Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
How much thought/money do you put into the water you drink?
Options
Replies
-
Mapalicious wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Mapalicious wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Mapalicious wrote: »ForgetfoodDrinktea wrote: »'If that was true the human race would have died out thousands of years ago!! I know it sounds rank but fact is our bodies are equipped to build immunity to bacteria like that! I'm talking clean creek water here like nature intended!'
This is true... Probiotics are a very important part of older nutritional lifestyles. I'm glad your body can handle that water. However many normal people nowadays couldn't handle this type of water.
Call it evolution or just dietary changes, but our bodies really can't handle that bacterial disaster unless we eat the right things.
Sure, we could make it a possibility. What with the probiotics in kombucha, yogurt, kefir, vinegar, fermented foods, etc. We can build a stronger immunity.
People today have it easy, with tap water that's precleaned and fancy vegetable washers and scrubbers and refrigerators.
Considering that many people around the world survive just fine on less-than-ideal water, it's less "evolutionary" on the human DNA scale than it is on the scale of our own microbial ecosystem's evolution (like..what's in our bodies and guts)...you train it to be hardcore, it will be hardcore for you. While some basic sanitation is great (not dying before the age of 5 from diarrhea is pretty awesome), living in an over-sanitized landscape is awful for us too, IMO. We're delicate, and creating super-bugs that can kill us.
Also bottled water (especially in plastic water bottles, and no "BPA free" doesn't mean it doesn't have other cancerous alternatives) isn't good for you.
Citation needed.
Sure, @FunkyTobias
BPA is Bisphenol A...it's easy enough to look up on wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisphenol_A) where you can read about it's estrogen-like activity, and why it's been banned from baby bottles. As it also says...current research is still in process (as always...science!!), and that's what I find most interesting.
So, BPA is tricky because it affects the endocrine system (as in it affects your estrogen and androgen receptors: it can mess with your reproductive system, among other things). Also, recent studies show that the dose-response relationship of BPA is entirely against common sense: high doses don't affect health, but low doses do. Unfortunately, the CDC's current stance is based on animal studies in which they were given extremely high rates.
I know this stuff because I work in envt'l and food health (MPH, PhD-in-process). Also, my fiance is a chemist/toxicologist researching this right now in a university/govt partnership. It's interesting to be at the forefront of this research. We'll likely see changes in CDC recommendations in the next few years. There are a few papers out about this in animal studies, but thanks to the Nazi Holocaust & Tuskeegee trials we don't really test things on people anymore. Working on doing other kinds of epidemiological studies though.
BPA is often replaced w/ BPF or BPE, (also byproducts of oil refinement processes - just like most plastics - which is why they were suggested as 'replacements' for BPA when studies about its danger started coming out). These replacement compounds, unfortunately, have also been linked to the same issues, and also carcinogenicity, DNA damage, and metabolic effects. The search goes on!
Here is a good citation w/ good review of other recent work: https://toxsci.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2014/02/27/toxsci.kfu030.full.pdf
TL;DR - probably best to use glass/ceramic containers, or at the very least do not put hot food in plastic, not even "bpa-free" plastic.
Re: bold.
Anyone with even a cursory knowledge of statistics could tell you that you're dealing with a statistical artifact, not a real result.
And I find it hilarious that you are more worried about the trivial risk of plastic than the very real risk of contaminated water.
No worries, mate. I'll trust my ivy-league trained chemist over you at the moment. And changing to glass is no biggie for me.
I'm not sure what you mean by saying you "find it hilarious." Is that sarcasm? I don't believe I ever said anything about not being also concerned with "contaminated water" - what are the contaminants you care about, @FunkyTobias ?
E coli, giardia, etc.
You know. All that stuff you're supposedly training your system to be "hardcore " with.
0 -
As long as your municipality is within spec, activated carbon filtration should add no more than 5 ppm chloride (5 mg/L) to your water. That is insignificant compared to dietary chloride/chloride that may already be found in your water supply.
I do not miss the chlorine in municipal water, but I understand and agree with the why they do it for public water supplies.
