 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / General / July 2005Purified water versus tap water
Are there any health benefits in drinking purified water as compared to tap water or is it mainly an issue of taste? I live in a large US city, and the tap water tastes horrid, but I don't think that it can actually affect my health (although I have been told so). Have there been any studies done on this? >Are there any health benefits in drinking purified water as compared to >tap water or is it mainly an issue of taste? I live in a large US city, >and the tap water tastes horrid, but I don't think that it can actually >affect my health (although I have been told so). Have there been any >studies done on this? Your water company should be sending you a report each year about what is in the water. Get one, and look at it. There is no simple relationship between taste and healthfulness. You need to look at what is in the water. The water presumably meets legal specs, so is officially considered ok for health. Of course, there is always room to quibble about some of the specs. Bottom line... there is probably no big problem with it. But any better statement requires looking at the analysis -- looking at specifics. bob NozomiMomi@gmail.com wrote in part: >Are there any health benefits in drinking purified water as compared to >tap water or is it mainly an issue of taste? I live in a large US city, >and the tap water tastes horrid, but I don't think that it can actually >affect my health (although I have been told so). Have there been any >studies done on this? Tap water IS purified water. -- Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Not so. Tap water is full of minerals and trace chemicals. What you lose in purified water is the fluoride which slows or prevents dental cavities. To compensate, brush with a medically recommended fluoride compound. One more thing. Don't rinse your mouth after brushing. You can spit but not rinse. This allows extra fluoride ions to penetrate the enamel. Ask your dentist for a sample. The standard tube costs $12. David H ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ dcholiman@ev1.net wrote in part: >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >Not so. Tap water is full of minerals and trace [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >David H >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "purified," not "pure." -- Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA >Not so. Tap water is full of minerals and trace >chemicals. Some of which are beneficial. And what makes you think bottled water doesn't have those same minerals and trace chemicals? Unless it's distilled water, bottled in glass and sealed imperviously, what makes it any better? Nature is funny that way. Pure water simply doesn't exist in nature, and I'm pretty skeptical that anything bottled in plastic is "pure" for very long anyway. In fact, I'm not even sure what "purified water" actually is, but if we're talking about commercial bottled water sold under various marketing names that evoke images of crystal clear springs, those products often have much higher bacteria counts than the average municipal water supply. The only thing pure about them is the picture of crystal clear springs on the label and the profits they generate. Bottled water is the biggest scam of the century. It never ceases to amaze me that people will pay well over $1 for a half liter of water of unknown quality if it's put in a bottle with a fancy label. > Bottled water is the biggest scam of the century. It never ceases to amaze > me that people will pay well over $1 for a half liter of water of unknown > quality if it's put in a bottle with a fancy label. COMMENT: It's a dollar's worth of decreased anxiety, baby. Works just as well as a dollar's worth of anxiety-decreasing homeopathic crap, and fixes your thirst, too. Hey, better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick. SBH > Bottled water is the biggest scam of the century. It never ceases to amaze > me that people will pay well over $1 for a half liter of water of unknown > quality if it's put in a bottle with a fancy label. Nah. I buy bottled water because it's convenient, it's healthier than Coke and tastes better than the local municipal water. The labels don't fool me. My favorite brand is from the Houston city supply and merely run through charcoal filters. Yumm. L Darnall >My favorite brand is from the Houston city supply and merely >run through charcoal filters. Yumm. So Houston has one redeeming quality, after all. ;-) > In fact, I'm not even sure what "purified water" actually is, It's been through a charcoal filter. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Yes indeed. If Houston water has not yet won a taste prize, then they should bring in a European quality control institute to test it and compare it to French, German, and Swedish tap waters. David H ~~~~~~~~~~~~ > And what makes you think bottled water doesn't have those same minerals and > trace chemicals? Unless it's distilled water, bottled in glass and sealed > imperviously, what makes it any better? Purified water is generally run through a reverse osmosis filtering system. > In fact, I'm not even sure what "purified water" actually is, but if we're > talking about commercial bottled water sold under various marketing names > that evoke images of crystal clear springs, those products often have much > higher bacteria counts than the average municipal water supply. The only > thing pure about them is the picture of crystal clear springs on the label > and the profits they generate. Nonsense. Site your source. Purified water is NOT spring water. Purified water is tap that's run through a filtering process. Obviously you don't know anything about it (as admitted above). Learn what reverse osmosis is. >> And what makes you think bottled water doesn't have those same minerals and >> trace chemicals? Unless it's distilled water, bottled in glass and sealed >> imperviously, what makes it any better? > >Purified water is generally run through a reverse osmosis filtering >system. "Purified" is a general term that can mean many things. Hell, tap water is "purified water" if you want to pick nits. If the OP meant reverse osmosis filtered water, he should have said so. >> In fact, I'm not even sure what "purified water" actually is, but if we're >> talking about commercial bottled water sold under various marketing names [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Nonsense. Site your source. http://www.nrdc.org/water/drinking/bw/exesum.asp Feel free to search further. More citations aren't hard to find. >Purified water is NOT spring water. Purified water is tap that's run >through a filtering process. Obviously you don't know anything about >it (as admitted above). Learn what reverse osmosis is. I know what reverse osmosis is. I hate to tell you this, but "purified water" is not defined as reverse osmosis. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Not so. Tap water is full of minerals and trace [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > David H > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Yes---I have been getting this for a few years now. I quit using it a year ago or so in order to save a few bucks a year due to my loss of work and return to school. My dentist Rx'd it for sensitivity, and it works, but you have to be consistent (which isn't a big deal for me, I just decided to stop buying it for the moment due to financial reasons), and I found BID TX is fine. Once in the morning & at bedtime after brushing. David's right---you just brush it on for a few minutes (recommended, but a minute is fine). AFA the tap H2O question, well, the Culligan water we use at home (& my dad's office) is filtered by reverse osmosis & some other filtration techniques, & I believe it's much different then the tap water here in town. The Culligan (or most any other reverse osmosis/filtered water, or even spring water) makes all the difference for me. Tastes great. Some add minerals for taste, which is fine I guess, but I like that Culligan water. (I know, the check's in the mail for spamming for Culligan, right?). > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Not so. Tap water is full of minerals and trace [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > thing. Don't rinse your mouth after brushing. > You can spit but not rinse. I do not recommend this, and caution especially not to allow young children (under 10 or so) to follow this practice, even in the presence of significant decay. There is too high a potential to develop dental fluorosis. This allows extra fluoride > ions to penetrate the enamel. Ask your dentist for a > sample. The standard tube costs $12. I'm assuming you are referring to prescription products such as Prevident 2000 or Gel-Kam. These are fine for adults with high caries rates, esp. patients with a history of periodontal disease. Steve > David H > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  SignatureMark & Steven Bornfeld DDS http://www.dentaltwins.com Brooklyn, NY 718-258-5001 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Neither product. My dentista sells Fluoridex in 4 ounce tubes at cost. Walmart sells a similar product at $11.66 per 4 ounces. The Fluoridex fact sheet says: "Topical application of fluorides does not cause fluoridosis." Another question. Is there any data on fluoridosis caused or aggravated by public fluoridated water supplies ? David H ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~` > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Neither product. My dentista sells Fluoridex [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "Topical application of fluorides does not > cause fluoridosis." Of course not. My point is that if you don't rinse out, it is ingested. > Another question. Is there any data on > fluoridosis caused or aggravated by public > fluoridated water supplies ? Fluorosis is related to the amount of fluoride ingested. To the extent that fluoridated water is part of the total fluoride load it does contribute. However, for the average person, this contribution is small. For this reason, I do not recommend dietary fluoride in my area. Topical is OK, properly applied. However, I do not do this routinely for my patients. Steve > David H > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~` SignatureMark & Steven Bornfeld DDS http://www.dentaltwins.com Brooklyn, NY 718-258-5001 dcholiman@ev1.net wrote in news:1121801041.455535.200690 @o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com: > What you lose in purified water is > the fluoride which slows or prevents dental > cavities. "Purifiers" are charcoal filters, not stills. The water isn't de- chlorinated, so it won't be de-fluoridated, either. > dcholiman@ev1.net wrote in news:1121801041.455535.200690 > @o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > "Purifiers" are charcoal filters, not stills. The water isn't de- > chlorinated, so it won't be de-fluoridated, either. I'll have to check. Many of the filters contain colloidal silver--I believe they may be designed to remove chlorine. Steve SignatureCut the nonsense to reply >> dcholiman@ev1.net wrote in news:1121801041.455535.200690 >> @o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Steve The PUR filter contains activated charcoal and an ion exchange resin. They claim to lower chlorine content but not significantly diminish fluoride. http://www.purwaterfilter.com/faqs.html Brita seems to be pretty similar. They claim to remove cryptosporidium, and to lower levels of lead, mercury and other metals. http://www.brita.com/products/faq.shtml Steve SignatureCut the nonsense to reply > They claim to remove cryptosporidium, and to lower levels of ... mercury I don't think that either of these is a significant worry. You'll only get mercury near toxic industrial sites, and you'll get crypto if rotting garbage gets into the water table, perhaps near a leaky garbage dump. >>They claim to remove cryptosporidium, and to lower levels of ... mercury > > I don't think that either of these is a significant worry. You'll only get > mercury near toxic industrial sites, and you'll get crypto if rotting > garbage gets into the water table, perhaps near a leaky garbage dump. My understanding is that crypto may be a risk for immunocompromised patients. I know that during the last severe water shortage in New York they began allowing some water from the Hudson River to enter the NYC water supply, and after this crypto was detected. On a related note, there is a chassidic rabbi in the NY area who heard a report that a small crustacean was found in the NY water supply. Shellfish of course are not kosher. So now all my orthodox Jewish patients carry little bottles of spring water with them. Wait till the rabbi looks at THAT under the microscope!! Steve SignatureMark & Steven Bornfeld DDS http://www.dentaltwins.com Brooklyn, NY 718-258-5001 >> dcholiman@ev1.net wrote in news:1121801041.455535.200690 >> @o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > I'll have to check. Many of the filters contain colloidal silver--I >believe they may be designed to remove chlorine. Activated charcoal removes chlorine, as well as a lot of miscellaneous organic compounds that cause off tastes in drinking water. The colloidal silver is in there to inhibit the growth of bacteria which can be pathogenic or add other off tastes to the water. The charcoal can reach its limit on chlorine while still adsorbing organics. A lot of different water treatment devices are loosely called 'purifiers', from sediment filters to reverse osmosis equipment, so it's not really possible to conclude much if you don't know just what method is being used. bae@cs.toronto.no-uce.edu wrote in news:2005Jul22.011403.2110 @jarvis.cs.toronto.edu: > Activated charcoal removes chlorine Can you provide a reference for this? >Are there any health benefits in drinking purified water as compared to >tap water or is it mainly an issue of taste? I live in a large US city, >and the tap water tastes horrid, but I don't think that it can actually >affect my health (although I have been told so). Have there been any >studies done on this? The chlorine in tap water is probably responsible for some small number of cases of bladder cancer every year, though I'm not sure how well established this is. (The cost of not disinfecting the water is higher, of course.) So a filter that removes chlorine might be worth having if you consume tap water. Your local water almost certainly isn't harmful, but if you don't like the taste of it, get a filter. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "I believe The Battle of the Network Stars should be fought with guns." -- Steve Martin |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.