drinking water quality in Germany?
Aug 13th 2004, 5:06 pm
#61
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: drinking water quality in Germany?
devil extrapolated from data available...
> On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 09:45:26 -0500, Olivers wrote:
>
>> Tim Challenger extrapolated from data available...
>>
>>
>>>
>>> But there are a number of treatments. Chlorination is only one.
>>
>> 1. Chlorination is inexpensive, using a treatment chemical which is
>> widely available as a byproduct.
>>
>> 2. Chlorination is about the only treatment which has substantial
>> residual effect, remaining in the water for a long enough period to
>> destroy bacteria, etc. introduced in the distribution system or a
>> residence or building's water supply lines.
>
>
> I would think that bromine, which is what I use in my pool, would too.
> With much less smell and taste. But it's more expensive.
A good bit more, while chlorine is a cheap byproduct from the petrochemical
industry.
>
> This said, residuals are a mixed blessing. If you piping is good,
> with no leaks or points below atmospheric pressure and no
> contamination, and a reasonable residence time, a residual is not
> necessary. Obviously water with no residual is much nicer.
>
> If your piping is antiquated and you don't trust it (which I suspect
> is more or less the state of affair in most of the US)
Distrust maybe, but most of the residences in the US have fairly modern
distribution pipes (unfortunately, all too many of which were constructed
of polymers later judged to be unnsuitable).
>then clearly
> you need a residual. In Sao Paulo, the way they handled a poor piping
> which they knew had high points where dirty stuff was sucked in, they
> maintained a very high residual. more or less requiring filtration
> before drinking.
Most "newer" US cities use elevated storage, holding the water to the point
that residuuals are largely eliminated.
>
> In some European countries, ozone is used, with obviously no residual,
> and there does not seem to have led to any public health issue.
>
In the US, the public's view of ozone has so negatively impacted that even
in a contained system. there would be substantial outcry from "concerned
citizens". I suspect that "ozone treatment" would be harder to sell than
"plannned freon releases".
TMO
> On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 09:45:26 -0500, Olivers wrote:
>
>> Tim Challenger extrapolated from data available...
>>
>>
>>>
>>> But there are a number of treatments. Chlorination is only one.
>>
>> 1. Chlorination is inexpensive, using a treatment chemical which is
>> widely available as a byproduct.
>>
>> 2. Chlorination is about the only treatment which has substantial
>> residual effect, remaining in the water for a long enough period to
>> destroy bacteria, etc. introduced in the distribution system or a
>> residence or building's water supply lines.
>
>
> I would think that bromine, which is what I use in my pool, would too.
> With much less smell and taste. But it's more expensive.
A good bit more, while chlorine is a cheap byproduct from the petrochemical
industry.
>
> This said, residuals are a mixed blessing. If you piping is good,
> with no leaks or points below atmospheric pressure and no
> contamination, and a reasonable residence time, a residual is not
> necessary. Obviously water with no residual is much nicer.
>
> If your piping is antiquated and you don't trust it (which I suspect
> is more or less the state of affair in most of the US)
Distrust maybe, but most of the residences in the US have fairly modern
distribution pipes (unfortunately, all too many of which were constructed
of polymers later judged to be unnsuitable).
>then clearly
> you need a residual. In Sao Paulo, the way they handled a poor piping
> which they knew had high points where dirty stuff was sucked in, they
> maintained a very high residual. more or less requiring filtration
> before drinking.
Most "newer" US cities use elevated storage, holding the water to the point
that residuuals are largely eliminated.
>
> In some European countries, ozone is used, with obviously no residual,
> and there does not seem to have led to any public health issue.
>
In the US, the public's view of ozone has so negatively impacted that even
in a contained system. there would be substantial outcry from "concerned
citizens". I suspect that "ozone treatment" would be harder to sell than
"plannned freon releases".
TMO
Aug 14th 2004, 3:50 am
#62
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: drinking water quality in Germany?
On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 00:06:06 -0500, Olivers wrote:
> devil extrapolated from data available...
>
>> On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 09:45:26 -0500, Olivers wrote:
>>
>>> 2. Chlorination is about the only treatment which has substantial
>>> residual effect, remaining in the water for a long enough period to
>>> destroy bacteria, etc. introduced in the distribution system or a
>>> residence or building's water supply lines.
>>
>>
>> I would think that bromine, which is what I use in my pool, would too.
>> With much less smell and taste. But it's more expensive.
