Unfiltered Fervor: The Rush to Get Off the Water Grid(nytimes.com)
nytimes.com
Unfiltered Fervor: The Rush to Get Off the Water Grid
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/29/dining/raw-water-unfiltered.html
85 comments
Do you remineralize that water before drinking?
Besides flavor, does it matter? If it's not for the flavor you can eat like three almonds to make up for the loss of minerals.
Water entering your body with a trace mineral deficit will dilute the mineral content of your body, and you'll excrete these minerals every day in your urine.
One day or one week doing this is no big deal, but if it's your main water source and you do it all the time, you will start demineralizing your body and you'll be short of electrolytes which is known as hyponatremia.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyponatremia
It can also cause bone density issues during child development.
One day or one week doing this is no big deal, but if it's your main water source and you do it all the time, you will start demineralizing your body and you'll be short of electrolytes which is known as hyponatremia.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyponatremia
It can also cause bone density issues during child development.
Our house came with a ridiculous reverse osmosis filter on the kitchen sink, and the included TDS meter showed < 5 ppm. It seemed great at first, but we grew concerned about the potential for mineral deficit for our kids, so I disconnected it. But, we could find no definitive source of info on this topic.
It's hard to take the water fanatics seriously: the manual talks about how the filter "reprograms" the water so that "the water is imprinted with the far-infrared frequencies." And: "the water molecules are shaken by the special field in a way that, for a short time, the clusters and the hydrogen bridges are broken up", and "the water is carried forward in an s-pattern movement, identical to that of water in nature".
Then again, I'm the guy who disconnected it out of possibly baseless fear of demineralization, so I'm not in a position to throw stones.
It's hard to take the water fanatics seriously: the manual talks about how the filter "reprograms" the water so that "the water is imprinted with the far-infrared frequencies." And: "the water molecules are shaken by the special field in a way that, for a short time, the clusters and the hydrogen bridges are broken up", and "the water is carried forward in an s-pattern movement, identical to that of water in nature".
Then again, I'm the guy who disconnected it out of possibly baseless fear of demineralization, so I'm not in a position to throw stones.
People tend to get a lot of sodium from their diets making the sodium content in their water a non issue. The same is generally true of most other minerals, unless your diet is horrid the water you drink is not going to make a meaningful difference.
There seems to be a difference between minerals already dissolved in water, and taking dry minerals straight.
Part of this may simply be the combination of other minerals and foreign mater in the water that somehow helps the body absorb correctly.
Just like eating whole vegetables vs eating isolated plant supplement extracts.
Part of this may simply be the combination of other minerals and foreign mater in the water that somehow helps the body absorb correctly.
Just like eating whole vegetables vs eating isolated plant supplement extracts.
you'll be short of electrolytes which is known as hyponatremia
The endurance scene is full of people banging on about hyponatremia but I'll wager 1000 people have gotten dehydrated trying to avoid it for every 1 that was affected.
The endurance scene is full of people banging on about hyponatremia but I'll wager 1000 people have gotten dehydrated trying to avoid it for every 1 that was affected.
I've been drinking non-remineralized RO water almost exclusively since literally conception and I'm just fine. My daughter has done the same and she is fine.
Water is potentially a source of minerals but a varied diet works just as well. The situation may be different for people in developing countries with very limited diets but in rich nations with access to year-round fruits, etc it's not a problem.
Water is potentially a source of minerals but a varied diet works just as well. The situation may be different for people in developing countries with very limited diets but in rich nations with access to year-round fruits, etc it's not a problem.
WHO seem to think it matters.
http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/nutrientschap...
http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/nutrientschap...
Thank you, that link is very clear and informative.
It's very bad for your teeth.
Wouldn't it then suffice to brush your teeth? Am I missing something?
It will sap minerals from bones too, prompting osteoporosis. We need the minerals in water:
http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/nutrientschap...
http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/nutrientschap...
It leeches minerals out of your teeth. Nothing to do with leaving a coating behind.
Water is not a significant source of minerals. To get your daily needs you would need to drink around a bathtub full of water daily.
Yes, with his bone structure.
No I do not. The amount of minerals in water is tiny compared to food.
[deleted]
I am not a Chemist - what do you suggest as a good plug-and-play water filtering system for a normal US apartment?
Just go to Amazon and search for reverse osmosis systems. They go under your sink and are quite easy to install.
