Triclosan is a popular antimicrobial agent with widespread use in common soaps, plastics, toys and other household items. In addition to causing antibiotic resistance, it builds up in the human body, and degrades in the aquatic environment, creating among other things, dioxins, which are known carcinogens and found to mutate DNA and cause birth defects. In August of 2011, the Minnesota Department of Health published a “guidance” related to Triclosan in water, which stated “we currently do not know if Triclosan is present in Minnesota drinking water.” Moreover, they “recommend against using products containing Triclosan at home.” But, went on to say that they think at 50 parts per billion in the drinking water, there should be little health risk.
The fact is that Triclosan is among the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s “contaminants of emerging concern.” A lot of research is being done, to try and discern how harmful this chemical is and at what levels. In 2012, researchers at UC Davis and the University of Colorado found that Triclosan affects muscular strength in mice, swimming in fish and muscular contractions in skeletal and cardiac cells. The researchers reached these conclusions by first exposing living mice to doses of Triclosan similar to that which humans and animals would be in contact with on a daily basis. After 20 minutes of exposure, the mice had a 25% drop in heart function. They also had an 18% decrease in grip strength after an hour of exposure. Yet, the FDA’s official position is that “it is not currently known to be hazardous to humans. But several scientific studies have come out since the last time FDA reviewed this ingredient that merit further review.” According to the EPA, “as rapidly developing scientific database for Triclosan, the Agency intends to accelerate the schedule for the registration review process for this chemical. Currently, the Agency intends to begin that process in 2013, ten years earlier than originally planned. EPA and FDA are collaborating on research projects that will help both agencies to better characterize the endocrine-related effects of Triclosan, including toxicological effects, human relevance, and the doses at which they occur to determine if levels of human exposure are safe or not. The Agency will pay close attention to this ongoing research and will amend the regulatory decision if the science supports such a change.” So, essentially, when we get around to figuring out how nasty this is, we’ll let you know.
It’s important to keep in mind that this is just one of the hundreds of harmful chemicals found in our drinking water, which are still being “researched” by the government. What’s REALLY concerning is that as bad as Triclosan is, the AWWA Research Foundation has found MANY other compounds that require even higher margins of safety.
Gravity filtration will not remove Triclosan from drinking water. However, reverse osmosis is among a select few technologies that are highly effective at removing not only Triclosan, but a wide array of other pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCP’s) and endocrine disrupting compounds (EDC’s).
Wednesday, March 5, 2014
Saturday, March 1, 2014
MARSHALL MINNESOTA, WE SALUTE YOU
I’m not a journalist or engineer, but I’m pretty sure the story below would lead the reader to believe the day of lower "acceptable amounts" of known contaminants, and the identification of “emerging contaminants” is here, as opposed to what casual readers of The Laker have been led to believe.
READ ARTICLE HERE
“The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has proposed new, lower limits for chemicals like chlorides, copper and phosphorus in wastewater that won't be easy for the plant to meet.”
"Apparently, RO (reverse osmosis) systems are the only way we can remove chlorides," he said.
"Olson and VanMoer said Marshall isn't alone in struggling with more stringent water-quality standards. The challenge is statewide For example, the city of St. Peter installed a costly reverse osmosis system at its water treatment plant in recent years, they said."
READ ARTICLE HERE
“The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has proposed new, lower limits for chemicals like chlorides, copper and phosphorus in wastewater that won't be easy for the plant to meet.”
"Apparently, RO (reverse osmosis) systems are the only way we can remove chlorides," he said.
"Olson and VanMoer said Marshall isn't alone in struggling with more stringent water-quality standards. The challenge is statewide For example, the city of St. Peter installed a costly reverse osmosis system at its water treatment plant in recent years, they said."
Why are we being led to believe by The Laker and the city that “some day” is years away; when obviously it’s not? Why do these very rural cities like Marshall and St. Peter seem to have a grasp on the future, while Minnetrista is considering an archaic technology like a gravity filtration system that is “expandable in the future” when the future is here?