(keep track of your n's and d's as you tldr my post).
"tldr"? Please, give me more credit than that, @_John_ ! I'm not the type to briefly glance at a post, dismiss things out of hand, jump to conclusions and rage at people for no reason! I've been a victim of those who have done so myself!
I do admit, though, to having to look up the reason they put chlorine in water. Of course, I would rather drink water with chlorine than have germs in it, but I would rather not have either at all, if possible. That's why I don't worry about it when I'm out, or when I'm having tea or something. We appear to be in agreement about that.
0 -
I just bought and installed a PUR water filtration system for my kitchen sink. After Flint happened and I heard a piece on NPR about another small town in New Hampshire that is having water problems, and our congressman is pushing to repeal the clean water act, it was all too much for me. I installed the system. It was quite easy and I find that I'm drinking way more water than I did before I installed it. So it was a win/win.0
-
At home I'm drinking filtered tap water mostly.0
-
FunkyTobias wrote: »Mapalicious wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Mapalicious wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Mapalicious wrote: »ForgetfoodDrinktea wrote: »'If that was true the human race would have died out thousands of years ago!! I know it sounds rank but fact is our bodies are equipped to build immunity to bacteria like that! I'm talking clean creek water here like nature intended!'
This is true... Probiotics are a very important part of older nutritional lifestyles. I'm glad your body can handle that water. However many normal people nowadays couldn't handle this type of water.
Call it evolution or just dietary changes, but our bodies really can't handle that bacterial disaster unless we eat the right things.
Sure, we could make it a possibility. What with the probiotics in kombucha, yogurt, kefir, vinegar, fermented foods, etc. We can build a stronger immunity.
People today have it easy, with tap water that's precleaned and fancy vegetable washers and scrubbers and refrigerators.
Considering that many people around the world survive just fine on less-than-ideal water, it's less "evolutionary" on the human DNA scale than it is on the scale of our own microbial ecosystem's evolution (like..what's in our bodies and guts)...you train it to be hardcore, it will be hardcore for you. While some basic sanitation is great (not dying before the age of 5 from diarrhea is pretty awesome), living in an over-sanitized landscape is awful for us too, IMO. We're delicate, and creating super-bugs that can kill us.
Also bottled water (especially in plastic water bottles, and no "BPA free" doesn't mean it doesn't have other cancerous alternatives) isn't good for you.
Citation needed.
Sure, @FunkyTobias
BPA is Bisphenol A...it's easy enough to look up on wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisphenol_A) where you can read about it's estrogen-like activity, and why it's been banned from baby bottles. As it also says...current research is still in process (as always...science!!), and that's what I find most interesting.
So, BPA is tricky because it affects the endocrine system (as in it affects your estrogen and androgen receptors: it can mess with your reproductive system, among other things). Also, recent studies show that the dose-response relationship of BPA is entirely against common sense: high doses don't affect health, but low doses do. Unfortunately, the CDC's current stance is based on animal studies in which they were given extremely high rates.
I know this stuff because I work in envt'l and food health (MPH, PhD-in-process). Also, my fiance is a chemist/toxicologist researching this right now in a university/govt partnership. It's interesting to be at the forefront of this research. We'll likely see changes in CDC recommendations in the next few years. There are a few papers out about this in animal studies, but thanks to the Nazi Holocaust & Tuskeegee trials we don't really test things on people anymore. Working on doing other kinds of epidemiological studies though.
BPA is often replaced w/ BPF or BPE, (also byproducts of oil refinement processes - just like most plastics - which is why they were suggested as 'replacements' for BPA when studies about its danger started coming out). These replacement compounds, unfortunately, have also been linked to the same issues, and also carcinogenicity, DNA damage, and metabolic effects. The search goes on!
Here is a good citation w/ good review of other recent work: https://toxsci.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2014/02/27/toxsci.kfu030.full.pdf
TL;DR - probably best to use glass/ceramic containers, or at the very least do not put hot food in plastic, not even "bpa-free" plastic.
Re: bold.