He said “real water” should expire after a few months. His does. “It stays most
fresh within one lunar cycle of delivery,” he said. “If it sits around too long, it’ll turn
green. People don’t even realize that because all their water’s dead, so they never see
it turn green.”
The marketing speak these companies utilize makes me cringe. As a science teacher, I aim to help students develop the ability to critically analyze claims like these. I think half of the people in charge of these companies believe their own hype, and half of them are just doing it to take money from uneducated people.
The marketing speak these companies utilize makes me cringe. As a science teacher, I aim to help students develop the ability to critically analyze claims like these. I think half of the people in charge of these companies believe their own hype, and half of them are just doing it to take money from uneducated people.
make that 10 and 90... most are just scammers trying to find gullible people over and over again
It's definitely cringe-worthy, but I don't doubt the turning green part: a fish tank will do that too from algal growth, which is almost certainly what is happening to their "real" water.
It's really about the level of ammonia/nitrates in the water and a sufficiently strong source of light, that's all that algae need. It will happen to any water that sits a few weeks in open air so that spores can get into it. Even a regular tap water with added chloride will turn green if it has at least some level of nitrates in it (and usually they have).
A fish tank provides ample nutrients for algae growth, pure spring water not so much (unless they pour fish food into the water) Pure tap water will not turn green within a month.
[deleted]
Yes, the founder of Juicero has re-emerged: After his juicing company, Juicero, collapsed in September, he went on a 10-day cleanse, drinking nothing but Live Water. “I haven’t tasted tap water in a long time,” he said.... “You have to be agile and tactile, and be available to experiment,” he said. “Literally, you have to carry bottles of water through the dark.”
On mobile I tend to stick to just HN; is this "for reals"? I couldn't make this stuff up!
Edit: Yes, though even the photos remind me most of the YouTube comedian 'AwakenWithJP' https://m.youtube.com/#/channel/UCwUizOU8pPWXdXNniXypQEQ
Edit: Yes, though even the photos remind me most of the YouTube comedian 'AwakenWithJP' https://m.youtube.com/#/channel/UCwUizOU8pPWXdXNniXypQEQ
[deleted]
How this guy still has money for stuff is beyond me
I thought this was satire until I read the article.
I was curious what kind of scam this guy was going to move onto next.
I grew up drinking raw water in New York State. It was connected to the tap, so it was available for all cooking and for filling a glass at any moment. We could even bathe in it. Of course, there was a reason: my parents lived beyond the reach of municipal water grids and so had to source their water from a well in the back yard. This is not uncommon outside urban bubbles.
These "live water" individuals are morons. It's unbelievable what people will pay for. This is anti-science, and anti-progress. I've been to Sierra Leone, a place where all water is "live" and they have never added flouride or chloramine. Want raw water? Go live there and enjoy the cholera and dysentery. Municipal water grids are a triumph of urban development. Early New York City understood it, they built the first tunnel to import meteoric water in 1917, because people did not want to drink nearby water made filthy by their neighbors and by industrial development. Hell, even the Romans got it: you need a water system for a large population, and it has to be safe water. This is something we have only improved with treatment. Have there been missteps with lead pipes? Sure. But they aren't actually a problem unless the water their carrying has a pH that will solubilize the metal.
If you want to drink healthful water: use a multi-stage filter.
As an aside, let me tell you: having a well can be terrible. We're talking unbelievable minerality that you either remove via ion exchange with a water softener or that you watch clog your pipes, faucets, and water heater. Haven't experienced soft water? It tastes salty, and it feels like you can never fully wash soap off. When I was young I had to take flouride tablets because, of course, none was added to our water. The dose was a bit higher than in city water. I've never had dental carries, and I have my careful pediatrician to thank. We could afford the tablets, but in a different circumstance we may not have been so fortunate. The poor in cities get flouride for free thanks to municipal flouridation. Of course there is also the risk of the well running dry during droughts, and during blackouts there is no water because well pumps are electric. That means no toilets either. Where there is no city water, there is no city sewer either, so waste ends up in a septic tank that needs to be pumped out every couple years. That of course prohibits having a garbage disposal. It goes on and on. City services are valued for good reasons. The wealthy should be championing them, and fostering their improvement and expansion, not opting-out with bogus "live water" and vague misbeliefs about health.
