(If you are based in the U.K., please read my article on the best water filter jugs in the U.K. But also read this article to get an understanding of what makes a good water filter jug.)
(If you are based in the U.S. or Canada, please continue reading this article.)
Studies show that tap water in developed countries contains fewer contaminants than does bottled water, thanks to thorough water purification systems being in place for tap water. However, tap water still contains the likes of chlorine, disinfection byproducts, pharmaceuticals, heavy metals, plastic contaminants, and oestrogens, which is why it's important to filter or distill tap water.
Filtered or distilled tap water is perhaps the best water to drink, but not all water filters are the same.
Since I currently live in rental accommodation, I don't have the option of installing an in-line under sink water filter. Like many people, I am stuck with using water filter pitchers for the time being.
Unfortunately, when I researched the best water filter pitchers, I quickly realised that there aren't many thorough independent tests done by anyone online, looking at how good popular water filter pitchers are at filtering water.
The vast majority of articles and videos online look at total dissolved solids (TDS), because TDS is cheap and easy to measure. However, TDS doesn't take into account important contaminants like chlorine, pesticides, heavy metals, pharmaceuticals, plastic contaminants, and oestrogens. They also look at other factors that are not reliable indicators of contaminants in water, such as taste and acidity. Even articles that claim to have “lab tested” the best water filters, don't share any detailed results or details about their lab tests.
The best resource I could find was the following video by Modern Castle:
In the above video, Modern Castle founder, Derek, tests 10 popular U.S. brands of water filter pitchers, by sending water samples to a lab for analysis. He tests for disinfection byproducts, heavy metals, fluoride, and less importantly, TDS and pH.
The 10 brands were ranked in the following order, based on overall performance, with the best filter first and the worst last:
Good filters to consider buying (according to Derek):
- Waterdrop
- Epic Water
- Aqua Crest
- Amazon Basics
- Brita
Rubbish filters to avoid:
- Nakii
- Pur
- ZeroWater
- Soma
- Aquagear
According to Derek's experiment, of the above, the first 5 are worth considering, the last 5 are not worth their salt. Later in this article, I'll tell you about my findings, which are a little different, I'll let you decide whose findings you want to go by.
One thing I discovered in my research while trying to find the best water filter pitcher for me, is that…
Which Water Filter Is Best For You Depends On Which Contaminants You Need To Get Rid Of
Let me explain this to you using fluoride as an example.
Despite Waterdrop being found to be the overall best water filter, the Modern Castle study above found that his Waterdrop filter pitcher reduced ZERO fluoride from Derek's tap water. This is fine for me, since my water provider, Thames Water in the U.K., doesn't add artificial fluoride to my water. However, if you live in a fluoridated water area, then you may be better off with an Epic Water filter, which removed 66% of fluoride in Derek's test. The ZeroWater filter removed 100% of fluoride, but I don't recommend it because it misses out on a lot of other contaminants (more on this later).
Most tap water providers in developed countries are required to post annual reports of contaminant testing in their water, so I recommend you check out that report on your water provider's website. Failing that, or for a more detailed report that includes oestrogens, plastic contaminants, and pharmaceuticals, I would recommend getting your water tested by an independent lab.
To help you decide which of the above 10 water filters would be most suitable for you, here's a summary of the findings in the above video:
Disinfection Byproducts
All tap water has to be disinfected, which means all tap water is likely to contain disinfection byproducts. Since studies suggest that disinfection byproducts may be linked to cancer and hormonal and reproductive disturbances, any filter you get should do a good job of removing these. From the above chart, it's clear that Nakii, ZeroWater, and Soma should be avoided.
Fluoride
ZeroWater is clearly the best at removing fluoride, with Epic Water being second.
Heavy Metals
All except AquaGear did a great job at removing uranium and copper.
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
It's clear that ZeroWater is by far the best at reducing TDS. By reducing TDS to zero, a ZeroWater filter will bring the most marked noticeable change in your water. However, this is a red herring and a clever marketing strategy used against uninformed customers. Let me explain why.
The ZeroWater filter uses an ion exchange resin to remove ions from water that give water a high TDS. However, in the vast majority of cases, a high TDS is caused by harmless, or even health promoting ions like magnesium, calcium, sodium and potassium. In developed countries, where tap water is closely regulated by the government, a high TDS alone is very unlikely to be a health problem.
ZeroWater even give away a free TDS meter with their filter pitcher, misleadingly calling it a “water quality meter”, when in reality, TDS has very little to do with water quality.
