Why Anna's recycled water Barrier 1 won't work ...
Excerpt from Erie Times News:
Chemicals pose water hazard
19 September 2008
An Associated Press investigation shows that much remains to be done to keep our waters safe from pharmaceutical waste.
Residue from prescription drugs and personal-care products ends up in our water from a number of sources, including unmetabolized drugs excreted by consumers, the AP reported.
But drugs also taint our nation's water -- in minute quantities, we must stress -- because consumers don't know how to dispose of unused drugs. Some federal agencies advise flushing drugs down the toilet. Others advise against flushing.
Paperwork for patients is already heavy with information about dosages and side effects. Pharmaceutical manufacturers say there isn't enough space to detail different methods of disposing drugs, other than to advise consumers to "ask a doctor, pharmacist or waste-disposal expert how to discard medication."
How many people have access to a waste-disposal expert?
No one is certain whether trace amounts of pharmaceuticals in water are hazardous, but scientists are concerned. "While these trace chemicals may be detected at very low levels, the accumulation is real and constant," said Sani Sukkari, assistant professor in the Department of Pharmacy Practice at Lake Erie College of Osteopathic Medicine's School of Pharmacy.
Erie Water Works got out in front of this issue by sending water samples for tests in 2007. The tests found no traces of pharmaceuticals. Water Works expects additional results from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection in March 2009.
We applaud Water Works for its pro-active stance and look forward to seeing it continue that work. But we also urge consumers to press for environmentally sound solutions to dispose of drugs, including pharmacy take-back programs and community drug collection days.
See - Chemicals pose water hazard.
posted by Concerned Ratepayer at 7:01 AM
13 Comments:
These are the very real concerns that the communities have held all through the Toowoomba debate and now in the S/E Queensland area.
The people should have been given a say via a referendum.
Let the citizens judge based on the information which is out there by the bucket load and the very real risk factors as shown in this story.
The Bligh government will go down on this issue mark my words.
The water is not safe for humane consumpion and should only be used for the powere stations and industry.
7:21 AM, October 02, 2008
The government have no idea how much the general public are already being exposed to chemicals and drugs in the environment - because they haven't done the studies. They make assumptions - dangerous ones - that if they add just 1-3% of chemicals that cannot be filtered out by the recycled sewage equipment, that it's all we're going to get. Where are the studies showing bio-accumulation as these chemicals cycle around and around from sewer to tap and back again?
They make assumptions that if they add just 0.9ppm of industrial waste silicofluoride chemicals that that is all we will be exposed to. They don't know the level of exposure in society today - from all sources in the food chain and environment - of Persistent Organic Pollutants (POP), and of industrial contaminants such as lead and aluminium - both having been proven to bind with fluoride and pass the blood-brain barrier to cause mental illness and other systemic poisoning. And what about the reaction of some of these chemicals and heavy metals when they combine and form something new and even more dangerous?
This is just the tip of the iceberg and government is in denial. They know not what they do. Little do they realise that this will also affect their own families. No one will be immune. Forget the money. Forget the job. What use is it all if you are sick as a dog or demented?
According to the law of exponential arithmetic (something politicians should learn about) if something has a growth rate of 7% it will double in 10 years. In the beginning you have a slow progression until you hit the steep part of the J-curve and things speed up at uncontrollable rates until system collapse results (look at the global financial system). If, let's say, the addition of new drugs and chemicals to the food-water supply has increased by 7% in the last 10 years, today it would be double the quantity. What will happen next year when they add to this increase? The straw that breaks the camel's back perhaps? Think about it.
12:49 PM, October 02, 2008
Fluoride has been in Sydney's water for years. Are they all demented (excluding the politicians of course)?
1:02 PM, October 02, 2008
The global financial problems have nothing to do with a system speeding up at uncontrollable rates. It has a lot to do with Congress loosening the lending requirements for Fannie Mae back in 1999 which led to imprudent risk taking in home mortgage lending.
Have new drugs and chemicals added to the food-water supply increased by 7% in the last 10 years?