These "live water" individuals are morons. It's unbelievable what people will pay for. This is anti-science, and anti-progress. I've been to Sierra Leone, a place where all water is "live" and they have never added flouride or chloramine. Want raw water? Go live there and enjoy the cholera and dysentery. Municipal water grids are a triumph of urban development. Early New York City understood it, they built the first tunnel to import meteoric water in 1917, because people did not want to drink nearby water made filthy by their neighbors and by industrial development. Hell, even the Romans got it: you need a water system for a large population, and it has to be safe water. This is something we have only improved with treatment. Have there been missteps with lead pipes? Sure. But they aren't actually a problem unless the water their carrying has a pH that will solubilize the metal.
If you want to drink healthful water: use a multi-stage filter.
As an aside, let me tell you: having a well can be terrible. We're talking unbelievable minerality that you either remove via ion exchange with a water softener or that you watch clog your pipes, faucets, and water heater. Haven't experienced soft water? It tastes salty, and it feels like you can never fully wash soap off. When I was young I had to take flouride tablets because, of course, none was added to our water. The dose was a bit higher than in city water. I've never had dental carries, and I have my careful pediatrician to thank. We could afford the tablets, but in a different circumstance we may not have been so fortunate. The poor in cities get flouride for free thanks to municipal flouridation. Of course there is also the risk of the well running dry during droughts, and during blackouts there is no water because well pumps are electric. That means no toilets either. Where there is no city water, there is no city sewer either, so waste ends up in a septic tank that needs to be pumped out every couple years. That of course prohibits having a garbage disposal. It goes on and on. City services are valued for good reasons. The wealthy should be championing them, and fostering their improvement and expansion, not opting-out with bogus "live water" and vague misbeliefs about health.
When we were living in Beijing, we couldn’t trust the tap water even with a multi stage filter (bad pipes), so we’d get bottles water for drinking and cooking needs. Now that I’m back in the states, I’m so happy to be drinking tap again, double great since Seattle water is especially nice.
> This is something we have only improved with treatment. Have there been missteps with lead pipes? Sure. But they aren't actually a problem unless the water their carrying has a pH that will solubilize the metal.
I 100% concur on your statement about the advancements we've made, but unfortunately things are not so black and white outside the urban US and some Western European countries. For example, I live in an Eastern European capital, in an apartment building built in the early 1980s (so it's not that old) but, nevertheless, I cannot drink tap water because the pipes are just too rusty. One can notice that every couple of weeks or so, when the water is temporarily stopped, and when it comes back on the first burst is red-ish, and it keeps being red-ish for at least 10 or 15 seconds after that, after which it turns back to being clear. There's no way I'm drinking water that flows through those rusty pipes.
I 100% concur on your statement about the advancements we've made, but unfortunately things are not so black and white outside the urban US and some Western European countries. For example, I live in an Eastern European capital, in an apartment building built in the early 1980s (so it's not that old) but, nevertheless, I cannot drink tap water because the pipes are just too rusty. One can notice that every couple of weeks or so, when the water is temporarily stopped, and when it comes back on the first burst is red-ish, and it keeps being red-ish for at least 10 or 15 seconds after that, after which it turns back to being clear. There's no way I'm drinking water that flows through those rusty pipes.
Sure, the same rust spurt happens when I shut off the water in my house to fix a valve since air can suddenly access what normally has only water contact. It may be unpalatable, but if it is brief it should be safe and fixable with filtration. Reverse osmosis would definitely solve the taste problem, but then you need to worry about adding minerals back in (good multi-stage systems will do this).
It’s not just the rust, it’s the lead in the pipes, the abestsos, and so on. Developing countries are just different, you can’t compare their problems to developed country ones.
All removed with basic filtration+activated carbon. I've spent time in countries at the bottom of the human development index. (Good) filters are enough.
And arsenic? We aren’t talking about western style contaminates here. Sure a good filter can remove 70% of the arsenic from your water, but...
Doable with various techniques, to varying levels of effectiveness. Activated carbon is the cheapest, but not the most effective. Definitely tractable.
http://www.oregon.gov/oha/PH/HealthyEnvironments/DrinkingWat...
http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/hygiene/om/linkin...
http://www.oregon.gov/oha/PH/HealthyEnvironments/DrinkingWat...
http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/hygiene/om/linkin...
Yep, the same was true in Beijing. Rusty water was common after a stoppage, even in new developments.
Naive question: Is rusty water actually dangerous to drink?
[deleted]
> If you want to drink healthful water: use a multi-stage filter
You mean "pure" water. A filter like that removes the good with the bad so we don't know if the end result is actually "healthful" or simply "clean".
http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/nutrientschap...