DEAR TIM LAPARA
1. You stated that RO could destroy the distribution system. Please show us an example where this has occurred? If this were true why have cities throughout the world installing RO systems?
2. You stated that pure water tastes bad. Tell me, why then is bottled water from the RO process over a multi billion dollar industry and growing?
3. You stated that: "RO is something you would want to use on a small scale". Would you consider over 10 municipalities in Minnesota, Fargo and Grand Forks North Dakota, Houston, TX and many many other municipalities worldwide to be small scale installations?
4. You stated that gravity filtration "technology is totally appropriate", how well does that system work on ARSENIC, RADIUM, PHARMACEUTICALS, TRICHLOROETHYLENE
and other future contaminants?
If anyone would like to ask Tim any more questions about his interview with Mrs. Malloy and question him on the research he has made in order to make such bold statements about RO water treatment systems here is his contact information.
Tim LaPara
612-624-6028
lapar001@umn.edu
Also you might like to know a little about Tim before you have a chat with him:
VIEW HIS BIO HERE
He is an expert in sewage, NOT drinking water.
2. You stated that pure water tastes bad. Tell me, why then is bottled water from the RO process over a multi billion dollar industry and growing?
3. You stated that: "RO is something you would want to use on a small scale". Would you consider over 10 municipalities in Minnesota, Fargo and Grand Forks North Dakota, Houston, TX and many many other municipalities worldwide to be small scale installations?
4. You stated that gravity filtration "technology is totally appropriate", how well does that system work on ARSENIC, RADIUM, PHARMACEUTICALS, TRICHLOROETHYLENE
and other future contaminants?
If anyone would like to ask Tim any more questions about his interview with Mrs. Malloy and question him on the research he has made in order to make such bold statements about RO water treatment systems here is his contact information.
Tim LaPara
612-624-6028
lapar001@umn.edu
Also you might like to know a little about Tim before you have a chat with him:
VIEW HIS BIO HERE
He is an expert in sewage, NOT drinking water.
ARTICLE IN THE LAKER BY MRS. MALLOY
The article titled "School Board Approves Land Donation For Minnetrista Water Treatment Plant" has not yet appeared online. I am attaching a scanned version for your viewing pleasure. It's great to read about the land donation approval from the school district to the city. What is very disturbing about this article is the interview with Tim LaPara "U of M Director of Graduate Studies at the Water Resources Graduate Program and Department of Civil Engineering". This interview, once again, proves that The Laker is 100% taking sides on the water issue. Tim makes some seriously negative statements about RO systems. Statements that will only scare Minnetrista residents into settling for an out dated gravity filtration system. Statements that are completely untrue. The Laker and Tim need to back up this interview with research proving his statements.
Tuesday, February 18, 2014
Monday, February 17, 2014
A WATER ARTICLE WORTH READING
In the next 40 years the Met Council predicts we will be rationing water in the Twin Cities. We need to set an example in Minnetrista and become a leader in water sustainability and not a blind follower ignoring our near futures problems.
http://www.startribune.com/local/east/245702541.html
"Fischer, vice chairman of the House Environment and Natural Resources Policy Committee, said that pesticides and leaking garbage landfills contaminated Minnesota’s abundant waterways over the years and that high nitrate levels from fertilizers are being found in wells. 'We’ve done a lot of things where we haven’t been very responsible with our water resources,” he said. Despite the notable problems, he said, the trend of depletion and contamination can be reversed if cities and counties “learn to think about water in a whole new way.' "
http://www.startribune.com/local/east/245702541.html
"Fischer, vice chairman of the House Environment and Natural Resources Policy Committee, said that pesticides and leaking garbage landfills contaminated Minnesota’s abundant waterways over the years and that high nitrate levels from fertilizers are being found in wells. 'We’ve done a lot of things where we haven’t been very responsible with our water resources,” he said. Despite the notable problems, he said, the trend of depletion and contamination can be reversed if cities and counties “learn to think about water in a whole new way.' "
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)