ZeroWater filters cost more than other filters, and they don't last very long because they get clogged up by all of those dissolved solids they are removing. What is the point in paying a premium for removing stuff like magnesium and calcium in water, which are good for your health?
I would much rather buy a water filter pitcher that is dedicated to removing disinfection byproducts, pharmaceuticals, plastic contaminants, and oestrogens, than one that is dedicated to a red herring like reducing TDS.
Unfortunately, Derek's video above doesn't look at how good these filter pitchers are at removing other important contaminants like drugs, plastic contaminants, and oestrogens. I also couldn't find any other resources online with detailed unbiased tests on different water filter pitchers. Also, I haven't conducted any tests myself, though this is something I will consider doing in future.
Unlike most products sold online, there's little point in looking at customer reviews on water filters. Sure, a 4 star rating or lower can indicate there's something seriously wrong with a particular filter, but good (4.5 to 5 star) ratings don't indicate that a particular filter is good at removing harmful contaminants. This is because the vast majority of people who leave good reviews on a water filter pitcher, do so based on factors such as how pleasant it is to use, how quickly it filters the water, how the filtered water tastes, how long the filters last, and other such qualities that have no bearing on what contaminants remain in the filtered water.
The best thing you can do is to do what Derek did in the above Modern Castle video, which is to send a sample of the tap water in your own home to an independent lab for analysis, and also send samples of the same water filtered by different brands of water filter pitchers. This way you can know for sure which filter pitchers work best at removing the contaminants in your particular tap water supply. However, this will cost you hundreds of dollars.
Another good way to know which water filter pitchers are good, would be to have access to lots of different independent tests done by other people (so lots more videos like the Modern Castle video above), and to look for trends on which water filter pitchers seem to consistently perform better. Unfortunately, at this moment in time, the Modern Castle video is the only good resource I could find of this kind online.
Thankfully, there are reliable free resources we all have access to, that can help us decide on which water filter pitchers are worth buying: independent organisations that are accredited by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), like The Water Quality Association (WQA), National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) International, and the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials (IAPMO).
Water filter companies can voluntarily apply for WQA, NSF, and IAPMO certification. Once they are certified, you can rest assured that the claims covered by those certifications, are true.
One caveat though, is that as much as these independent organisations claim to be “international”, they're all based in the U.S., and only products sold in the U.S. and Canada seem to be certified by them. If you are based in the U.K., I let you know which products are available in the U.K. and which are not, in this article.
So let's take a look at the 10 water filter pitchers from the above video based on their WQA and NSF certifications and other important factors.
Waterdrop
On the Waterdrop website, they claim that their water filter pitchers are NSF 42 and NSF 372 certified.
When I type waterdrop as a brand name on the NSF website, the first thing I notice is that this company is based in China, which does not inspire confidence.
From what I can see, Waterdrop don't make any independent testing results easily accessible online. Instead, they tell you to, “…refer to the performance data sheet in the instruction manual”, which I'm guessing arrives with the product when you buy it.
I can confirm from the NSF website, that the Waterdrop filter pitchers are certified against:
- NSF/ANSI 42, for reducing the aesthetic impurities: chlorine, taste and odour.
- NSF/ANSI 372, establishes a limit on the amount of lead that may be contained within the water contact materials in a drinking water contact product.
Despite Waterdrop's great performance in the above Modern Castle video, their NSF certification leaves much to be desired. All we can say for sure, is that Waterdrop's water filter pitchers are effective at removing chlorine and improving the taste and smell of the water, and that they don't add dangerous amounts of lead to the water.
Since the company is based in China, and their product is manufactured in China, who knows what other contaminants their filters could be adding to water that go untested. For all of these reasons, I would personally not use a Waterdrop filter.
You can get the various Waterdrop filter pitchers here.
Epic Water
Epic Water makes one of the very few water filter pitchers that remove bacteria, viruses, and other microbes from water. These guys specialise in making unsafe untreated water safe to drink. This aspect of their filter is not something most of us in the West need for our regular supply of drinking water at home, since our tap water is treated and deemed to be free of (or very low in) dangerous microbes. However, the Epic Water filter performed very well in the above video, where it very effectively removed disinfectant byproducts, fluoride, and heavy metals.
Unlike Waterdrop, Epic Water is based in the U.S.A., and their filter pitcher is made in the U.S.A. According to their website, the Epic Nano water filter pitcher is certified to NSF/ANSI standards 42, 53, 401, P473, and P231. This is a far more impressive list than Waterdrop's.