Anyone with even a cursory knowledge of statistics could tell you that you're dealing with a statistical artifact, not a real result.
And I find it hilarious that you are more worried about the trivial risk of plastic than the very real risk of contaminated water.
No worries, mate. I'll trust my ivy-league trained chemist over you at the moment. And changing to glass is no biggie for me.
I'm not sure what you mean by saying you "find it hilarious." Is that sarcasm? I don't believe I ever said anything about not being also concerned with "contaminated water" - what are the contaminants you care about, @FunkyTobias ?
E coli, giardia, etc.
You know. All that stuff you're supposedly training your system to be "hardcore " with.
Sure, @FunkyTobias . Those are good ones to be worried about! Good thing they're hardly in circulation in the US. Giardia is almost exterminated, and e. coli circulates on food more than in water.
I am not sure why you think I'm trying to build up an immunity against them? Where have I ever stated that? I have had giardia, as well as amoebic dysentery, and it's really no fun (even though I lost 30 lbs w/ the two of them, once. Do not recommend that weight-loss plan!) Also, I certainly don't want to make light of the fact that many people w/o good water systems die and get ill un-necessarily. What I find ridiculous is this thing where people in the 1st world think they need to purchase bottled water to be safe and healthy. It's such a scam. (Barring, of course, those places where towns say it's important, and also not including folks who filter for taste).
However, there's something to be said for the body building up immunity to certain organisms (not the more harmful/fatal ones you've mentioned), from either drinking or bathing in water. For example cryptosporidium is a small parasite that many people in 3rd world countries are quite immune to, but that we in the 1st are not. I think you can easily surmise I'm not suggesting we all start putting feces back into our water systems. I think a little less of the anti-bacterial hyper-sterile craze could do folks a bit of good, aye?0 -
Apologies, that disclaimer was meant for the "peanut gallery" not you specifically.LHWhite903 wrote: »As long as your municipality is within spec, activated carbon filtration should add no more than 5 ppm chloride (5 mg/L) to your water. That is insignificant compared to dietary chloride/chloride that may already be found in your water supply.
I do not miss the chlorine in municipal water, but I understand and agree with the why they do it for public water supplies.
(keep track of your n's and d's as you tldr my post).
"tldr"? Please, give me more credit than that, @_John_ ! I'm not the type to briefly glance at a post, dismiss things out of hand, jump to conclusions and rage at people for no reason! I've been a victim of those who have done so myself!
I do admit, though, to having to look up the reason they put chlorine in water. Of course, I would rather drink water with chlorine than have germs in it, but I would rather not have either at all, if possible. That's why I don't worry about it when I'm out, or when I'm having tea or something. We appear to be in agreement about that.
0 -
Mapalicious wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Mapalicious wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Mapalicious wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Mapalicious wrote: »ForgetfoodDrinktea wrote: »'If that was true the human race would have died out thousands of years ago!! I know it sounds rank but fact is our bodies are equipped to build immunity to bacteria like that! I'm talking clean creek water here like nature intended!'
This is true... Probiotics are a very important part of older nutritional lifestyles. I'm glad your body can handle that water. However many normal people nowadays couldn't handle this type of water.
Call it evolution or just dietary changes, but our bodies really can't handle that bacterial disaster unless we eat the right things.
Sure, we could make it a possibility. What with the probiotics in kombucha, yogurt, kefir, vinegar, fermented foods, etc. We can build a stronger immunity.
People today have it easy, with tap water that's precleaned and fancy vegetable washers and scrubbers and refrigerators.
Considering that many people around the world survive just fine on less-than-ideal water, it's less "evolutionary" on the human DNA scale than it is on the scale of our own microbial ecosystem's evolution (like..what's in our bodies and guts)...you train it to be hardcore, it will be hardcore for you. While some basic sanitation is great (not dying before the age of 5 from diarrhea is pretty awesome), living in an over-sanitized landscape is awful for us too, IMO. We're delicate, and creating super-bugs that can kill us.
