The Trump WH looks to be trying to slow-walk or downplay the effects here, but it looks bad. The entire US water supply may be contaminated at unsafe levels with a pair of substances that causes thyroid problems, cancer risks, problems in pregnancy and reduce effectiveness of child vaccines.
If you know anyone pregnant or breastfeeding, it’s probably a smart move to recommend they move away from tap-water. The risk might be small, but it appears to be there.
Where do you think bottled water comes from?
You think tap water and bottled water are the same thing?
It depends, not all of it is from municipal sources and not all of it is untreated.
Also, getting your hands on imported bottled water is more than doable.
Most of it comes right out of a tap.
If we’re to believe the article both ground and surface reservoirs are contaminated so going to bottled water would be a pointless exercise in futility at best.
Sure it is and of course we have no way of knowing how “clean” such imported water would be and the cost is of course prohibitive.
Going to bottled would be pointless nation wide since you can easily treat the water at home, the issue is the lack of properly funded treatment plant which has caused the slip in quality.
It depends if water treatment at bottling plants removes enough of the contaminants.
If it does, bottled will be safer.
Really, provide a link to the study and it’s conclusions.
The study is in the OP, they are not calling for a national bottled water advisory.
What exactly are the contaminants in question and what is required to remove them or reduce them to a “safe” level?
The study hasn’t been released, that’s the point of the op.
You think Flint is an isolated case of mismanagement of water treatment?
I know you’re deflecting because you’ve talked yourself into a corner again as usual.
Did you not read the link?
PFOA’s and PFOS’. Used in teflon coatings and fire-fighting foam. The problem may be being exacerbated by DOD facilities using the foam around the country.
They can be removed by large scale water treatments, but it will be very expensive. The company that made Scotchguard had to pay out 1.5 billion in settlements over this stuff.
Maybe the government should release it then so we can know what need to be improved.
What exactly is a “large scale treatment”? What is required? What is an acceptable level of PFOA and PFOS?
What kind of treatment specifically is required? Chemical? Filtering? RO?
What are the actual documented problems?
maybe if we had access to the full study we would know, so why is the government hiding it?
Again, did you not read the link?
Acceptable levels were previously thought to be 70 parts per trillion, the new study is suggesting that even levels below 1/6th of 70 parts per trillion is still dangerous.
As for treatment at local sources:
“The WRF found that aeration, chlorine dioxide, dissolved air flotation, coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, granular filtration, and microfiltration were all ineffective for removing PFASs including PFOA and PFOS. Anion exchange was moderately effective in treating PFOA, highly effective for PFOS, and failed to remove several other PFASs. Nanofiltration and reverse osmosis proved to be the most effective methods of removing even the smallest PFASs. Granular activated carbon (GAC) was shown to be adept at removing most PFASs and it may be the average utility’s best bet for PFOA and PFOS contamination.”