>
> A good bit more, while chlorine is a cheap byproduct from the petrochemical
> industry.
Don't tell me :-). (Mind you, the 10 lbs or so that I use per year don't
amount to more than $100. And I don't think I want the whole house to
smell of chlorine.)
>> This said, residuals are a mixed blessing. If you piping is good, with
>> no leaks or points below atmospheric pressure and no contamination, and
>> a reasonable residence time, a residual is not necessary. Obviously
>> water with no residual is much nicer.
>>
>> If your piping is antiquated and you don't trust it (which I suspect is
>> more or less the state of affair in most of the US)
>
> Distrust maybe, but most of the residences in the US have fairly modern
> distribution pipes (unfortunately, all too many of which were
> constructed of polymers later judged to be unnsuitable).
Sure, houses are often fairly new in the US. Perhaps I should have been
more specific, I was now thinking about that side.
But OTOH, city water piping is often in poor shape for a variety of
reasons. Starting with your typical attitude about taxes. No cash flow, no
money for infrastructure maintenance. My understanding is that many or
most municipal water systems in the US are antiquated and in poor shape.
>> then clearly
>> you need a residual. In Sao Paulo, the way they handled a poor piping
>> which they knew had high points where dirty stuff was sucked in, they
>> maintained a very high residual. more or less requiring filtration
>> before drinking.
>
> Most "newer" US cities use elevated storage, holding the water to the point
> that residuuals are largely eliminated.
You always need a pressurized system. It's not only "newer" places. Pld
ones too. You can pressurize your system without elevated storage, or
have "elevated storage" with minimal capacity, just enough for provising
a pressure reference.
But that's not really the point. Even with that (a given), you might
encounter situations (high point, higher than design flow rate, etc.)
where you end up temporarily with points under depression.
>> In some European countries, ozone is used, with obviously no residual,
>> and there does not seem to have led to any public health issue.
>>
> In the US, the public's view of ozone has so negatively impacted that
> even in a contained system. there would be substantial outcry from
> "concerned citizens". I suspect that "ozone treatment" would be harder
> to sell than "plannned freon releases".
You may think of either the ozone layer, where ozonr is a good thing, or
ground level ozone pollution as the bad thing. But ozone used in water is
very short-lived. I don't think people are stupid to the point of going
against that. Surely from an environmental standpoint chlorine is much
much more nasty stuff.
> devil extrapolated from data available...
>
>> On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 09:45:26 -0500, Olivers wrote:
>>
>>> 2. Chlorination is about the only treatment which has substantial
>>> residual effect, remaining in the water for a long enough period to
>>> destroy bacteria, etc. introduced in the distribution system or a
>>> residence or building's water supply lines.
>>
>>
>> I would think that bromine, which is what I use in my pool, would too.
>> With much less smell and taste. But it's more expensive.
>
> A good bit more, while chlorine is a cheap byproduct from the petrochemical
> industry.
Don't tell me :-). (Mind you, the 10 lbs or so that I use per year don't
amount to more than $100. And I don't think I want the whole house to
smell of chlorine.)
>> This said, residuals are a mixed blessing. If you piping is good, with
>> no leaks or points below atmospheric pressure and no contamination, and
>> a reasonable residence time, a residual is not necessary. Obviously
>> water with no residual is much nicer.
>>
>> If your piping is antiquated and you don't trust it (which I suspect is
>> more or less the state of affair in most of the US)
>
> Distrust maybe, but most of the residences in the US have fairly modern
> distribution pipes (unfortunately, all too many of which were
> constructed of polymers later judged to be unnsuitable).
Sure, houses are often fairly new in the US. Perhaps I should have been
more specific, I was now thinking about that side.
But OTOH, city water piping is often in poor shape for a variety of
reasons. Starting with your typical attitude about taxes. No cash flow, no
money for infrastructure maintenance. My understanding is that many or
most municipal water systems in the US are antiquated and in poor shape.
>> then clearly
>> you need a residual. In Sao Paulo, the way they handled a poor piping
>> which they knew had high points where dirty stuff was sucked in, they
>> maintained a very high residual. more or less requiring filtration
>> before drinking.
>
> Most "newer" US cities use elevated storage, holding the water to the point
> that residuuals are largely eliminated.
You always need a pressurized system. It's not only "newer" places. Pld
ones too. You can pressurize your system without elevated storage, or
have "elevated storage" with minimal capacity, just enough for provising
a pressure reference.
But that's not really the point. Even with that (a given), you might
encounter situations (high point, higher than design flow rate, etc.)
where you end up temporarily with points under depression.
>> In some European countries, ozone is used, with obviously no residual,
>> and there does not seem to have led to any public health issue.
>>
> In the US, the public's view of ozone has so negatively impacted that
> even in a contained system. there would be substantial outcry from
> "concerned citizens". I suspect that "ozone treatment" would be harder
> to sell than "plannned freon releases".
You may think of either the ozone layer, where ozonr is a good thing, or
ground level ozone pollution as the bad thing. But ozone used in water is
very short-lived. I don't think people are stupid to the point of going
against that. Surely from an environmental standpoint chlorine is much
much more nasty stuff.
Aug 14th 2004, 4:36 am
#63
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: drinking water quality in Germany?
devil extrapolated from data available...
>
> But OTOH, city water piping is often in poor shape for a variety of
> reasons. Starting with your typical attitude about taxes. No cash
> flow, no money for infrastructure maintenance. My understanding is
> that many or most municipal water systems in the US are antiquated and
> in poor shape.
>
You're suffereing from some induced misunderstanding. While I can find
some older cities with "antiquated" systems (as compared to.....?) and some
areas where systems are outdated in almost every community, a claim that US
municipal systems are largely antiquated is simply poppycock. Most of them
could hardly be old enough to be antiquated and "outdated" has less to do
with age than with expanding populations and territorial expansion across
the hinterlands. In much of the US, the problem remains guaranteeing
adequate future supplies of potable water, not the local disribution
thereof.
USAians routinely gripe about taxes, but seem to pay them locally without
much fight, and, moreover, water/sewer systems are almost entirely funded
from revenues (and future bonded obligations thereof). City politicos
bemoan the paucity of revenues - in my own small cities, a rainy Spring
and early Summer has sadly dimished expectations from water sales for lawn
watering, but with the exception of tiny communities and the decaying urban
centers where water/sewer systems have been degraded, usage is down, and
tax revenues have declined, municipal governments and municipal or other
tax entity water systems are in pretty good shape, hampered more by keeping
up with sprawl than by antiquation as such. Driving through the US, the
constant view is of local government public works of which water and sewer
systems are by their nature among the most noticeable. Of course, in the
US, where natural gas, electricity and communications services are
delivered primarily by private industry, and are on an increasingly
competitive basis (though rising electricity and natural gas prices have
more to do with markets than with suppliers) most cities don't have to
subsidize those costly services (and in newly developed areas, it's the
developers, not the "city", who are responsible for funding and installing
water and wastewater systems and draninage).
I spent 8 years on a city council (elected after having led the campaign to
purchase a private water company about to fall into the hands of its
creditors), so I'm relatively current when it comes to municipal water
systems, revenues therefrom and any drain on local taxes.
TMO
>
> But OTOH, city water piping is often in poor shape for a variety of
> reasons. Starting with your typical attitude about taxes. No cash
> flow, no money for infrastructure maintenance. My understanding is
> that many or most municipal water systems in the US are antiquated and
> in poor shape.
>
You're suffereing from some induced misunderstanding. While I can find
some older cities with "antiquated" systems (as compared to.....?) and some
areas where systems are outdated in almost every community, a claim that US
municipal systems are largely antiquated is simply poppycock. Most of them
could hardly be old enough to be antiquated and "outdated" has less to do
with age than with expanding populations and territorial expansion across
the hinterlands. In much of the US, the problem remains guaranteeing
adequate future supplies of potable water, not the local disribution
thereof.
USAians routinely gripe about taxes, but seem to pay them locally without
much fight, and, moreover, water/sewer systems are almost entirely funded
from revenues (and future bonded obligations thereof). City politicos
bemoan the paucity of revenues - in my own small cities, a rainy Spring
and early Summer has sadly dimished expectations from water sales for lawn
watering, but with the exception of tiny communities and the decaying urban
centers where water/sewer systems have been degraded, usage is down, and
tax revenues have declined, municipal governments and municipal or other
tax entity water systems are in pretty good shape, hampered more by keeping
up with sprawl than by antiquation as such. Driving through the US, the
constant view is of local government public works of which water and sewer
systems are by their nature among the most noticeable. Of course, in the
US, where natural gas, electricity and communications services are
delivered primarily by private industry, and are on an increasingly
competitive basis (though rising electricity and natural gas prices have
more to do with markets than with suppliers) most cities don't have to
subsidize those costly services (and in newly developed areas, it's the
developers, not the "city", who are responsible for funding and installing
water and wastewater systems and draninage).
I spent 8 years on a city council (elected after having led the campaign to
purchase a private water company about to fall into the hands of its
creditors), so I'm relatively current when it comes to municipal water
systems, revenues therefrom and any drain on local taxes.
TMO
Aug 14th 2004, 6:13 am
#64
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: drinking water quality in Germany?
Olivers wrote:
> The US is a very young country by European standards, and well into the
> last century experienced substantial outbreaks of disease and high
> fatalities from "bad water".
Chicago starting chlorinating it's water supply in 1912 IIRC. Before that
cholera, etc. outbreaks killed thousands yearly (and it didn't help that
Chicago was mostly built on a swamp)....
When it rains a lot Lake Michigan gets the overflow that the sewer system
can't handle...this leads to swimming beaches being closed because of the
high level of coliform bacteria. And for some reason Milwaukee sends a lot
of "stuff" down our way - it's a big article of contention....
--
Best
Greg
> The US is a very young country by European standards, and well into the
> last century experienced substantial outbreaks of disease and high
> fatalities from "bad water".
Chicago starting chlorinating it's water supply in 1912 IIRC. Before that
cholera, etc. outbreaks killed thousands yearly (and it didn't help that
Chicago was mostly built on a swamp)....
When it rains a lot Lake Michigan gets the overflow that the sewer system
can't handle...this leads to swimming beaches being closed because of the
high level of coliform bacteria. And for some reason Milwaukee sends a lot
of "stuff" down our way - it's a big article of contention....
--
Best
Greg
Aug 14th 2004, 6:20 am
#65
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: drinking water quality in Germany?
devil wrote:
> But OTOH, city water piping is often in poor shape for a variety of
> reasons. Starting with your typical attitude about taxes. No cash flow, no
> money for infrastructure maintenance. My understanding is that many or
> most municipal water systems in the US are antiquated and in poor shape.
A number of water mains here in Chicago are well over 100 years old - one
near me "blew" last summer, leading to a huge and expensive mess (creating a
large sinkhole, blocking off of traffice, etc.). ISTR reading about water
mains in New York City that are much older than that - supposedly there are
still "wooden" water mains left in Manhattan....
The little town I grew up in western Illinois is finally getting around to
replacing water mains that were laid in *1893*.
BTW devil did you know that here in the US fluoridation of drinking water is
a COMMUNIST plot...???
--
Best
Greg ;---)
> But OTOH, city water piping is often in poor shape for a variety of
> reasons. Starting with your typical attitude about taxes. No cash flow, no
> money for infrastructure maintenance. My understanding is that many or
> most municipal water systems in the US are antiquated and in poor shape.
A number of water mains here in Chicago are well over 100 years old - one
near me "blew" last summer, leading to a huge and expensive mess (creating a
large sinkhole, blocking off of traffice, etc.). ISTR reading about water
mains in New York City that are much older than that - supposedly there are
still "wooden" water mains left in Manhattan....
The little town I grew up in western Illinois is finally getting around to
replacing water mains that were laid in *1893*.
BTW devil did you know that here in the US fluoridation of drinking water is
a COMMUNIST plot...???
--
Best
Greg ;---)
Aug 14th 2004, 8:48 am
#66
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: drinking water quality in Germany?
Gregory Morrow wrote:
> devil wrote:
>
>
>>But OTOH, city water piping is often in poor shape for a variety of
>>reasons. Starting with your typical attitude about taxes. No cash flow, no
>>money for infrastructure maintenance. My understanding is that many or
>>most municipal water systems in the US are antiquated and in poor shape.
>
>
>
> A number of water mains here in Chicago are well over 100 years old - one
> near me "blew" last summer, leading to a huge and expensive mess (creating a
> large sinkhole, blocking off of traffice, etc.). ISTR reading about water
> mains in New York City that are much older than that - supposedly there are
> still "wooden" water mains left in Manhattan....
>
> The little town I grew up in western Illinois is finally getting around to
> replacing water mains that were laid in *1893*.
>
> BTW devil did you know that here in the US fluoridation of drinking water is
> a COMMUNIST plot...???
>
Gosh Greg, you are right I'd forgotten about those Commies and
fluoridation! The protesters weren't quite as militant and noisy as they
are today .. like the anti-furrs and the anti-foigrassers. But don't
forget tinfoil beanies are good for mental health!! billfrogg
> devil wrote:
>
>
>>But OTOH, city water piping is often in poor shape for a variety of
>>reasons. Starting with your typical attitude about taxes. No cash flow, no
>>money for infrastructure maintenance. My understanding is that many or
>>most municipal water systems in the US are antiquated and in poor shape.
>
>
>
> A number of water mains here in Chicago are well over 100 years old - one
> near me "blew" last summer, leading to a huge and expensive mess (creating a
> large sinkhole, blocking off of traffice, etc.). ISTR reading about water
> mains in New York City that are much older than that - supposedly there are
> still "wooden" water mains left in Manhattan....
>
> The little town I grew up in western Illinois is finally getting around to
> replacing water mains that were laid in *1893*.
>
> BTW devil did you know that here in the US fluoridation of drinking water is
> a COMMUNIST plot...???
>
Gosh Greg, you are right I'd forgotten about those Commies and
fluoridation! The protesters weren't quite as militant and noisy as they
are today .. like the anti-furrs and the anti-foigrassers. But don't
forget tinfoil beanies are good for mental health!! billfrogg
Aug 14th 2004, 10:34 am
#67
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: drinking water quality in Germany?
billfrogg wrote:
>Gosh Greg, you are right I'd forgotten
>about those Commies and fluoridation!
>The protesters weren't quite as militant
>and noisy as they are today .. like the
>anti-furrs and the anti-foigrassers. But
>don't forget tinfoil beanies are good for
>mental health!!
Guess who's jumping on that bandwagon today?
The environmentalists among others and I doubt any of them are good ole
boy John Birchers* :).
www.fluorideaction.org/
Regards, Walter
* The 'John Birch Society' was an extreme right-wing American
organization who in the late 50's and 60's claimed that fluoridation was
a Communist Plot.
..And Paradise Was Lost...like teardrops in the rain...
>Gosh Greg, you are right I'd forgotten
>about those Commies and fluoridation!
>The protesters weren't quite as militant
>and noisy as they are today .. like the
>anti-furrs and the anti-foigrassers. But
>don't forget tinfoil beanies are good for
>mental health!!
Guess who's jumping on that bandwagon today?
The environmentalists among others and I doubt any of them are good ole
boy John Birchers* :).
www.fluorideaction.org/
Regards, Walter
* The 'John Birch Society' was an extreme right-wing American
organization who in the late 50's and 60's claimed that fluoridation was
a Communist Plot.
..And Paradise Was Lost...like teardrops in the rain...
Aug 15th 2004, 8:55 am
#68
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: drinking water quality in Germany?
billfrogg wrote:
> Gosh Greg, you are right I'd forgotten about those Commies and
> fluoridation! The protesters weren't quite as militant and noisy as they
> are today .. like the anti-furrs and the anti-foigrassers. But don't
> forget tinfoil beanies are good for mental health!!
I am old enough to remember right - wing groups like the John Birch Society
and such proclaiming that fluoridation of drinking water was a "communist
plot" to take away our "freedom of choice". Unbelievable now, but.......
--
Best
Greg
> Gosh Greg, you are right I'd forgotten about those Commies and
> fluoridation! The protesters weren't quite as militant and noisy as they
> are today .. like the anti-furrs and the anti-foigrassers. But don't
> forget tinfoil beanies are good for mental health!!
I am old enough to remember right - wing groups like the John Birch Society
and such proclaiming that fluoridation of drinking water was a "communist
plot" to take away our "freedom of choice". Unbelievable now, but.......
--
Best
Greg
Aug 15th 2004, 10:17 am
#69
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: drinking water quality in Germany?
Gregory Morrow wrote:
>I am old enough to remember right - wing
>groups like the John Birch Society and
>such proclaiming that fluoridation of
>drinking water was a "communist plot" to
>take away our "freedom of choice".
>Unbelievable now, but.......
Also to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids:). Regards,
Walter
Dr. Strangelove, Or: How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Bomb
(1964)
General Jack D. Ripper: Mandrake?
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: Yes, Jack?
Ripper: Have you ever seen a Commie drink a glass of water?
Mandrake: Well, I can't say I have.
Ripper: Vodka, that's what they drink, isn't it? Never water?
Mandrake: Well, I-I believe that's what they drink, Jack, yes.
Ripper: On no account will a Commie ever drink water, and not without
good reason.
Mandrake: Oh, eh, yes. I, uhm, can't quite see what you're getting at,
Jack.
Ripper: Water, that's what I'm getting at, water. Mandrake, water is the
source of all life. Seven-tenths of this earth's surface is water. Why,
do you realize that seventy percent of you is water?
Mandrake: Uh, uh, Good Lord!
Ripper: And as human beings, you and I need fresh, pure water to
replenish our precious bodily fluids.
Mandrake: Yes. (he begins to chuckle nervously)
Ripper: Are you beginning to understand?
Mandrake: Yes. (more laughter)
Ripper: Mandrake. Mandrake, have you never wondered why I drink only
distilled water, or rain water, and only pure-grain alcohol?
Mandrake: Well, it did occur to me, Jack, yes.
Ripper: Have you ever heard of a thing called fluoridation. Fluoridation
of water?
Mandrake: Uh? Yes, I-I have heard of that, Jack, yes. Yes.
Ripper: Well, do you know what it is?
Mandrake: No, no I don't know what it is, no.
Ripper: Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously
conceived and dangerous Communist plot we have ever had to face?
..And Paradise Was Lost...like teardrops in the rain...
>I am old enough to remember right - wing
>groups like the John Birch Society and
>such proclaiming that fluoridation of
>drinking water was a "communist plot" to
>take away our "freedom of choice".
>Unbelievable now, but.......
Also to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids:). Regards,
Walter
Dr. Strangelove, Or: How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Bomb
(1964)
General Jack D. Ripper: Mandrake?
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: Yes, Jack?
Ripper: Have you ever seen a Commie drink a glass of water?
Mandrake: Well, I can't say I have.
Ripper: Vodka, that's what they drink, isn't it? Never water?
Mandrake: Well, I-I believe that's what they drink, Jack, yes.
Ripper: On no account will a Commie ever drink water, and not without
good reason.
Mandrake: Oh, eh, yes. I, uhm, can't quite see what you're getting at,
Jack.
Ripper: Water, that's what I'm getting at, water. Mandrake, water is the
source of all life. Seven-tenths of this earth's surface is water. Why,
do you realize that seventy percent of you is water?
Mandrake: Uh, uh, Good Lord!
Ripper: And as human beings, you and I need fresh, pure water to
replenish our precious bodily fluids.
Mandrake: Yes. (he begins to chuckle nervously)
Ripper: Are you beginning to understand?
Mandrake: Yes. (more laughter)
Ripper: Mandrake. Mandrake, have you never wondered why I drink only
distilled water, or rain water, and only pure-grain alcohol?
Mandrake: Well, it did occur to me, Jack, yes.
Ripper: Have you ever heard of a thing called fluoridation. Fluoridation
of water?
Mandrake: Uh? Yes, I-I have heard of that, Jack, yes. Yes.
Ripper: Well, do you know what it is?
Mandrake: No, no I don't know what it is, no.
Ripper: Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously
conceived and dangerous Communist plot we have ever had to face?
..And Paradise Was Lost...like teardrops in the rain...
Aug 15th 2004, 10:49 pm
#70
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: drinking water quality in Germany?
On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 09:45:26 -0500, Olivers wrote:
> I would suspect that water supply (in quality, quantity and consistency)
> remains a real problem along Spain's "Vacation Coasts". Would the French
> Riviera even exist were it not for all nearby sources of natural water
> flow?
And the Canary Islands would still be green, were it not for the tourists.
--
Tim C.
> I would suspect that water supply (in quality, quantity and consistency)
> remains a real problem along Spain's "Vacation Coasts". Would the French
> Riviera even exist were it not for all nearby sources of natural water
> flow?
And the Canary Islands would still be green, were it not for the tourists.
--
Tim C.
Aug 15th 2004, 11:10 pm
#71
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: drinking water quality in Germany?
non-smoking restaurants in Germany
http://www.smokefreeworld.com/germany.shtml
http://www.smokefreeworld.com/germany.shtml
Aug 17th 2004, 12:57 am
#72
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: drinking water quality in Germany?
Fluoridation: No Benefit, another study shows
NEW YORK, Aug. 16 /PRNewswire/ -- Dental examinations of 4800 South
Australian ten- to fifteen-year-olds' permanent teeth reveal
unexpected results – similar cavity rates whether they drink
fluoridated water or not, reports Armfield and Spencer in the August
2004 "Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology" (1).
Children sampled lived in fluoridated and nonfluoridated metropolitan
and rural areas of the Australian state, South Australia.
Collected rainwater, or tank water, is the main non-fluoridated
(non-public) water source for 37% of South Australians, 8% drink
bottled water. The public water supply is fluoridated in Adelaide,
South Australia's capital city. The rest of South Australia is
predominantly non-fluoridated, the authors report.
"The effect of consumption of nonpublic (non-fluoridated) water on
permanent caries (cavities) experience was not significant," report
Armfield and Spencer.
"It should be noted that, as discussed here, the drinking of bottled
or tank water is neither immediately deleterious nor beneficial to
oral health in and of itself," write the authors.
The American Dental Association asserts that fluoridation provides
15-35% cavity reductions in fourteen to seventeen-year-olds. But
South Australian adolescents averaged less than 1 ½ decayed, missing
or filled permanent tooth surfaces (28 teeth have 128 surfaces),
whether they drank fluoridated water or not.
Actually, many studies show, after fluoridation ceases, cavities
decline (2). Others reveal fluoridation is ineffective at reducing
tooth decay (3a-j).
The media recently used the Australian study to blame fluoride-free
bottled or tank water for increased cavity rates in primary or baby
teeth (4). However, no decay data was included for one- to
four-year-olds, the children with the most baby teeth. The studied
group (5100 five- to nine-year-olds) already shed primary teeth,
perhaps some decayed. This places doubt on the validity of the
conclusion that fluoridated water is linked to decreased primary-tooth
cavities in this population sample.
"Cities waste millions of dollars fluoridating their water supplies;
but the poor, malnourished or less educated still get the most
cavities and the least dental care," says lawyer Paul Beeber,
President, New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation.
"Dental health crises exist in many, fluoridated cities (5); while
residents of non-fluoridated Wichita, Kansas and Long Island, New
York have better dental health than many fluoridated areas (6)," says
Beeber.
References: http://tinyurl.com/ad9k
SOURCE New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc.
PO Box, 263,
Old Bethpage, NY 11803
http://www.orgsites.com/ny/nyscof
[email protected] (Poetic Justice) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Gregory Morrow wrote:
> >I am old enough to remember right - wing
> >groups like the John Birch Society and
> >such proclaiming that fluoridation of
> >drinking water was a "communist plot" to
> >take away our "freedom of choice".
> >Unbelievable now, but.......
>
> Also to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids:). Regards,
> Walter
>
> Dr. Strangelove, Or: How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Bomb
> (1964)
>
> General Jack D. Ripper: Mandrake?
> Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: Yes, Jack?
> Ripper: Have you ever seen a Commie drink a glass of water?
> Mandrake: Well, I can't say I have.
> Ripper: Vodka, that's what they drink, isn't it? Never water?
> Mandrake: Well, I-I believe that's what they drink, Jack, yes.
> Ripper: On no account will a Commie ever drink water, and not without
> good reason.
> Mandrake: Oh, eh, yes. I, uhm, can't quite see what you're getting at,
> Jack.
> Ripper: Water, that's what I'm getting at, water. Mandrake, water is the
> source of all life. Seven-tenths of this earth's surface is water. Why,
> do you realize that seventy percent of you is water?
> Mandrake: Uh, uh, Good Lord!
> Ripper: And as human beings, you and I need fresh, pure water to
> replenish our precious bodily fluids.
> Mandrake: Yes. (he begins to chuckle nervously)
> Ripper: Are you beginning to understand?
> Mandrake: Yes. (more laughter)
> Ripper: Mandrake. Mandrake, have you never wondered why I drink only
> distilled water, or rain water, and only pure-grain alcohol?
> Mandrake: Well, it did occur to me, Jack, yes.
> Ripper: Have you ever heard of a thing called fluoridation. Fluoridation
> of water?
> Mandrake: Uh? Yes, I-I have heard of that, Jack, yes. Yes.
> Ripper: Well, do you know what it is?
> Mandrake: No, no I don't know what it is, no.
> Ripper: Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously
> conceived and dangerous Communist plot we have ever had to face?
>
>
>
> ..And Paradise Was Lost...like teardrops in the rain...
NEW YORK, Aug. 16 /PRNewswire/ -- Dental examinations of 4800 South
Australian ten- to fifteen-year-olds' permanent teeth reveal
unexpected results – similar cavity rates whether they drink
fluoridated water or not, reports Armfield and Spencer in the August
2004 "Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology" (1).
Children sampled lived in fluoridated and nonfluoridated metropolitan
and rural areas of the Australian state, South Australia.
Collected rainwater, or tank water, is the main non-fluoridated
(non-public) water source for 37% of South Australians, 8% drink
bottled water. The public water supply is fluoridated in Adelaide,
South Australia's capital city. The rest of South Australia is
predominantly non-fluoridated, the authors report.
"The effect of consumption of nonpublic (non-fluoridated) water on
permanent caries (cavities) experience was not significant," report
Armfield and Spencer.
"It should be noted that, as discussed here, the drinking of bottled
or tank water is neither immediately deleterious nor beneficial to
oral health in and of itself," write the authors.
The American Dental Association asserts that fluoridation provides
15-35% cavity reductions in fourteen to seventeen-year-olds. But
South Australian adolescents averaged less than 1 ½ decayed, missing
or filled permanent tooth surfaces (28 teeth have 128 surfaces),
whether they drank fluoridated water or not.
Actually, many studies show, after fluoridation ceases, cavities
decline (2). Others reveal fluoridation is ineffective at reducing
tooth decay (3a-j).
The media recently used the Australian study to blame fluoride-free
bottled or tank water for increased cavity rates in primary or baby
teeth (4). However, no decay data was included for one- to
four-year-olds, the children with the most baby teeth. The studied
group (5100 five- to nine-year-olds) already shed primary teeth,
perhaps some decayed. This places doubt on the validity of the
conclusion that fluoridated water is linked to decreased primary-tooth
cavities in this population sample.
"Cities waste millions of dollars fluoridating their water supplies;
but the poor, malnourished or less educated still get the most
cavities and the least dental care," says lawyer Paul Beeber,
President, New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation.
"Dental health crises exist in many, fluoridated cities (5); while
residents of non-fluoridated Wichita, Kansas and Long Island, New
York have better dental health than many fluoridated areas (6)," says
Beeber.
References: http://tinyurl.com/ad9k
SOURCE New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc.
PO Box, 263,
Old Bethpage, NY 11803
http://www.orgsites.com/ny/nyscof
[email protected] (Poetic Justice) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Gregory Morrow wrote:
> >I am old enough to remember right - wing
> >groups like the John Birch Society and
> >such proclaiming that fluoridation of
> >drinking water was a "communist plot" to
> >take away our "freedom of choice".
> >Unbelievable now, but.......
>
> Also to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids:). Regards,
> Walter
>
> Dr. Strangelove, Or: How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Bomb
> (1964)
>
> General Jack D. Ripper: Mandrake?
> Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: Yes, Jack?
> Ripper: Have you ever seen a Commie drink a glass of water?
> Mandrake: Well, I can't say I have.
> Ripper: Vodka, that's what they drink, isn't it? Never water?
> Mandrake: Well, I-I believe that's what they drink, Jack, yes.
> Ripper: On no account will a Commie ever drink water, and not without
> good reason.
> Mandrake: Oh, eh, yes. I, uhm, can't quite see what you're getting at,
> Jack.
> Ripper: Water, that's what I'm getting at, water. Mandrake, water is the
> source of all life. Seven-tenths of this earth's surface is water. Why,
> do you realize that seventy percent of you is water?
> Mandrake: Uh, uh, Good Lord!
> Ripper: And as human beings, you and I need fresh, pure water to
> replenish our precious bodily fluids.
> Mandrake: Yes. (he begins to chuckle nervously)
> Ripper: Are you beginning to understand?
> Mandrake: Yes. (more laughter)
> Ripper: Mandrake. Mandrake, have you never wondered why I drink only
> distilled water, or rain water, and only pure-grain alcohol?
> Mandrake: Well, it did occur to me, Jack, yes.
> Ripper: Have you ever heard of a thing called fluoridation. Fluoridation
> of water?
> Mandrake: Uh? Yes, I-I have heard of that, Jack, yes. Yes.
> Ripper: Well, do you know what it is?
> Mandrake: No, no I don't know what it is, no.
> Ripper: Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously
> conceived and dangerous Communist plot we have ever had to face?
>
>
>
> ..And Paradise Was Lost...like teardrops in the rain...
