Local water supply .....arsenic,cadmium, lead

practitioner

Registered User
Messages
68
We have a county council water supply and this has been checked and shown to conform to acceptable standards.

We have seen the report and note that there is arsenic, cadmium and lead in the water amongst others but still withing acceptable limits.

Is this the case in general regarding these minerals/contaminants?

We have looked at reverse osmosis and been told that the water may be so pure that it may attract ions etc from your own body as the water may be unstable due to its purity?
 
All water contains traces of other substances, it is the actual concentration of these substances in an analysis that determines whether a particular water-supply is safe or otherwise.

Water treated by reverse osmosis is not suitable for long term exclusive consumption by humans. The process was originally developed to produce potable water for short-term use by the military from sea-water or high-alkaline water-sources in deserts.
 
The EU limits for these parameters (broadly in line with the WHO guidelines) are quite conservative. If the drinking water from the council supply meet these guidelines then I would not worry.

Beware of rogue traders selling overpriced RO systems based on creating fear in the minds of consumers.


From table B [broken link removed]

STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS.
S.I. No. 278 of 2007
————————
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (DRINKING WATER) (NO. 2)
REGULATIONS 2007

TABLE B
CHEMICAL PARAMETERS
Parameter Parametric value Unit Comments
3 Acrylamide 0.10 μg/l Note 1
4 Antimony 5.0 μg/l
5 Arsenic 10 μg/l
6 Benzene 1.0 μg/l
7 Benzo(a)pyrene 0.010 μg/l
8 Boron 1.0 mg/l
9 Bromate
• until 24 December 2008 25 μg/l
• from 25 December 2008 10 μg/l
10 Cadmium 5.0 μg/l
11 Chromium 50 μg/l
12 Copper 2.0 mg/l Note 2
13 Cyanide 50 μg/l
14 1,2-dichloroethane 3.0 μg/l
15 Epichlorohydrin 0.10 μg/l Note 1
16 Fluoride
(a) fluoridated supplies
• until 30 June 2007 1.0 mg/l
• from 1 July 2007 0.8 mg/l
(b) supplies with naturally 1.5 mg/l
occurring fluoride,
not needing further
fluoridation
17 Lead Notes 2 and 3
• until 24 December 2013 25 μg/l
• from 25 December 2013 10 μg/l

18 Mercury 1.0 μg/l
19 Nickel 20 μg/l Note 2
20 Nitrate 50 mg/l Note 4
21 Nitrite 0.50 mg/l Note 4
22 Pesticides 0.10 μg/l Notes 5 and 6
23 Pesticides — Total 0.50 μg/l Note 5 and 7
24 Polycyclic aromatic 0.10 μg/l Sum of
hydrocarbons concentrations of
specified
compounds; Note 8
25 Selenium 10 μg/l
26 Tetrachloroethene and 10 μg/l Sum of
Trichloroethene concentrations of
specified
parameters.
27 Trihalomethanes — Total Sum of
• until 24 December 2008 150 μg/l concentrations of
• from 25 December 2008 100 μg/l specified
compounds; Note 9
28 Vinyl chloride 0.50 μg/l Note 1
 
I would prefer not to drink any water with arsenic, cadmium and lead in it and do not fully trust what any quide lines say.

We got a Osmosis water filter and are very happy with it.

Anna
 

There are acceptable safe limits for all chemicals, granted for some chemicals it is very small limits, but they are quantifiably safe nonetheless. Eat an apple and you'll take in some cyanide, yet we don't fall down in an Agatha Christie like death.

You'll find traces of chemicals in most things, as stated, if it's within safe limits, it is safe.

Reverse Osmosis does not give pure water, it removes some of the contaminants. However, it will not cause you any harm drinking it. Having said that nor will drinking unfiltered tap water.
 
Reverse Osmosis does not give pure water, it removes some of the contaminants. However, it will not cause you any harm drinking it. Having said that nor will drinking unfiltered tap water.

Tell the people of Galway that drinking the unfiltered water will cause no harm. The mains water supplies are not ok by me, even if it was just a case of the old lead piping or the cholorine and flouride added.

Anna
 
Tell the people of Galway that drinking the unfiltered water will cause no harm. The mains water supplies are not ok by me, even if it was just a case of the old lead piping or the cholorine and flouride added.

Starting to sound like some of the scare tactics used by those selling over-priced filtration systems!
 
So if anyone has an opinion different from the 2 Mr. frequent posters here they get accused of leading up to a sales pitch.

If I say my Volvo is a safe car are you going to state that its starting to sound like scare tactics also. Then you'll say you expect me to produce the crash test dummies.
 
If I say my Volvo is a safe car are you going to state that its starting to sound like scare tactics also.

Bad example - it does sound like a sales pitch. For the simple reason that many cars on the road have a better safety rating than Volvo anyway.

Re the main point, there are many charlatans out there selling overpriced and/or ineffective systems for water treatment on foot of 'lab analysis' water quality results. This has come up many times. Caution advised.

As mentioned, tap water contains traces of loads of metals etc.
 
Starting to sound like some of the scare tactics used by those selling over-priced filtration systems!

I have an interest in my familys health and what is consumed in my home and that is it. I dont think I need to add a note with every post to state that I have no alterior motives.

Is this how a difference in opnion on a subject is dealt with here, by discreting the poster.

Sounds line paranoia to me.
 
Interesting that you bring up paranoia. Introducing Galway's Cryptosporidium contamination here smacks of stoking the flames. Also, you don't trust the official guide lines for the safe consumption levels? Why not?

Where do you source your food from? If you're the same as the vast majority of us, then I'm afriad you are feeding your children many of these and other chemicals on a daily basis. To pretend that a massively overpriced water filter is going to solve your issues is somewhat naieve.
Leo
 
Leo I think you are unfair with you criticisms. As a Moderator on this form I take it then your opnion is not to be challenged ?

If I state I dont trust the water supply and have a water filter I am accused of using scare tatics and having alter motives. As I posted before I have no alter motives and not connected to suppliers of water filters.

Now your saying I pretend that a massively overpriced water jug is going to solve my issues. What issues? dont remember saying that..

This is childish and not worthy of any more of my time.

Anna
 
Hi Anna,

The personal opinions I've expressed here are in no way related to moderation policy, and are as open to be challenged as anyone else's. I'll readily admit I'm no expert in relation to these matters.

However, the the idea of a forum such as AAM is that people offer their opinions, and others are free to challenge them. With this debate, the facts can be made clear to all with an interest in such matters.

You have stated that you do not trust your water supply, and you also do not trust international standards for the required quality of drinking water. I have challenged you in the hope of obtaining a rational explanation and to further the debate.

I accept your assertion you have no vested interest, but to post such comments without reasoning or substantiating evidence in a public forum is simply scare mongering.
Leo
 
There is a fairly good description of RO systems and the "sales professionals" who sometimes sell them here: "Pure H2O" water filtration system - fact or myth? Look out for the insightfull contributions from poster Zenn.

By all means install an RO system if you are not happy with your mains water but understand what RO does and the price you should pay for those systems.

Dont be swayed by slick sales people and always get your water tested off site in an independant laboratory INAB accredited to test Drinking Water.

If you must purchace an RO system then get quotations from a number of reputable water treatment contractor (they are listed in the golden pages) preferablly one that is associated with or a member of the Water Quality Association.
 


Unfortunately, the urban myth of RO water being so pure that it does odd things within your body, is a nonsense that still does the rounds.

Globally, no authority yet large or small has authenticated any evidence to show that residential RO water filters are able to draw ions from the human body or affect our hyperstasis.

The World Health Organisation after looking at thirty years worth of odd opinions that have emerged from time to time regarding minerals or lack of minerals in water have now settled on an approach that massively recommends RO technology large and small for helping towards the world's future water demands.

The W.H.O. also put out an official statement recently that states that water cannot be reliably looked upon as a source of minerals.

All residential RO systems available cannot provide water at a purity that affects bodily hyperstasis, and the truth is that if water was commercially refined to the ultimate level of purity to 18.3 megaohm D.I. quality for semiconductor, pharmaceutical and nuclear uses, it still would be perfectly fine to drink for most people, as the pH would still be an exact 7.0 balance.

Residential RO systems do not raise water purity to commercial levels however, and generally work on excess minerals and salts not in the 99.999999 removal level, but actually in the 85% to 95% removal level.

It is the nasty stuff like heavy metals that RO are very good in removing in the 99.9% range, even on a domestic level.

For four or more decades, residential RO systems have had a perfect world wide medical track record for exceptional quality water, and because RO is so proven it has been used for decades as the only water treatment technology for re-processing water on all long term space station missions, and long term naval submarine missions for all crew.

GE and Siemens are two of the worlds largest technology firms and both have been making and selling top level residential and commercial RO systems for decades.

I can absolutely qualify that remarks made by certain microbiologists based in Dublin that have appeared in the past on TV to give opinions about RO water quality from residential devices as being so misleading that they are both unable to re-substantiate past opinions and have now withdrawn from making any repeat of mistakes of trying to describe the performance of RO systems in general, such was their past embarrassment of their comments.

The thing with RO systems, for the new age hippy types, is that you can pop on a mineral cartridge after the RO if there are spiritual doubts about the water energy, or contaminant reduction to levels where minerals come down to the levels of Volvic water.

Volvic bottled water is the example of a highly successful water sold globally with a refreshing sort of taste, that actually has little or no minerals at all. It is so low on minerals it is actually classed as a spring water and not a mineral water, but is generally mistaken by 90% ? of the population as a mineral water.

Most RO systems after an average span of operation leave as many minerals in water (well as much as the 9.9 mg/L calcium in Volvic) as many spring bottled waters and more so above the new chunk of the RO bottled waters from the world's food giants like Kraft and Coke that are selling Zero mineral level bottled waters (commercial process RO) that now have over 30% of world market share.