Also bottled water (especially in plastic water bottles, and no "BPA free" doesn't mean it doesn't have other cancerous alternatives) isn't good for you.
Citation needed.
Sure, @FunkyTobias
BPA is Bisphenol A...it's easy enough to look up on wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisphenol_A) where you can read about it's estrogen-like activity, and why it's been banned from baby bottles. As it also says...current research is still in process (as always...science!!), and that's what I find most interesting.
So, BPA is tricky because it affects the endocrine system (as in it affects your estrogen and androgen receptors: it can mess with your reproductive system, among other things). Also, recent studies show that the dose-response relationship of BPA is entirely against common sense: high doses don't affect health, but low doses do. Unfortunately, the CDC's current stance is based on animal studies in which they were given extremely high rates.
I know this stuff because I work in envt'l and food health (MPH, PhD-in-process). Also, my fiance is a chemist/toxicologist researching this right now in a university/govt partnership. It's interesting to be at the forefront of this research. We'll likely see changes in CDC recommendations in the next few years. There are a few papers out about this in animal studies, but thanks to the Nazi Holocaust & Tuskeegee trials we don't really test things on people anymore. Working on doing other kinds of epidemiological studies though.
BPA is often replaced w/ BPF or BPE, (also byproducts of oil refinement processes - just like most plastics - which is why they were suggested as 'replacements' for BPA when studies about its danger started coming out). These replacement compounds, unfortunately, have also been linked to the same issues, and also carcinogenicity, DNA damage, and metabolic effects. The search goes on!
Here is a good citation w/ good review of other recent work: https://toxsci.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2014/02/27/toxsci.kfu030.full.pdf
TL;DR - probably best to use glass/ceramic containers, or at the very least do not put hot food in plastic, not even "bpa-free" plastic.
Re: bold.
Anyone with even a cursory knowledge of statistics could tell you that you're dealing with a statistical artifact, not a real result.
And I find it hilarious that you are more worried about the trivial risk of plastic than the very real risk of contaminated water.
No worries, mate. I'll trust my ivy-league trained chemist over you at the moment. And changing to glass is no biggie for me.
I'm not sure what you mean by saying you "find it hilarious." Is that sarcasm? I don't believe I ever said anything about not being also concerned with "contaminated water" - what are the contaminants you care about, @FunkyTobias ?
E coli, giardia, etc.
You know. All that stuff you're supposedly training your system to be "hardcore " with.
Sure, @FunkyTobias . Those are good ones to be worried about! Good thing they're hardly in circulation in the US. Giardia is almost exterminated, and e. coli circulates on food more than in water.
I am not sure why you think I'm trying to build up an immunity against them? Where have I ever stated that? I have had giardia, as well as amoebic dysentery, and it's really no fun (even though I lost 30 lbs w/ the two of them, once. Do not recommend that weight-loss plan!) Also, I certainly don't want to make light of the fact that many people w/o good water systems die and get ill un-necessarily.
No kidding...0 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »Mapalicious wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Mapalicious wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Mapalicious wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Mapalicious wrote: »ForgetfoodDrinktea wrote: »'If that was true the human race would have died out thousands of years ago!! I know it sounds rank but fact is our bodies are equipped to build immunity to bacteria like that! I'm talking clean creek water here like nature intended!'
This is true... Probiotics are a very important part of older nutritional lifestyles. I'm glad your body can handle that water. However many normal people nowadays couldn't handle this type of water.
Call it evolution or just dietary changes, but our bodies really can't handle that bacterial disaster unless we eat the right things.
Sure, we could make it a possibility. What with the probiotics in kombucha, yogurt, kefir, vinegar, fermented foods, etc. We can build a stronger immunity.
People today have it easy, with tap water that's precleaned and fancy vegetable washers and scrubbers and refrigerators.
Considering that many people around the world survive just fine on less-than-ideal water, it's less "evolutionary" on the human DNA scale than it is on the scale of our own microbial ecosystem's evolution (like..what's in our bodies and guts)...you train it to be hardcore, it will be hardcore for you. While some basic sanitation is great (not dying before the age of 5 from diarrhea is pretty awesome), living in an over-sanitized landscape is awful for us too, IMO. We're delicate, and creating super-bugs that can kill us.
