricter rules.
Perhaps because a sealed bottle feels more controlled, 30% of those surveyed believed bottled water was more strictly regulated than tap water. In the U.S., the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates bottled water, while the EPA regulates public systems. When the EPA sets a standard, the FDA adopts a corresponding bottled-water standard or determines that one is unnecessary. Some limits differ, so single-use bottled water is not uniformly subject to stricter rules. In fact, it’s common for single-use bottled water to be sourced from tap water.
Recent findings also show why bottled water is not necessarily a better choice from a water-quality standpoint. For example, FDA testing detected PFAS in 10 of 197 bottled-water samples from 2023 and 2024 (although none exceeded comparable EPA limits); a 2024 study detected microplastics and nanoplastics in samples from three brands. (Note that these findings apply only to the samples tested and do not represent every bottled-water product.)
Myth 3: Every filtration method works the same way.
Water filtration was another source of confusion: 57% of respondents believed all water filters provide the same level of filtration. In reality, filtration methods and their capabilities vary significantly.
Understanding water filter certification can help dispel this myth. Certification does not mean a system reduces every possible contaminant. Consumers concerned about specific contaminants should check whether the filtration system they’re considering is specifically certified (proven) to reduce them.
Start with testing
Testing is the most direct way to understand water quality at a particular home, yet 51% of survey respondents have not tested theirs in the previous year. For U.S. households served by a community water system, annual Consumer Confidence Reports are required to provide information about local drinking water quality. These provide useful background, including the water source, regulated contaminants detected and compliance information. Canadian households can request local information from their utility or municipality.
Because these reports describe the public water supply, they may not fully reflect conditions at an individual tap. Lead or copper, for example, can leach into water from service lines, household plumbing or fixtures.
The right type of testing depends on the water source, local conditions, household plumbing and the concerns being investigated. Free or low-cost screenings can cover basic characteristics such as hardness, chlorine and pH. Potential health-related contaminants, such as lead, arsenic, nitrate or PFAS, generally require analysis by an appropriately certified or accredited laboratory.
Once testing clarifies the concern, treatment can be matched to it. Advanced reverse osmosis drinking water filtration systems, for example, can often address a comprehensive range of drinking-water concerns, while whole-house filtration systems typically are designed to address more specific issues throughout the home. In either case, consumers should look for system certification specific to their concerns.
Like reading a food label or tracking sleep, paying attention to water quality starts by seeking reliable information. That means understanding what’s coming from your tap and taking the right steps to help you feel confident about its quality.
Survey methodology
Talker Research surveyed 2,000 general population Americans who have access to the internet; the survey was commissioned by Culligan International and administered and conducted online by Talker Research between May 13 and May 18, 2026.
This story was produced by Culligan and reviewed and distributed by Stacker.
