Physico-chemical and bacteriological quality assessment of some selected sachet water brands produced in Gwale local government Area, Kano Nigeria

The proliferation of sachet water products has been fuelled by the rising demand for clean, safe drinking water in areas where access to potable water sources remains a challenge. Unfortunately, some of the sachet water producers fail to adhere to the standards set by regulatory agencies, resulting in potential health risk for the unsuspecting consumers. Therefore, critical investigation of the various parameters of these water products is needed to determine whether they meet the safety standards established by regulatory agencies. Thirty (30) different brands of sachet water (15 NAFDAC registered and 15 non-NAFDAC registered) were randomly collected (n=3) from producers in Gwale Local Government Area, Kano Nigeria to assess their physico-chemical and bacteriological quality. The parameters were determined using standard methods. The mean results of the temperature, pH, turbidity, conductivity, chloride and total hardness of the NAFDAC registered samples were found to be in the range of 25.9-29.7 oC, 6.8-7.2, 0.1-1.2 NTU, 11.0-41.8µs/cm,15.0-25.1 mg/L and 2.0-17.6 mg/L respectively, while for the non-NAFDAC registered samples, the mean range were found to be 25.8-30.8 oC, 6.6-8.7, 0.5-2.2 NTU, 13.6-46.8 µs/cm, 17.0 23.0mg/L and 15.8-25.3 mg/L for the same parameters respectively. These results are in compliance with the standards set by the National Agency for Food Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC), Nigerian Industrial Standard (NIS) and World Health Organization (WHO) except pH values of 8.7 found in some non-NAFDAC registered samples which were a bit higher than the recommended limits. Some non- NAFDAC registered samples were found to contain aerobic mesophilic bacteria, though below the limit set by the aforementioned regulatory agencies. Statistically, there is significant difference (p>2.326) between the NAFDAC registered and the non-NAFDAC registered samples in aerobic mesophilic bacterial count but there is no significant difference in terms of coliform count between the two groups (p< 2.326). This finding highlights the need for regular microbiological monitoring so as to ensure public health safety.