1:37 PM, October 02, 2008
The comparison of growth in chemical exposures with the financial market in the arithmetic of exponential growth is: if you inflate the global economy by, say 7% credit (money created from thin air) per year your amount of thin air money would be double in 10 years. Only, I suspect it's much more because the fiat money and gambling of the derivatives market speeded everything up. That means the amount of credit in the world is far more than the GDP of the world and so the things we buy are inflated in price. It gets to a certain point where productive capacity can't keep up, it overbalances and the economy/credit/financial system collapses.
Compare that with new chemicals and drugs being created and pumped into people and the environment over time. Drugs are more, food additives and chemicals are more, vaccines are more - everything is more per person. How much more? That is the whole point... the government is flying blind. They don't know. That is an un-calculated risk we cannot afford to take. The human body isn't equipped to deal with such a large amount of man-made synthetic industrial pollutants - much of which can't be broken down and disposed of. The build-up of these chemical wastes in the body gets to a certain point where it results in system collapse and diseased organs.
As for Sydney people... in 2003 there was a study to measure iodine levels in the blood of primary school children in each state and Queensland had the highest iodine levels. If you want a higher IQ you need adequate iodine levels. Low iodine levels mean lower IQ. Fluoride is an antagonist of iodine. Fluoride was also proven to be a neurotoxin (Mullenix + the Chinese study). It crosses the blood-brain barrier and affects the brain. Now, where are your stats on the increase in ADHD, dementia, all kinds of behavioural problems and mental illness over time? Is it going down per capita of population? Or going up? I rest my case.
4:23 PM, October 03, 2008
Look, people in Sydney are just smarter than people in Brisbane, fluoride or not.
Perhaps the iodine difference can be explained by other factors?
10:34 PM, October 03, 2008
Iodine intake in Australia has dropped
Low dietary levels of iodine were thought to be a problem in the past or in developing countries only.
However, some researchers suspect that iodine intake levels in Australia have dropped considerably, perhaps by as much as half, over the past few decades.
To find out how big the problem is and what might be done about it, a nation wide study is set to start in Australia.
Some reasons for low iodine intake may include:
- A reduction in the use of salt in cooking and table salt (particularly iodised salt).
- Consuming most of our salt in processed foods, which do not contain iodine.
- Less iodine in milk because of changes in treatment methods.
- Iodine levels in Australian soils may have dropped
10:35 PM, October 03, 2008
So, people in Queenland have higher IQs than the rest of Australia because they haven't been subjected to fluoride. Good luck finding a study which shows that!
10:42 PM, October 03, 2008
Now, where are your stats on the increase in ADHD, dementia, all kinds of behavioural problems and mental illness over time?
Are you saying that ADHD, dementia, behavioural problems and mental illness are all linked to fluoride?
By your argument, there must be no ADHD, dementia, behavioural problems or mental illness in Qld because it hasn't been subjected to fluoride yet.
11:11 PM, October 03, 2008
WIN News:
Flurodation Future
6 October 2008
Toowoomba residents remain divided on whether the State Government's announcement to fluoridate our water supplies is the best way to help reduce tooth decay.
But some residents are outraged, saying the chemical addition combined with recycled water will create a toxic smoothie.
7:34 PM, October 06, 2008
Re: The comments about IQ, ADHD and mental illness etc... of course there are always a number of possible causes for such things - eg. heavy metal exposure in the brain or vaccinations containing mercury based drugs, and many more. You will find it is most commonly some kind of polluting factor. Fluoride is just another polluting factor that we don't need to add to the already increasing burden of chemicals and toxins in our food chain and environment. Fluoride is an antagonist to iodine. That is a fact. Do the research. See study by Mullenix to show fluoride is a neurotoxin... Also the Chinese study into the IQ of children in fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas. There are more... just look. Start with www.fluoridealert.org www.waterloowatch.com www.waterwatchofutah.com and then you have many millions more sites when you Google.
11:28 PM, October 08, 2008
A Chinese study into the IQ of children in fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas? This from the country that brought us melamine tainted milk products which killed their babies. LOL.
1:32 AM, October 09, 2008
How about an IQ study of children in NSW and Qld?
1:41 AM, October 09, 2008
Post a Comment
<< Home