Rather than being certified by the NSF directly, Epic Water claims to be certified by the IAPMO against NSF standards. However, on the IAPMO website, I couldn't find any active certifications for their water filter pitcher, the Epic Nano. It's only their under sink filter that is certified to NSF/ANSI standards 42, 53, 401, and P473. The certificate on their website for their water filter pitchers is dated 02/05/2020, which tells me that they were probably certified in the past, but haven't been renewing their certifications annually like the IAPMO requires them to.
I just sent an email to Epic Water to ask them why they haven't renewed their certificate, they replied on the same day. Here's what they said:
Hey there,
NSF/ANSI have set up water filter standards. Anyone lab can test to those standards and make claims. To be certified, you have to pay a lot of money to either NSF, WQA or IAPMO which are all non-government for profit organizations. We have used IAPMO to certify products in the past to NSF/ANSI standards.
The Epic Pure Pitcher Filter, Epic Everyday Bottle filter, & Epic Outdoor Adventure Bottle filter have all been tested by a third party and exceeds NSF/ANSI standards 42, 53, 401, & P231. That being said, it hasn't been certified by the company NSF.
If you're looking for a filter that has been certified, you'll want to take a look at our new Epic Smart Shield. This filter has been certified by IAPMO against NSF/ANSI standards 42, 53, 401.
Thanks.
Unfortunately, the Epic Smart Shield is an under sink filter, not a pitcher. I understand their plight, these certifications cost a lot of money. It's easy for a company like Brita to get certified, being well-known industry leaders with high sales volumes. Epic have the premium feature of eliminating microbes, and it could well be that their filters are better than Brita's, but with a higher cost of production and a higher cost to the consumer, they may not have the sales volumes and/or profit margins to justify the high cost of renewing certifications for each product annually.
Not having renewed their certificate doesn't necessarily mean that their filter quality has deteriorated since 2020. Unlike with the IAPMO, certification with the NSF is valid for 5 years, and WQA for 3 years. Amazon Basics, Brita and Pur were last certified in 2019 by the WQA. Epic's water filter pitcher may still be a great filter, but I can't recommend it as highly if I can't find their certificate in an accredited independent lab's website (the IAPMO doesn't seem to show any record of expired certificates).
If removing fluoride was a priority for me, I would still prefer to go for the Epic than the ZeroWater filter.
You'll find Epic's small collection of water filter pitchers here.
Aqua Crest
It turns out Aqua Crest is owned by the same Chinese company that owns Waterdrop – HongKong Ecoaqua Co., Limited / Qingdao Ecopure Filter Co., Ltd.
Aqua Crest's website is just a single page with no links and an insecure connection warning. On this single page they mention being NSF certified, with their refrigerator filter being certified against NSF 42 and 372.
It seems that Aqua Crest only sells the replacement filter without the pitcher. Their filters are compatible with popular brand pitchers like Brita and Pur. I can see on the NSF website, that Aqua Crest pitcher filters are certified only against NSF/ANSI 42 and 372, just like Waterdrop. They seem to be more focused on their refrigerator filters however, with one that is certified against NSF/ANSI 42, 53, 401, and CSA Standard B483.1.
All in all, I don't like it. I don't trust a water filter from a Chinese company made in a Chinese factory. Their filter pitcher is also certified only against NSF/ANSI 42 (which merely covers aesthetics) and 372 (which simply promises not to add lots of lead to the filtered water). The Aqua Crest wing of the company focuses more on their refrigerator water filter, while the Waterdrop wing focuses more on water filter pitchers. So if you want to buy a water filter pitcher from this Chinese company, you'd likely be better off buying the Waterdrop version.
In case you're still interested, you'll find Aqua Crest filter cartridges here.
Amazon Basics
On Amazon.com and Amazon.ca, they claim their water filter pitcher is “WQA CERTIFIED: Gold seal certified by the Water Quality Association against NSF/ANSI Standards 42 and 53.” I can see on the WQA website, that as of 2019, Amazon Fulfillment Services Inc. has an “Amazonbasics 10 Cup Water Pitcher with Filter” that's certified against:
- NSF/ANSI 42, for reducing the aesthetic impurities: chlorine, taste and odour.
- NSF/ANSI 53, for reducing contaminants with health effects: benzene, copper, and mercury.
Being certified for NSF/ANSI 53 is impressive, since it applies to contaminants with health effects. However, the number of contaminants the Amazon Basics filter pitcher is certified to remove under NSF/ANSI 53 is very small.
