Dangers in Public Drinking Water
There’s something in the water – again.
You’ve heard me railing about all the poisonous stuff the government puts in our public drinking water – fluoride, especially. Don’t even get me started on how this darling of the mainstream is actually nothing more than toxic waste (once used as a rat poison) that doesn’t even help your teeth!
But fluoride’s not the only poison Americans are ingesting in the vast majority of the country’s public water systems – not by a long shot.
Chlorine is another major toxin (it used to be employed as a chemical weapon, in fact) that the bureaucrats are pumping into our water in the name of our health. Supposedly, chlorine keeps water supplies clean and free of many harmful bacteria. While this may well be the case in swimming pools, in the aging pipes and pumping stations most of our country uses to disperse public water, this “harmless” chemical can interact with small quantities of organic matter to produce some really nasty toxins – including carcinogens chloroform and DCA (dichloro-acedic acid).
I know You’ve heard all of this from me before. But here’s something you likely haven’t heard: Some municipalities in the U.S. are starting to realize that chlorine’s byproducts are a health hazard, and are implementing alternatives for water treatment Hooray, right?
Not quite. According to a Reuters article, a new study suggests that one class of chlorine substitute used in some U.S. cities’ water supplies can produce byproducts that may be EVEN MORE TOXIC than those produced by garden-variety chlorine. Called chloramines (they’re a blend of chlorine and ammonia), these substitutes may be linked to a family of chemicals called iodoacids, which have been shown to be up to 300 times more toxic than chlorine byproducts in laboratory animals.
What’s even more disconcerting than this is the fact that only an estimated 30% of the byproducts of chlorine alternatives have even been studied for their toxic effects. That means the government’s been adding chemicals to our water that it doesn’t even know how will they affect us. Essentially, we’re the guinea pigs in a huge poison study. Of course, that’s nothing new, considering the fluoride and chlorine we’ve already been drinking, bathing, and washing our dishes in for the last 40 or 50 years.
According to the article, the EPA plans to monitor the effects of these disinfection agents, but has no plans to regulate the chemicals at this time. Now that you’ve read this, you may be looking for something else to drink. I can definitely help you there
Turn water into wine – especially if you light up
As it is with so many things when it comes to your health, the medical mainstream is way off in its estimation of how much water we need in order to be healthy – especially considering all the toxins and toxic byproducts floating around in our public water. But even if every drop of water in this country were completely safe to drink, their eight- glasses-a-day mantra is still pure madness.
The mainstream also says that we need drink ONLY water to stay as healthy as we can possibly be. I would differ from them on that point, too. There’s at least one other drink I know of that most of us just can’t achieve optimum health without Wine.
If you’ve been a reader of mine for any length of time at all, you’ve heard me talk about the benefits of wine – especially the red varieties – before. And a recent European study simply reaffirms the truth of my assertion. Apparently, in addition to its well-known protective benefits to the heart, red wine also protects against lung cancer, if some recent Spanish research holds true.
Focusing on a pool of more than 300 patients, the research didn’t find an overwhelming cancer-preventive effect among red wine drinkers, but a statistically significant one nonetheless. Oddly, it was only the red varieties that registered the anti-cancer effect (probably because these are richer in antioxidants) – the white wine drinkers actually endured a “slightly increased” (which means it was not statistically significant) risk. Does this mean those with lung cancer or at risk for lung cancer should take up binge drinking of red wine? Of course not. But if you’re a cigarette smoker, and your beverage of choice is, say, white wine (or water), you’d likely do yourself some good by acquiring a taste for the reds.