Also bottled water (especially in plastic water bottles, and no "BPA free" doesn't mean it doesn't have other cancerous alternatives) isn't good for you.
Citation needed.
Sure, @FunkyTobias
BPA is Bisphenol A...it's easy enough to look up on wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisphenol_A) where you can read about it's estrogen-like activity, and why it's been banned from baby bottles. As it also says...current research is still in process (as always...science!!), and that's what I find most interesting.
So, BPA is tricky because it affects the endocrine system (as in it affects your estrogen and androgen receptors: it can mess with your reproductive system, among other things). Also, recent studies show that the dose-response relationship of BPA is entirely against common sense: high doses don't affect health, but low doses do. Unfortunately, the CDC's current stance is based on animal studies in which they were given extremely high rates.
I know this stuff because I work in envt'l and food health (MPH, PhD-in-process). Also, my fiance is a chemist/toxicologist researching this right now in a university/govt partnership. It's interesting to be at the forefront of this research. We'll likely see changes in CDC recommendations in the next few years. There are a few papers out about this in animal studies, but thanks to the Nazi Holocaust & Tuskeegee trials we don't really test things on people anymore. Working on doing other kinds of epidemiological studies though.
BPA is often replaced w/ BPF or BPE, (also byproducts of oil refinement processes - just like most plastics - which is why they were suggested as 'replacements' for BPA when studies about its danger started coming out). These replacement compounds, unfortunately, have also been linked to the same issues, and also carcinogenicity, DNA damage, and metabolic effects. The search goes on!
Here is a good citation w/ good review of other recent work: https://toxsci.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2014/02/27/toxsci.kfu030.full.pdf
TL;DR - probably best to use glass/ceramic containers, or at the very least do not put hot food in plastic, not even "bpa-free" plastic.
Re: bold.
Anyone with even a cursory knowledge of statistics could tell you that you're dealing with a statistical artifact, not a real result.
And I find it hilarious that you are more worried about the trivial risk of plastic than the very real risk of contaminated water.
No worries, mate. I'll trust my ivy-league trained chemist over you at the moment. And changing to glass is no biggie for me.
I'm not sure what you mean by saying you "find it hilarious." Is that sarcasm? I don't believe I ever said anything about not being also concerned with "contaminated water" - what are the contaminants you care about, @FunkyTobias ?
E coli, giardia, etc.
You know. All that stuff you're supposedly training your system to be "hardcore " with.
Sure, @FunkyTobias . Those are good ones to be worried about! Good thing they're hardly in circulation in the US. Giardia is almost exterminated, and e. coli circulates on food more than in water.
I am not sure why you think I'm trying to build up an immunity against them? Where have I ever stated that? I have had giardia, as well as amoebic dysentery, and it's really no fun (even though I lost 30 lbs w/ the two of them, once. Do not recommend that weight-loss plan!) Also, I certainly don't want to make light of the fact that many people w/o good water systems die and get ill un-necessarily.
No kidding...
I guess nobody told the CDC
During the past 30 years, Giardia infection has become recognized as a common cause of waterborne disease in humans in the United States. Giardia can be found worldwide and within every region of the United States
http://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/private/wells/disease/giardia.html0 -
summerkissed wrote: »The point I'm making is humans shouldn't be drinking water that animals defecate in without filtering
If that was true the human race would have died out thousands of years ago!! I know it sounds rank but fact is our bodies are equipped to build immunity to bacteria like that! I'm talking clean creek water here like nature intended!!
So why do so many people in developing countries (especially children) die of dysentery or parasitic infections from lack of clean water? Do you think all of that is just made up? smh at the ignorance...0 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Mapalicious wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Mapalicious wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Mapalicious wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Mapalicious wrote: »ForgetfoodDrinktea wrote: »'If that was true the human race would have died out thousands of years ago!! I know it sounds rank but fact is our bodies are equipped to build immunity to bacteria like that! I'm talking clean creek water here like nature intended!'