You mean "pure" water. A filter like that removes the good with the bad so we don't know if the end result is actually "healthful" or simply "clean".
http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/nutrientschap...
>What adherents share is a wariness of tap water, particularly the fluoride added to it
At the same time most 'natural ground water' in the west coast has naturally higher fluoride content than what is considered safe. Municipalities remove fluoride, they don't add it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_fluoridation#/media/File...
At the same time most 'natural ground water' in the west coast has naturally higher fluoride content than what is considered safe. Municipalities remove fluoride, they don't add it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_fluoridation#/media/File...
Watero. $25 bags of clean water freshly filtered your personal $500 dispenser
Once you've tasted cold-pressed water you won't drink anything else.
People will buy it. Look at the audiophile market.
Please buy my tone rocks. For just $2000 you'll get a set of not one, but four tuned rocks which you place precisely 66.7mm away from your midrange speaker. They enhance the undertones and make midtones shine. You've never experienced an audio enhancement quite like this for just $2000. Order today.
This just seems plain stupid to me. How can a government not provide one of the most basic, most essential services that we even see as the first thing to provide to third world drought-ridden places? There are a ton of NGO's in the USA that (so they say) make wells and clean water available in Africa, but when it comes to tap water at home it is so bad that people turn away from it and away from the scientific backing on how tap water should be.
It always amazes me that in some countries (or areas within those) you still can't expect safe tap water, and still have a large 'bottled water' industry and consumption. It doesn't help anyone and it doesn't align with the idea of setting up a specialised entity and supply them with resources to do it (a.k.a. water supply company and governing instances).
We expect normal, clean water that is just water and not added with anything for 'our benefit' out of the tap, and that's what we get. It's tested, and there are multiple different grids with individual sources and individual filters. It's not hard to do, it's what we have here; it costs almost nothing, and doesn't fail. Strangely enough, one neighbouring country (France) doesn't have this uniformly (don't drink water in Paris...) but in another (Germany) the water is just fine again.
You'd think that a civilised country that sets up organisations and systems to deal with basic needs at scale would be able to accomplish their designated tasks.
It always amazes me that in some countries (or areas within those) you still can't expect safe tap water, and still have a large 'bottled water' industry and consumption. It doesn't help anyone and it doesn't align with the idea of setting up a specialised entity and supply them with resources to do it (a.k.a. water supply company and governing instances).
We expect normal, clean water that is just water and not added with anything for 'our benefit' out of the tap, and that's what we get. It's tested, and there are multiple different grids with individual sources and individual filters. It's not hard to do, it's what we have here; it costs almost nothing, and doesn't fail. Strangely enough, one neighbouring country (France) doesn't have this uniformly (don't drink water in Paris...) but in another (Germany) the water is just fine again.
You'd think that a civilised country that sets up organisations and systems to deal with basic needs at scale would be able to accomplish their designated tasks.
So cringe-worthy. I drink lots of "raw" water on camping trips, and the only difference I've noticed is a bout of giardia (easily treated, but highly unpleasant). Bottled water in general is an insult to the environment and human progress; bottled "raw" water is all that plus forehead-smackingly dumb. The fact that potable water is almost free is a triumph to be celebrated.
Anecdata: a dentist mentioned flouridated bottled water as an option since the parents didn't realize their kids were missing out with "regular" bottled water.
To me it's interesting to consider the long-term impact of all products that are consumed/applied frequently (both manufactured and natural ones, though somehow natural usually seems less worrisome). I believe it is best to introduce fairly dramatic variety just to give the body a chance to dodge any long term accumulating effects/deficiencies... but this hasn't translated into a soap-switching schedule yet! (a very low personal priority thanks to mass-market manufacturing similarities).
Water supply selection seems to be one of the most critical choices in this department; I appreciate this chance to learn from what other HN users have researched and implemented as best.
To me it's interesting to consider the long-term impact of all products that are consumed/applied frequently (both manufactured and natural ones, though somehow natural usually seems less worrisome). I believe it is best to introduce fairly dramatic variety just to give the body a chance to dodge any long term accumulating effects/deficiencies... but this hasn't translated into a soap-switching schedule yet! (a very low personal priority thanks to mass-market manufacturing similarities).
Water supply selection seems to be one of the most critical choices in this department; I appreciate this chance to learn from what other HN users have researched and implemented as best.
When I was in elementary school we lived out in an area dominated by rural farmland. I'm guessing close to 100% of the students at the school got their water at home from an untreated well. Once a month the school nurse would bring around little cups of fluoride mouth wash and we would swish with it for 3 minutes then spit it out.
If you are seriously concerned about fluoridated vs non-fluoridated water there is no reason that the two things have to be linked. Heck, you can get many mouth washes with fluorine in thing. Listerine has a fluoridated version for example.
If you are seriously concerned about fluoridated vs non-fluoridated water there is no reason that the two things have to be linked. Heck, you can get many mouth washes with fluorine in thing. Listerine has a fluoridated version for example.
True! Another commenter mentioned tablets from the pediatrician.
These days progress consists of companies marketing "healthy" improvements to products that have become a convenient part of the daily routine.
These days progress consists of companies marketing "healthy" improvements to products that have become a convenient part of the daily routine.
We are in a well in an area without a lot of flouride in it. Our kids take tablets from the pharmacy. I think they are about $2/month.
I had to double check I wasn't reading The Onion. Sure, public water supplies in developed nations aren't without their problems, but I'd sure as hell prefer to take my chances with municipal "processed water" than put myself at risk from cholera or other water borne maladies that we more or less eradicated over the past 120 years.
I thoroughly recommend "The Blue Death: The Intriguing Past and Present Danger of the Water You Drink" by Dr. Robert Morris [0]. Kinda feels like these quacks need to be reminded of the life and death lottery our water supply used to be.
[0]: https://www.amazon.com/Blue-Death-Intriguing-Present-Danger/...
I thoroughly recommend "The Blue Death: The Intriguing Past and Present Danger of the Water You Drink" by Dr. Robert Morris [0]. Kinda feels like these quacks need to be reminded of the life and death lottery our water supply used to be.
[0]: https://www.amazon.com/Blue-Death-Intriguing-Present-Danger/...
“Water? You mean like in the toilet?”
Every day feels one step closer to Idiocracy.
Every day feels one step closer to Idiocracy.
I have a friend near Salt Lake who bought a house on an old property. When looking it over the owner pointed out that it wasn't on city water, but a pipe directly to a spring. A local company sells that same spring water, but he flushes his toilet with it.
This reminds me of Blenheim Palace in Oxfordshire, England. They sell expensive bottles of their mineral water in their restaurants, but it is the same water that has supplied the buildings since long before there was a municipal water supply in the area, so you can just ask for tap water and get the exact same product for free, just without the glass bottle.
https://www.blenheimpalace.com/estate/blenheim-palace-minera...
https://www.blenheimpalace.com/estate/blenheim-palace-minera...
Leaving aside the pretentiousness of the "water consciousness movement", I'm really interested in "decentralized" access to water, and I have a few questions about this technology maybe one of you can answer:
Is it portable? For example, the article mentions Burning Man. Could you theoretically bring this to a desert and extract water from the air? There's probably enough sunlight in a typical desert to power the solar panels, but is there enough water moisture in the air to extract?
(Context: I generally agree with the perspective that water treatment keeps water safe to drink.) How could I test water from the ZMW system to ensure that it meets similar safety standards as tap water? Could I process the extracted water myself? What does that process look like?
I get the general sense that this particular system is being marketed to wealthy people. Are there any similar systems that try to do this cheaply? Maybe as a mission to make water accessible to everyone.
General question around climate change: is "more water moisture in the air" one of the expected long-term effects of climate change?
Is it portable? For example, the article mentions Burning Man. Could you theoretically bring this to a desert and extract water from the air? There's probably enough sunlight in a typical desert to power the solar panels, but is there enough water moisture in the air to extract?
(Context: I generally agree with the perspective that water treatment keeps water safe to drink.) How could I test water from the ZMW system to ensure that it meets similar safety standards as tap water? Could I process the extracted water myself? What does that process look like?
I get the general sense that this particular system is being marketed to wealthy people. Are there any similar systems that try to do this cheaply? Maybe as a mission to make water accessible to everyone.
General question around climate change: is "more water moisture in the air" one of the expected long-term effects of climate change?
> Is it portable? For example, the article mentions Burning Man. Could you theoretically bring this to a desert and extract water from the air? There's probably enough sunlight in a typical desert to power the solar panels, but is there enough water moisture in the air to extract?
You could not do this at Burning Man. During the event, the humidity level is something like 3%. You literally don't sweat at Burning Man.
You could not do this at Burning Man. During the event, the humidity level is something like 3%. You literally don't sweat at Burning Man.
Children's ice cream, Mandrake?
Zero Mass is prepping, it’s quite unlike so-called “raw water”
secure, totally disconnected from all infrastructure
secure, totally disconnected from all infrastructure
In a game i work on, there is a faction of fanatic "green" monks, traversing the desert.
They plant glass trees, intricate structures, which use Silica-Gel to collect moisture during over the day and night, collected heat to turn the collected water into steam again, that is condensed near the root of the structure into a glass cavern. There it waits for a capillar effect system which pumps the liquids up at night.
Those glass trees would slowly terraform lifeless desserts back into green pastures, while withstanding sandstorms and goats.
Those glass trees would slowly terraform lifeless desserts back into green pastures, while withstanding sandstorms and goats.
[deleted]
[paywall]
Sometimes the crazy people are right.
Someone close to me used to have all kinds of health problems. These included digestive tract problems, skin problems, and many others.
After seeing many doctors and specialists over many years, they were worse off than when they started. They decided that maybe it was something in their diet. They eliminated pretty much everything except water from their diet, and that did not work.
Shortly after, they went on a trip where they were off grid for a few weeks. During that time, the health problems started going away. When they got back to civilization, the problems started coming back.
That's when the thought hit. What if those crazy people on the internet are right about municipal water?
After some experimentation, it was determined that chlorinated water was the culprit. They've moved to a house with a well and are much better off than before.
Since then, I've met other people with similar health issues who have benefited by eliminating chlorinated water as much as possible (drinking or bathing). Some have installed large carbon block filters on their municipal supply.
Chlorine has had undeniable public health benefits, but it is also a poison, and affects some people in a very detrimental way.
Someone close to me used to have all kinds of health problems. These included digestive tract problems, skin problems, and many others.
After seeing many doctors and specialists over many years, they were worse off than when they started. They decided that maybe it was something in their diet. They eliminated pretty much everything except water from their diet, and that did not work.
Shortly after, they went on a trip where they were off grid for a few weeks. During that time, the health problems started going away. When they got back to civilization, the problems started coming back.
That's when the thought hit. What if those crazy people on the internet are right about municipal water?
After some experimentation, it was determined that chlorinated water was the culprit. They've moved to a house with a well and are much better off than before.
Since then, I've met other people with similar health issues who have benefited by eliminating chlorinated water as much as possible (drinking or bathing). Some have installed large carbon block filters on their municipal supply.
Chlorine has had undeniable public health benefits, but it is also a poison, and affects some people in a very detrimental way.
I don't know about the latest research but I suppose a few people can be intolerant to chlorine at a much lower dose than most people. It happens with pretty much every substance, natural or man made.
As for your example, are you sure it is due to chlorine? From you description, there are simply too many variables. Sure, he stopped using chlorinated water, in fact, he changed water completely. He also moved. It means it can be caused by the mineral composition of water, plumbing, air quality, volatile organic compounds, etc... And all that is excluding psychological causes.
Anyways, I won't criticize your friend, he obviously made the right decision because he feels better, no matter the underlying cause. The problem is that to extrapolate to other people, we need more than anecdotal evidence.
As for your example, are you sure it is due to chlorine? From you description, there are simply too many variables. Sure, he stopped using chlorinated water, in fact, he changed water completely. He also moved. It means it can be caused by the mineral composition of water, plumbing, air quality, volatile organic compounds, etc... And all that is excluding psychological causes.
Anyways, I won't criticize your friend, he obviously made the right decision because he feels better, no matter the underlying cause. The problem is that to extrapolate to other people, we need more than anecdotal evidence.
We eventually did a double blind test.
Two buckets of water, one chlorinated. Dip a hand in each for a while. One hand turns red. Neither the person offering the water nor the person putting their hands in the water knows which is which.
The latest research is good for groups, but when its your own health, it may not have much bearing.
Two buckets of water, one chlorinated. Dip a hand in each for a while. One hand turns red. Neither the person offering the water nor the person putting their hands in the water knows which is which.
The latest research is good for groups, but when its your own health, it may not have much bearing.
Take your anecdote and replace "water" with "electromagnetic waves."
No credibility to those going off grid or those slandering them.
There will be idiots wanting things to be black or white with nothing in between - while it's the scale that creates the ability to differentiate right from wrong and what is what.
Fluoride has been linked as detrimental to IQ by Harvard - search and you'll find the study (and afaik not only by Harvard, one example should be enough).
Regarding tap water it will soon be the organisation of it through the state that stands between a massive "outbreak" of cancer in the population and keepign up the current rates of it. -Fracking has created holes inbetween water sources and oil/gas pockets - these are filled in by pumping down gravel and cement. That mixture to begin with isn't even as "qualitative" as you might think as pokects of other materials are created and as the layers of rock, dirth etc shifts the material is ground down. Within 30 years there is a really high risk of failure and over time the vast majority will fail - resulting in a poisioned watertable. Do you really think the people who have ownership of gas, oil and fracking companies will be held accountable by the legal system? Or by corrupt politicians - many who surely had a hand in the allowance to drill in the manner which has been done...
Tap water is the way to assure massive amounts of clean water to a population - that however does not mean that it does not come without a cost (if it is fluoride and a lowering of IQ to create a docile people or not) and that tradeoff should be known - both the positive and the negative of it.
Transparency drives technological evolution, if the tradeoff is known and can be argued to be problematic there is an incentive to come up with a better solution.
Fluoride has been linked as detrimental to IQ by Harvard - search and you'll find the study (and afaik not only by Harvard, one example should be enough).
Regarding tap water it will soon be the organisation of it through the state that stands between a massive "outbreak" of cancer in the population and keepign up the current rates of it. -Fracking has created holes inbetween water sources and oil/gas pockets - these are filled in by pumping down gravel and cement. That mixture to begin with isn't even as "qualitative" as you might think as pokects of other materials are created and as the layers of rock, dirth etc shifts the material is ground down. Within 30 years there is a really high risk of failure and over time the vast majority will fail - resulting in a poisioned watertable. Do you really think the people who have ownership of gas, oil and fracking companies will be held accountable by the legal system? Or by corrupt politicians - many who surely had a hand in the allowance to drill in the manner which has been done...
Tap water is the way to assure massive amounts of clean water to a population - that however does not mean that it does not come without a cost (if it is fluoride and a lowering of IQ to create a docile people or not) and that tradeoff should be known - both the positive and the negative of it.
Transparency drives technological evolution, if the tradeoff is known and can be argued to be problematic there is an incentive to come up with a better solution.
I checked this claim on Google Scholar. To my surprise, there actually appears to be some credible research linking fluoride in water to lower IQ in children. However, studies are typically in China where fluoride levels can be much higher than what is recommended in (e.g. in the US). We are also talking about roughly 0.5-1 IQ points as an average effect size, so not huge. Lastly, note that these are descriptive associations, and possible confounders include the presence of arsenic in drinking water (guess Chinese public health still has some way to go...).
Here's what seems like a reasonable meta analysis: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3491930/
There is a (rather old) NRC report here, which seems like a reputable source:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=NAB43R0rTV4C
For a more recent sceptical take, see: http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2013.3... with an ungated link at: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.699...
Anyone in the field want to comment on the credibility of this research?
Here's what seems like a reasonable meta analysis: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3491930/
There is a (rather old) NRC report here, which seems like a reputable source:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=NAB43R0rTV4C
For a more recent sceptical take, see: http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2013.3... with an ungated link at: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.699...
Anyone in the field want to comment on the credibility of this research?
Does anyone actually drink tap in china? Even boiled a lot of middle class Chinese will still prefer bottled. Not sure how they did these studies.
In 1832, there was a cholera epidemic. Thousands of new cases each week and hundreds of deaths. When it hit Paris alone, tens of thousands of people died. To quote a former mayor of New York at the time:
> Our visitation is severe but thus far it falls much short of other places. St. Louis on the Mississippi is likely to be depopulated, and Cincinnati on the Ohio is awfully scourged.
Over a hundred thousand people fled urban areas to live in the countryside to escape cholera. Hundreds of thousands of Europeans died of the disease. Our former president, James Polk, succumbed to the disease. Almost a quarter million Mexicans died. Millions of people contracted cholera around the world and hundreds of thousands of them died.
We don't really have cholera anymore. Fewer than forty cases have been reported in the US each year for the last fifty years or so. This is largely due to our ability to treat water.
You know who doesn't have treated water? The Democratic Republic of Congo. Ever hear about the water crisis in Africa? Tens of thousands of people contract cholera there (among other other diseases) each year, and a good chunk of them die.
> Transparency drives technological evolution, if the tradeoff is known and can be argued to be problematic there is an incentive to come up with a better solution.
Drinking untreated groundwater is not the answer, and not innovative in any way. It's regressionist. Encouraging other people to do it with promises of potential health benefits is ignoring our relatively recent past, where literally millions of people died because we didn't have clean tap water. Perhaps we've lulled ourselves into a false sense of security, not having to worry about dying from terrible waterborne diseases.
Also, fluoridated water doesn't decrease your IQ [0], and claiming it does is irresponsible.
[0] https://www.snopes.com/water-fluoridation-reduces-iq/
> Our visitation is severe but thus far it falls much short of other places. St. Louis on the Mississippi is likely to be depopulated, and Cincinnati on the Ohio is awfully scourged.
Over a hundred thousand people fled urban areas to live in the countryside to escape cholera. Hundreds of thousands of Europeans died of the disease. Our former president, James Polk, succumbed to the disease. Almost a quarter million Mexicans died. Millions of people contracted cholera around the world and hundreds of thousands of them died.
We don't really have cholera anymore. Fewer than forty cases have been reported in the US each year for the last fifty years or so. This is largely due to our ability to treat water.
You know who doesn't have treated water? The Democratic Republic of Congo. Ever hear about the water crisis in Africa? Tens of thousands of people contract cholera there (among other other diseases) each year, and a good chunk of them die.
> Transparency drives technological evolution, if the tradeoff is known and can be argued to be problematic there is an incentive to come up with a better solution.
Drinking untreated groundwater is not the answer, and not innovative in any way. It's regressionist. Encouraging other people to do it with promises of potential health benefits is ignoring our relatively recent past, where literally millions of people died because we didn't have clean tap water. Perhaps we've lulled ourselves into a false sense of security, not having to worry about dying from terrible waterborne diseases.
Also, fluoridated water doesn't decrease your IQ [0], and claiming it does is irresponsible.
[0] https://www.snopes.com/water-fluoridation-reduces-iq/
Here's one such (meta) study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3491930/#!po=58...
Note that it focuses on child development and several of the included studies have populations which rely on water sources contaminated way beyond typical fluorodation (up to 10mg/l vs 1mg/l).
Also we're talking about a small difference in IQ (-0.5 point, still very costly in personal and societal terms); nothing about making populations docile.
Note that it focuses on child development and several of the included studies have populations which rely on water sources contaminated way beyond typical fluorodation (up to 10mg/l vs 1mg/l).
Also we're talking about a small difference in IQ (-0.5 point, still very costly in personal and societal terms); nothing about making populations docile.
NYC has been fluoridating water since the 1964. Doesn’t seem to have affected IQ or made anyone docile.
That is not a productive debate to be had. Conspiracies aside, there are clearly questions to be asked: many studies show negative effects of fluoridation such as an increased rate of fluorosis in children, over-exposure, including evidence of neurotoxicity. Even more worrying, the sources of fluoride used have been shown to be frequently contaminated by much, much worse substances due to their origin as a manufacturing by-product.
Most importantly, countries that do not fluoridate water (~95% of the world) have experienced the same reduction in tooth decay as the ones who do.
Most importantly, countries that do not fluoridate water (~95% of the world) have experienced the same reduction in tooth decay as the ones who do.
They don’t call them UK teeth for nothing. It obviously does have an effect on tooth decay, I’ve seen a lot more problems in my friends who come from non-flouride societies with similar dental hygiene to myself.
http://www.bmj.com/content/351/bmj.h6543
The UK is (was) actually one of the few EU members to fluoridate their water for a slice of the population.
The UK is (was) actually one of the few EU members to fluoridate their water for a slice of the population.
just last week there were stories about the crime rate in nyc hitting lows not seen since the 1950s... ;)
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/27/nyregion/new-york-city-cr...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/27/nyregion/new-york-city-cr...
This is the study you are talking about --> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3491930/
"The estimated decrease in average IQ associated with fluoride exposure based on our analysis may seem small and may be within the measurement error of IQ testing."
Just out of curiosity, are you an anti-vaxxer?
"The estimated decrease in average IQ associated with fluoride exposure based on our analysis may seem small and may be within the measurement error of IQ testing."
Just out of curiosity, are you an anti-vaxxer?
Hey some places do have subpar water, I live in one with arsenic and chromium flirting above EPA guidelines. But a $150 reverse osmosis system from Amazon and a $30 deionizing filter after that if I want to get crazy and almost a 0 ppm TDS (Total Dissolved Solids) reading on a $10 eBay TDS meter solves that problem. It provides almost limitless fresh perfect water to drink.