On Amazon.com, the Amazon Basics water filter pitcher claims to be made in Europe. On Amazon.co.uk, it says they are made in either Switzerland or Germany.
Being made in Europe with certification for NSF/ANSI 42 and 53 makes Amazon Basics better than the likes of Waterdrop and Aqua Crest. The Amazon Basics filter also performed well in the Modern Castle video above. This is a half decent budget water filter pitcher you might consider. However, for some extra money, we can do better than just NSF/ANSI 42 and a partial 53.
You can get the NSF certified Amazon Basics 10-cup water filter pitcher here.
Brita
Brita is the industry leader in water filter pitchers. They have facilities all over the world, including in Germany, Canada, the Dominican Republic, and China. Let's see if their certifications live up to the name.
They have 2 different filters for their pitchers – the Standard and Elite (aka Longlast or Longlast+) filters – each with different certification levels. You can download certification details for each of their filters on their website.
The Brita Standard Filter lasts for 2 months (40 gallons). Brita claims this filter is certified by the WQA against NSF/ANSI 42 and 53.
The Brita Elite Filter lasts for 6 months (120 gallons). Brita claims this filter is certified by the WQA against NSF/ANSI 42, 53, and 401.
I can see on the WQA website, that many of their water filter pitchers are certified against:
- NSF/ANSI 42, for reducing the aesthetic impurities: chlorine, taste and odour, and particulate class I.
- NSF/ANSI 53, for reducing contaminants with health effects: 15 contaminants (see NSF certification comparison table below).
- NSF/ANSI 401, for reducing emerging contaminants, including pharmaceuticals: 15 contaminants (see NSF certification comparison table below)
Both the Amazon Basics and Brita Elite filters are certified against NSF/ANSI 53, but under NSF/ANSI 53, the Amazon Basics filter is certified to remove only 3 contaminants, while the Brita Elite filter is certified to remove 15 contaminants.
Brita's Elite filter is also certified against NSF/ANSI 401, while the Amazon Basics filter is not. It is certified to impressively remove 15 contaminants here as well. NSF/ANSI 401 is very much needed in my opinion, because it covers “emerging” contaminants, which are not yet regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or Health Canada. They include the likes of pharmaceutical drugs, pesticides, and estrogenic substances like estrone and bisphenol A. Since these are emerging contaminants that are not yet regulated, public water utilities are not required to test for them at all.
To find out if a particular Brita filter pitcher is certified, go on the product page on Brita's website, click to expand the “Product Specs” link, copy the Model #, and enter it on the WQA website. The model number for the “Huron Water Pitcher” for example, is OB60.
I would advise going for a filter pitcher with the Elite/Longlast filter, due to its advanced filtering ability.
I've heard great things about Brita from experts in the industry, they're apparently one of few water filter companies that drive research in the market. They also did pretty well in the Modern Castle video above.
Brita filters don't remove fluoride however, so if you live in an artificially fluoridated area, you might consider getting a different filter – such as Epic or ZeroWater. Since my tap water isn't fluoridated, I would definitely consider getting a Brita water filter pitcher (with an Elite filter). I would try to ensure the particular filter I get is made in Germany or Canada rather than in their facilities in China or the Dominican Republic.
You'll find Brita's Elite/Longlast water filter pitchers here. I highly recommend you go for the Elite (aka Longlast or Longlast+) filter as opposed to the Standard one.
PUR
Pur water filter pitchers are made by Kaz USA, Inc. They have facilities in the U.S.A., Mexico, and China. On their website they mention their water filter pitchers are WQA certified. They don't make any certificates available on their website.
On the WQA website, I can see that Pur water filter pitchers were certified in 2019 against:
- NSF/ANSI 42, for reducing the aesthetic impurities: chlorine, taste and odour, particulate class VI, and zinc.
- NSF/ANSI 53, for reducing contaminants with health effects: 14 contaminants (see NSF certification comparison table below).
- NSF/ANSI 401, for reducing emerging contaminants, including pharmaceuticals: 8 contaminants (see NSF certification comparison table below)
Pur seem to compare themselves a lot to Brita. Like Brita, Pur has 2 different filters for their filter pitchers – the Pur Basic filter and the Pur Plus filter. The Pur Plus removes lead and other contaminants that the Pur Basic filter does not.
On their website, they misleadingly compare their Pur Plus filter to Brita's Standard filter, referring to it as the “best-selling Brita® pitcher filter”, when they should be comparing their Plus filter to the Brita Elite filter. By comparing their Plus filter to Brita's Standard filter, they can claim that their filter gets rid of many more contaminants than Brita's best selling filter does. However, as you can see in the NSF certification comparison table below, when compared to Brita's Elite filter, the Pur Plus filter gets rid of fewer contaminants.
Under NSF/ANSI 42, the Pur Plus removes only Class VI particulates, which are the largest on the list at more than 50 microns in size. The Brita Elite on the other hand, removes the smallest particulates, i.e. Class I, which are 0.5 to 1 micron in size. The Pur Plus is certified to remove zinc, while the Brita Elite is not, so if high zinc levels are a problem in your water supply (unlikely), you might consider getting the Pur fitler.
Performance under NSF/ANSI 53 is quite similar between the two filters, with the Brita being certified to filter 15 health effect contaminants, and the Pur certified to remove 14.
Under NSF/ANSI 401, the Brita wins again, being certified to filter 7 different contaminants that the Pur is not. Of these, perhaps the most important are the non steroidal inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) ibuprofen and naproxen. NSAIDs are one of the most commonly prescribed drugs, and are responsible for more drug related deaths than any other class of drug.
It's important to note that in the above Modern Castle video, Derek mentions at 11m49s, that the Pur filter added silver, lead, nitrate, manganese, and sodium to the water, with lead being the most concerning contaminant in this list. Based on the NSF certifications alone, Pur is a great filter, second only to Brita. However, before I invest in a Pur filter, I'd need to do my own tests to confirm that it doesn't add lead to my water!
You can get Pure Plus water filter pitchers here.
Nakii
Nakii doesn't have a website, just a facebook page. They sell just the one pitcher and filter that is certified by the WQA to NSF/ANSI standard 42 only, for chlorine and taste/odour. It didn't do very well at all at removing disinfection byproducts in the Modern Castle video.
According to their Amazon product Q&A section, “The filter components are from Japan, the pitcher in China”.
I'm not very impressed at all with Nakii. Avoid.
ZeroWater
ZeroWater is based in Pennsylvania, USA. Their filters are made in Mexico.
On their website, ZeroWater claim their pitcher and filter are “certified by NSF International for standards 42 and 53.”
According to the NSF website, the ZeroWater filter pitcher is certified against:
- NSF/ANSI 42, for reducing the aesthetic impurities: chlorine, taste and odour.
- NSF/ANSI 53, for reducing contaminants with health effects: 5 contaminants (see NSF certification comparison table below).
As you can see, the contaminants ZeroWater filter pitchers are certified for removing under NSF standards 42 and 53, are minimal. Under NSF standard 53, ZeroWater is the only filter in this list that is certified to remove chromium, PFOS and PFAS. It's also the best filter pitcher in this list at removing fluoride. However, this does not make up for the fact that it was shown in the Modern Castle video to be the second worst at removing disinfection byproducts, and that it isn't certified under NSF standard 401 to remove drugs, oestrogenic substances like oestrone, bisphenol A, or pesticides.
The very name, “ZeroWater”, is based around deception – the deception that reducing the TDS of water to zero is an important thing to do to purify water. They're so focused on TDS, they even throw in a free TDS meter with their filter pitchers.
I explained earlier in this article why reducing TDS isn't that important. It can be helpful to partially reduce TDS if your water has a particularly high TDS. If your tap water has a TDS of 300 ppm for example, bringing it down to 200 ppm will make your water feel less heavy. However, a ZeroWater filter will reduce it right the way down to 0 ppm. All that this unnecessarily thorough reduction in TDS does is block up the filter, and the biggest complaint people have about the expensive ZeroWater filter, is that it gets blocked up and stops working after just 1 to 2 weeks. So you pay all this extra money for a 5-stage filter that removes a bunch of dissolved solids (most of which don't need to be removed), and it lasts just 1 to 2 weeks (because it gets clogged up by the very dissolved solids that we don't need to be removing in the first place).
Made in Mexico, overly focused on reducing TDS, certified to remove only a very short list of contaminants, you are likely to be better off with the Amazon Basics filter.
You can get ZeroWater filter pitchers here.
Soma
Soma is headquartered in the U.S.A. Their pitcher is made in China, and the filter made in the U.S.A.
I don't buy filters made in China, but the pitcher being made in China is also a problem. I've seen quite a few complaints online about Soma's made in China pitcher. For example, black mold growing under the rubber seal, and the pitcher itself adding a strong chemical taste to the water.
On their website, they claim that, “Our new and improved filter is tested and certified against NSF/ANSI Standard 53 for the reduction of mercury, cadmium, and copper, and Standard 42 for the reduction of chlorine taste and odor and zinc.”
That's not a very impressive list, and yet, when I searched the NSF, WQA, and IAPMO websites, I found no mention of Soma or their company, FC Brands LLC.
Avoid.
Aquagear
Aquagear was the worst performing pitcher in the Modern Castle video. Derek mentioned in that video that the Aquagear filter also added sulphate, nitrate, sodium, and chloride to the water.
Aquagear, owned by Sovereign Earth LLC, is based in California, U.S.A. Their water filter pitcher is made in the U.S.A.
They claim to be certified against NSF Standards 42 and 53. However, like with Soma, I could not find any mention of Aquagear or Sovereign Earth LLC on the NSF, WQA, or IAPMO websites.
Is it any wonder that the two worst performing filter pitchers (Soma and Aquagear) are the two that have no evidence of any certification whatsoever?
Avoid.
Water Filter Pitcher NSF Certification Comparison Table
(Please click on the image for an enlarged view – opens in new tab)
NSF/ANSI 53: Health effect contaminants
NSF/ANSI 401: Emerging contaminants, including pharmaceuticals
NSF/ANSI 372: Lead-free materials
Verdict: Which Water Filter Pitcher Should You Get If You Are In The U.S. Or Canada?
There's no definitive answer on which water filter pitcher is best.
One reason is because different filters are better at filtering different contaminants. Overall I think that the Brita Elite/Longlast are the best filters, however, many areas of U.S. and Canada receive artificially fluoridated water. If you want to remove fluoride from water, then you may be better off with an Epic or ZeroWater pitcher.
The other reason there's no clear-cut answer, is because there isn't enough data available. In Derek's video, Waterdrop was a clear winner. However, from my analysis, it seems Waterdrop's NSF certifications are not very extensive at all, plus it's made in China by a company that's based in China!
From reading this article, you at least know to avoid the likes of Aquagear, Soma, and Nakii. You know not to be fooled by Zerowater's TDS claims. You know that Pur Plus isn't bad, but it's not generally as good as Brita's Elite. You know that Amazon Basics is a half decent budget brand to go for.
If I were living in the U.S. or Canada in a non artificially fluoridated area, I would go for a Brita Elite filter pitcher. If I was in a fluoridated area, I would go for the Epic Nano filter pitcher, but due to its lack of active NSF certification, I would do my own testing to ensure the Epic filter was actually able to remove a decent amount of fluoride and other contaminants.
That's provided I was stuck with using only a filter pitcher. There are other ways to purify water, such as using inline filters, reverse osmosis, and distillation, which I will write about in a future article (you can check out the water distillers I recommend here).
Before you send for your water filter pitcher though, there's one last thing to consider…
Is The Plastic In A Water Filter Pitcher A Problem?
The vast majority of water filter pitchers are made of PLASTIC! Studies show that plastic containers leach hormone disrupting chemicals into their contents – the likes of microplastics, phthalates, and bisphenol A (BPA). The soft plastics of water bottles are much worse than the hard plastics that water filter pitchers are made of, but they are made of plastic nonetheless. A lot of these water filter pitchers claim that they are “BPA Free”, which means absolutely nothing, since studies show that even BPA free plastics leach oestrogenic chemicals into their contents.
Factors that increase how much of these contaminants leach into your water from the plastic container, include long storage time, heat, and exposure to sunlight. Unlike with plastic bottled water, where you have no control over these factors, with a water filter pitcher, water will only be in contact with the plastic pitcher for a day or two at most, and you can keep the pitcher in a cool place away from sunlight. So I don't think it's a huge deal that these things are made of plastic, but I would still prefer to have one that was made of glass. I would however, ensure that any plastic pitcher I get is not made in China. As I mentioned with Soma's made in China pitcher above, people are complaining about the pitcher itself adding a strong chemical taste to the water.
Unfortunately, I couldn't find any good glass water filter pitchers that are compatible with Brita filter cartridges. The one option I found is this ZeroWater glass water filter dispenser. However, I would personally prefer a great filter with a decent non-China made plastic pitcher than a rubbish filter with a glass pitcher.
If you have anything to add about your experience with water filter pitchers, please chime in and let us know in the comments section below.