This is true... Probiotics are a very important part of older nutritional lifestyles. I'm glad your body can handle that water. However many normal people nowadays couldn't handle this type of water.
Call it evolution or just dietary changes, but our bodies really can't handle that bacterial disaster unless we eat the right things.
Sure, we could make it a possibility. What with the probiotics in kombucha, yogurt, kefir, vinegar, fermented foods, etc. We can build a stronger immunity.
People today have it easy, with tap water that's precleaned and fancy vegetable washers and scrubbers and refrigerators.
Considering that many people around the world survive just fine on less-than-ideal water, it's less "evolutionary" on the human DNA scale than it is on the scale of our own microbial ecosystem's evolution (like..what's in our bodies and guts)...you train it to be hardcore, it will be hardcore for you. While some basic sanitation is great (not dying before the age of 5 from diarrhea is pretty awesome), living in an over-sanitized landscape is awful for us too, IMO. We're delicate, and creating super-bugs that can kill us.
Also bottled water (especially in plastic water bottles, and no "BPA free" doesn't mean it doesn't have other cancerous alternatives) isn't good for you.
Citation needed.
Sure, @FunkyTobias
BPA is Bisphenol A...it's easy enough to look up on wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisphenol_A) where you can read about it's estrogen-like activity, and why it's been banned from baby bottles. As it also says...current research is still in process (as always...science!!), and that's what I find most interesting.
So, BPA is tricky because it affects the endocrine system (as in it affects your estrogen and androgen receptors: it can mess with your reproductive system, among other things). Also, recent studies show that the dose-response relationship of BPA is entirely against common sense: high doses don't affect health, but low doses do. Unfortunately, the CDC's current stance is based on animal studies in which they were given extremely high rates.
I know this stuff because I work in envt'l and food health (MPH, PhD-in-process). Also, my fiance is a chemist/toxicologist researching this right now in a university/govt partnership. It's interesting to be at the forefront of this research. We'll likely see changes in CDC recommendations in the next few years. There are a few papers out about this in animal studies, but thanks to the Nazi Holocaust & Tuskeegee trials we don't really test things on people anymore. Working on doing other kinds of epidemiological studies though.
BPA is often replaced w/ BPF or BPE, (also byproducts of oil refinement processes - just like most plastics - which is why they were suggested as 'replacements' for BPA when studies about its danger started coming out). These replacement compounds, unfortunately, have also been linked to the same issues, and also carcinogenicity, DNA damage, and metabolic effects. The search goes on!
Here is a good citation w/ good review of other recent work: https://toxsci.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2014/02/27/toxsci.kfu030.full.pdf
TL;DR - probably best to use glass/ceramic containers, or at the very least do not put hot food in plastic, not even "bpa-free" plastic.
Re: bold.
Anyone with even a cursory knowledge of statistics could tell you that you're dealing with a statistical artifact, not a real result.
And I find it hilarious that you are more worried about the trivial risk of plastic than the very real risk of contaminated water.
No worries, mate. I'll trust my ivy-league trained chemist over you at the moment. And changing to glass is no biggie for me.
I'm not sure what you mean by saying you "find it hilarious." Is that sarcasm? I don't believe I ever said anything about not being also concerned with "contaminated water" - what are the contaminants you care about, @FunkyTobias ?
E coli, giardia, etc.
You know. All that stuff you're supposedly training your system to be "hardcore " with.
Sure, @FunkyTobias . Those are good ones to be worried about! Good thing they're hardly in circulation in the US. Giardia is almost exterminated, and e. coli circulates on food more than in water.
I am not sure why you think I'm trying to build up an immunity against them? Where have I ever stated that? I have had giardia, as well as amoebic dysentery, and it's really no fun (even though I lost 30 lbs w/ the two of them, once. Do not recommend that weight-loss plan!) Also, I certainly don't want to make light of the fact that many people w/o good water systems die and get ill un-necessarily.
No kidding...
I guess nobody told the CDC
During the past 30 years, Giardia infection has become recognized as a common cause of waterborne disease in humans in the United States. Giardia can be found worldwide and within every region of the United States
http://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/private/wells/disease/giardia.html
What gets me is the claim that she doesn't have to worry about giardia because it's "almost exterminated" and then she throws out there she's had it before.0 -
Thought: none; money: minimal0
-
Aside from putting a Brita filter on the tap and changing it when need be, I don't really worry much about my drinking water.
However, I do live with an Environmental Engineer who specialized in wastewater treatment, so I let him handle the water issues at our house. He doesn't seem worried.0 -
0 of both. I'm not going to pay for water. It's a waste of my money and a waste of resources. There are already enough people contributing to the # of plastic bottles in land fills and recycling does not result in 0 net energy/pollution. I have a well at home, which I test annually, and the water reports for the nearby town are SAT so I'm good filling up from the tap wherever I go.0
-
summerkissed wrote: »summerkissed wrote: »We drink creek water.....no filter, no testing! Our water is tannin stained so it's a brown color, the cows poo in it lol, animals drink from it and yup we drink it!......we also have very strong tummies and excellent immune systems.....ours kids have only had gastro once in there lives (as young kids when we were living in city) even when gastro and bugs go around school the kids don't pick them up! We think it's because they are exposed to the bugs and it's enough to build up our immune systems! We do buy bottles water if we are staying in the city because we can't handle the taste and smell of the chlorine!
Wow
You know there's a campaign called Water Aid that fights hard to raise money to protect people in the third world from having to drink dirty water that animals defecate in
You mean they have clean water over there?? Here I was thinking the water was filthy with human waste, rubbish due to unsanitary living conditions if I knew it was only the odd cow poop and kangaroo poo I'd never give them money!
The poo itself isn't the problem persay, its the bacteria/viruses/parasite eggs. Also if the animals are consuming high quantities of certain substances, such as arsenic, and then urinating/defecating into the water sources...well, you get the point.0 -
Apologies, that disclaimer was meant for the "peanut gallery" not you specifically.
No problem, I just assumed you were referring to me with that because the first part of the post was directed towards me and I felt my own post had sounded ignorant enough to give you the wrong impression. I was more concerned about how you thought of me than insulted.hazleyes81 wrote: »The poo itself isn't the problem persay, its the bacteria/viruses/parasite eggs. Also if the animals are consuming high quantities of certain substances, such as arsenic, and then urinating/defecating into the water sources...well, you get the point.
That makes sense. After all, some sprouts from plants are given their start by being consumed as seeds.0 -
http://ausglobetrotter.com/2013/10/Tasmania.html
My home......you people can be so so rude!!
I'm not skinny because of parasites or bacteria! nor am I a bad mum because my kids drink from the creek! I don't live were there's 'town water' yup animals drink from our creek!! No one around here filters water caught off roofs (but birds still poop on there) we are fit, we are healthy, our kids get dirty they aren't wrapped in cotton wool! We don't smother them in antibacterials before they eat! In fact we don't use antibacterials or bleach at all in our house.....Ohhhh and before you say anything my home is beautiful, clean and fresh...... I DONT LIVE IN A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY so why compare me to them! Where I live its pristine, beautiful and untouched........I live in Beautiful Tasmania0 -
summerkissed wrote: »The point I'm making is humans shouldn't be drinking water that animals defecate in without filtering
If that was true the human race would have died out thousands of years ago!! I know it sounds rank but fact is our bodies are equipped to build immunity to bacteria like that! I'm talking clean creek water here like nature intended!!
So why do so many people in developing countries (especially children) die of dysentery or parasitic infections from lack of clean water? Do you think all of that is just made up? smh at the ignorance...
When did I say I live in a developing country??? And I never said I have dirty water........quote I'm talking clean creek water here like nature intended!
My water supply! Can hardly compare that to a developing/third world country!!!!
Actually yes.
Many cases of giardia come from water that looks perfectly clean.
1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 914 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions