Water purification and such

[Phoynix]

I would like to add a small correction to what Thomas stated, with enough time Calcium Hypochlorite is effective vs everything.
For encapsulated pathogens it can just take a week to do its job(as long as the water is not exposed to sunlight).

This is not useful for instant water but its very useful for long term storage water disinfection.
Non stabilized poolshock(Stabilized is not suitable for human consumption) is a cheap way to get it and if kept in a airtight container and only open for short durations it stores long term.

 

[Thomas Linton]

I would like to add a small correction to what Thomas stated, with enough time Calcium Hypochlorite is effective vs everything.
For encapsulated pathogens it can just take a week to do its job(as long as the water is not exposed to sunlight).

This is not useful for instant water but its very useful for long term storage water disinfection.
Non stabilized poolshock(Stabilized is not suitable for human consumption) is a cheap way to get it and if kept in a airtight container and only open for short durations it stores long term.

I stand corrected. I guess that's what all the public authorities mean by "not reliable" - not reliable if you expect to drink the water anytime soon.

Milwaukee. 1993. About 403,000 cases of the runs despite heavy chlorination. Solved by better filters and ozone because " it can kill microorganisms such as Crypto that are left untouched by chlorine."

If I had sunlight, I'd try SODIS instead.

 

[Phoynix]

Looked it up... filters failed... large particles were allowed into the water from a sewerage plant down the road... nothing works against dirt(feces) encapsulated pathogens except for boiling or filtering out the particles... The chlorine added to the water was used up in reactions with the excess organic matter.
Ozone treatment would have failed in the exact same situation.

As for swimming pools, where the outbreaks mostly occur... for obvious reasons the inactivation time is low enough that one person can contaminate a pool and others can end up getting sick before the Chlorine can do its work.

Lab tests show its effective at 2ppm against Cryptosporidium after 7 days(100% inactivation rate), yet Chlorine in water is safe to drink up to 4ppm, one can also use higher doses on a large water supply and then pour water from one small container to another repeatedly in sunlight to quickly reduce the chlorine content to safe levels.

Its not something that is useful for general water purification of small amounts of water if you suspect encapsulated pathogens say when camping, on the other hand if you are in a disaster area and you no longer have access to clean drinking water along with a large group of other people it becomes very relevant having the ability to disinfect large amounts of water.

More ways people know to make potable water the better in my view, it also happens to be effective within 30mins-1hour against most pathogens.

lastly easily made sand filter works against larger pathogens like Cryptosporidium, and chlorine can take care of the rest, including killing the captured Cryptosporidium in the filter.

I stand corrected. I guess that's what all the public authorities mean by "not reliable" - not reliable if you expect to drink the water anytime soon.

Milwaukee. 1993. About 403,000 cases of the runs despite heavy chlorination. Solved by better filters and ozone because " it can kill microorganisms such as Crypto that are left untouched by chlorine."

If I had sunlight, I'd try SODIS instead.

 

[Thomas Linton]

Did you read that Milwaukee had eliminated its "obsolete" low pressure sand filter beds? Oops!

No reason not to do what can be done to reduce risk even if not 99.9999.

There is a reason for "Boil Alerts" when public water systems are compromised. No measuring. No timing. No Ph issues. The Gold Standard.

 

[Phoynix]

Actually
Cryptospordium takes over 3 mins at rolling boil to kill(deactivate 100% of oocysts) at sea level... it can take 4 mins+ at elevations.
Bring water to boil and then letting cool is only about 98% effective, which is less then the outdated sand filters...

Knowledge is power, and possibly life... the more everyone knows about ways and methods of water purification the better.

 

[Thomas Linton]

Actually is an interesting word.

Opinions vary, but I can find no advice corresponding to yours.

"71.7 degrees C for 15 s) used in commercial pasteurization are sufficient to destroy infectivity of oocysts. In this study, oocysts were suspended in either water or whole milk and heated to 71.7 degrees C for 15, 10, or 5 s[econds] in a laboratory-scale pasteurizer. Pasteurized and nonpasteurized (control) oocysts were then tested for the ability to infect infant mice. No mice (0 of 177) given 10(5) oocysts pasteurized for 15, 10, or 5 s in either water or milk were found to be infected with C. parvum on the basis of histologic examination of the terminal ileum. In contrast, all (80 of 80) control mice given nonpasteurized oocysts were heavily infected. These data indicate that high-temperature[77°C] --short-time [5-15 seconds] pasteurization is sufficient to destroy the infectivity of C. parvum oocysts in water and milk." Effect of pasteurization on infectivity of Cryptosporidium parvum oocysts in water and milk, J A Harp, R Fayer, B A Pesch, and G J Jackson, American Society for Microbiology, 1996.

Cryptosporidium oocysts are inactivated after "72.4°C for 1 min or 64.2°C for more than 2 min" (Those temperatures are 162.4F and 147.56f, respectively.) Fayer, R. 1994. Effect of high temperature on infectivity of Cryptosporidium parvum oocysts in water. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 60:2732-2735. Cited for authority by American Society for Microbiology at http://aem.asm.org/content/74/23/7101.full

Jenkins, M. B., L. J. Anguish, D. D. Bowman, M. J. Walker, and W. C. Ghiorse. 1997. Assessment of a dye permeability assay for determination of inactivation rates of Cryptosporidium parvum oocysts. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 63:3844-3850 "These K values predicted the exposure times before inactivation to be somewhat longer than those reported by Fayer." American Society for Microbiology at http://aem.asm.org/content/74/23/7101.full

These experiments used distilled water or milk as the medium. Results vary in wild water. Hence, the conservative advice of CDC and EPA to boil for one (1) minute exposure to 100°C and three (3) minutes at altitude "for individuals who wish to take extra measures to avoid waterborne cryptosporidiosis"

"Oocysts are not killed by typical household disinfectants, including bleach, but are killed at temperatures over 160 degrees Fahrenheit (hotter than most domestic hot tap water). Thorough drying in a clothes dryer will kill oocytes by desiccating them." University of Florida, Cryptosporidium : A Waterborne Pathogen, B.K. Avery, A. Lemley and A.G. Hornsby

"Heat processing is an effective control against Cryptosporidium oocysts in food. Normal milk pasteurisation processes are effective, as are recommended ‘Listeria cook’ processes for meat products (70 oC for at least 2 mins). Reheating cooked foods to at least 74 oC will destroy oocysts immediately."

ED: Found one. Arizona Dept, of Health suggest three minutes boil. Deader than dead.

"The term rolling boil facilitates communication and assures that an effective pasteurization temperature [77°C] is reached to kill or inactivate waterborne pathogens." N.Y. Dept of Health.

 

[Phoynix]

My source is my brother, PHD Virology, the people in the lab where he had his office while he was doing his dissertation worked with Cryptosporidium, this was in Australia.
He was visiting yesterday and due to this thread we got to talking about disinfecting water, I didn't know it took 3 mins myself till then.

Also I'm not going to go into it... but microbial research from the US is highly suspect, labs are lax, training is extremely bad, and outdated methods are used that are known to contaminate results. Anyone who was trained in Europe/Australia/Japan and has a masters/PHD in related fields and worked in the USA would like to disagree, feel free to post in this thread.

If you think I am being silly... look up CDC lab accidents...
Its only be sheer luck a large population center of the US has not been infected and its directly a result of poor training and outdated methods taught/used in the USA.

 

[Thomas Linton]

The conspiracy thread is at Whine and Cheese.

But it's too late.

The US conspiracy to give unsafe advice on using temperature to kill cypto has already infiltrated the UK National health Service ( "Boiling tap water will kill any cryptosporidia [sic] which may be present. The water needs to be boiled for a minimum of one minute – so just boiling in an automatic kettle is not adequate"; the UK Institute of Food Service Technology ("A temperature of 60°C inactivates oocysts in 5-10 minutes."); the Uk Travel Health Information website ("Although varying time periods are quoted, for all practical purposes, boiling for one minute is sufficient to kill all harmful organisms."); Scottish Water UK ("Boil water notices have been issued to minimise the risk of people coming in contact with Cryptosporidium through their water supply. Cryptosporidium is killed by bringing water to the boil."); Dwr Cymru Welsh Water ("it is sufficient to bring the water to the boil."); New South Wales Health ("When a notice is issued drinking water should be brought to a rolling boil, and allowed to cool before drinking."); UK National health Service again (""We know that bringing water to the boil will kill the cryptosporidium parasite," he added."); The World Health Organization ("Cryptosporidium parvum oocysts are inactivated in less than 1 minute once temperatures exceed 70 °C."; health.gov.au ("recommends making water microbiologically safe to drink by bringing it to a rolling boil for one (1) minute. This will inactivate all major waterborne bacterial pathogens (for example . . . , Cryptosporidium parvum, Giardia lamblia, and Entamoeba histolytica. . ."); UK Department for Environmental Food and Rural Affairs ("The Group recognises that there is a need for uniformity in the wording of advice on boiling water to ensure that the water is microbiologically safe whilst avoiding confusion to consumers and potential dangers with overheating electric kettles. It is necessary only to bring the water to the boil to kill Cryptosporidium oocysts. Water should be allowed to cool before use."); Health Canada ("Travellers to countries where the safety of drinking water is suspect should boil or disinfect and filter water that is to be used for drinking, food preparation, or dental hygiene. In the outdoors, water should be boiled for at least one minute before it is used for drinking, food preparation or dental hygiene. "); traveldoctor.com.au ("Boiled water is safe. You do not need to boil it for minutes as was once said. Just bringing it to the boil will kill most organisms."); Health Services Executive, Ireland ("The boiling of drinking water kills cryptosporidial oocysts and removes any potential threat of cryptosporidial infection from that source."); Nurul Fariza Rossle* and Baha Latif, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Jalan Hospital, 47000 Sungai Buloh, Selangor, Malaysia (" Water, especially untreated surface water, should be boiled before drinking to kill any oocysts in it.").

And I could go on.

No disrespect intended to your brother, but he didn't post here and I can still find no source on the Internet that supports your advice.

 

[Phoynix]

You can be snide all you wish, you can also keep posting Gov advice because we all know thats never wrong.
WHO
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs103/en/
Then we have
http://currents.plos.org/outbreaks/article/on-the-quarantine-period-for-ebola-virus/

CDC and WHO
Ebola is not transmittable through the air.

WHO admits it was wrong CDC refuses too... or rather it did... but refused to change its website...
CDC website still states its not transmittable though the air...

Do some more Google research you can find the head of the CDC stating it CAN be transmitted though the air in a public address.

CDC and WHO
Ebola is not airborne
Research has shown in air conditioned environments like offices it is airborne.

If you are wondering the difference between airborne and air transmissible is.
Airborne the virions can survive in the air by themselves, transmissible they survive in bodily fluids.. say the droplets from a persons sneeze that can remain in air for 45 mins or more.

You can also keep linking experiments with scientists who claim Chlorine doesnt work at all, despite a host information that says otherwise(its just slow) and by information I mean published experiment data...
I could also point you to CDC guidelines on Chlorine levels for pools to control Cryptospordia(which actually list chlorine levels that have been proven ineffective by multiple independent sources) That the CDC contradicts itself by also stating Chlorine isnt effective while claiming it is effective... while the chlorine levels they suggest are proven not effective...
Google that too.

What does exist is a vast lack of actual data on boiling to kill cryptospordia... of what you posted is one of the few I could find... and that includes scientific journals.
Also pathogens even the same type from different regions can show lesser/greater susceptibility to different environment and chemicals, this may be important because in Western Australia the ground in summer can reach temps of over 60 degrees, local variants I would be willing to bet found in the wild here can handle temps higher then ones from cooler climes.

As for conspiracy.
Conspiracy is an actual crime, it exists in most countries such as the USA, and accusations of conspiracy are required to be investigated AND acted upon.
Further, the whole conspiracy "crazy" mentality that exists today was actually invented by the CIA as propaganda to deal with people who had conspiracy theories that were close to the mark.
Google
CIA memo# 1035-960

At the end of the day people need to decide what information they trust...
I trust my brother, and I see no harm in boiling for 3 mins instead of just bringing to the boil.
You yourself have shown that no clear consensus on the amount of time required actually exists.

PS-If you cant refrain from being snide and/or insulting(and need to bring your EGO into the discussion) then we should consider this conversation over.

 

[AmericanAsApple3.14]

Phoynix - while I can't speak for everyone, I think many would agree that now-a-days a healthy suspicion of government reports isn't a bad thing. Who hasn't seen cases of what you're talking about or had suspicions that the official report wasn't necessarily the whole truth? But, Linton has specified many studies, and many recommendations from US and other governments, providing a basis for his argument/recommendations.... You brought up Ebola, chlorine, something I didn't understand about conspiracy being a crime, attacked America, and questioned his ego? Do you have any actual studies or links to recommendations? Have you heard of anyone who boiled for 1 or 2 minutes, or just brought a pot of infected/suspect water to a boil and let it cool, who subsequently got sick?
Will boiling for 3 minutes (or 10) hurt? Nope, of course not, better safe than sorry (unless you can't cover your pot, of course).

 

[B34NS]

Actually
Cryptospordium takes over 3 mins at rolling boil to kill(deactivate 100% of oocysts) at sea level... it can take 4 mins+ at elevations.
Bring water to boil and then letting cool is only about 98% effective, which is less then the outdated sand filters...

Knowledge is power, and possibly life... the more everyone knows about ways and methods of water purification the better.

The CDC and just about every source on earth: 1 minute at a rolling boil. 3 minutes is to allow boiling times at elevation >6,562FT.

My source is my brother, PHD Virology, the people in the lab where he had his office while he was doing his dissertation worked with Cryptosporidium, this was in Australia.
He was visiting yesterday and due to this thread we got to talking about disinfecting water, I didn't know it took 3 mins myself till then.

Also I'm not going to go into it... but microbial research from the US is highly suspect, labs are lax, training is extremely bad, and outdated methods are used that are known to contaminate results. Anyone who was trained in Europe/Australia/Japan and has a masters/PHD in related fields and worked in the USA would like to disagree, feel free to post in this thread.

If you think I am being silly... look up CDC lab accidents...
Its only be sheer luck a large population center of the US has not been infected and its directly a result of poor training and outdated methods taught/used in the USA.

If you could, please post the dissertation and some links to your claims above for further clarification.

Phoynix - while I can't speak for everyone, I think many would agree that now-a-days a healthy suspicion of government reports isn't a bad thing. Who hasn't seen cases of what you're talking about or had suspicions that the official report wasn't necessarily the whole truth? But, Linton has specified many studies, and many recommendations from US and other governments, providing a basis for his argument/recommendations.... You brought up Ebola, chlorine, something I didn't understand about conspiracy being a crime, attacked America, and questioned his ego? Do you have any actual studies or links to recommendations? Have you heard of anyone who boiled for 1 or 2 minutes, or just brought a pot of infected/suspect water to a boil and let it cool, who subsequently got sick?
Will boiling for 3 minutes (or 10) hurt? Nope, of course not, better safe than sorry (unless you can't cover your pot, of course).

Agreed. I think it's in their best interests to keep us all alive and continue to fund their research.

 

[Codger_64]

To my knowledge, achieving safe water from biological contamination is never about 100% filtration/kill. It is about reducing the biological to a level safe for human consumption. I worked in the commercial and residential swimming pool and spa industry for many years and attended many chemical seminars and watched new developments. I also delt with well water and the most common contamination, coliform bacteria. It is not required to completely eliminate this bacteria from drinking water but to reduce it to a level the human body can naturally cope with. Small quantities are harmless to healthy humans.

 

[B34NS]

To my knowledge, achieving safe water from biological contamination is never about 100% filtration/kill. It is about reducing the biological to a level safe for human consumption. I worked in the commercial and residential swimming pool and spa industry for many years and attended many chemical seminars and watched new developments. I also delt with well water and the most common contamination, coliform bacteria. It is not required to completely eliminate this bacteria from drinking water but to reduce it to a level the human body can naturally cope with. Small quantities are harmless to healthy humans.

Good points, curious, did you happen to work with diatomaceous?

 

[Codger_64]

Good points, curious, did you happen to work with diatomaceous?

I did. And all other filter and sanitation systems and chemicals tried since circa 1975. DE is a very effective media but like every other system has it's pros and cons. It forms a very good, tight filtration surface if the filter is properly sized with the amount of water, circulation system and contaminations being dealt with. It would be possible to create a DE filter for field use but the effective life of the media is relatively short due to the very tight filtration and it cannot be backwashed, has to be discarded and replaced.

 

[druid189]

Ok, that's it. We need a suitable replacement for potentially contaminated water........

 

[B34NS]

I did. And all other filter and sanitation systems and chemicals tried since circa 1975. DE is a very effective media but like every other system has it's pros and cons. It forms a very good, tight filtration surface if the filter is properly sized with the amount of water, circulation system and contaminations being dealt with. It would be possible to create a DE filter for field use but the effective life of the media is relatively short due to the very tight filtration and it cannot be backwashed, has to be discarded and replaced.

Thanks buddy! That's what I figured, we use it out here for pools and spas too, but in some cases in remote or sensitive wildlife areas for smaller wells to supply, fire stations, ranger/ med stations. Are there any larger hollow fiber based systems similar to what we use in Sawyer mini's that are more industrial/commercial sized for larger volumes of water? For De-sal? The CA drought has inspired me to start refreshing my knowledge on these systems.

Druid, I'm with ya! :thumbup:

 

[Thomas Linton]

Boiling longer than needed only uses up more time and more fuel -- typically not a big deal in an individual case.

You trust an unnamed relative, and I might too if I knew a single thing about him - even his name.

I trust the consensus of microbiologists all over the world, as reflected in peer-reviewed articles in scientific journals and as reflected, less importantly, in the advice of government health agencies all over the world. Could they be wrong? Sure. But we all can only do the best we can in deciding to whom we give our trust.

I did not realize I was being snide. I was intending to disagree with your citation of authority (you brother) by pointing out other and, I submit, more convincing authority.

"Conspiracy" is a perfectly good word that has meaning outside the realm of criminal law. I guess that was the "snide" part, reacting to your claim that U.S. public health authorities, in particular, are incompetent, at least as to water treatment. Mea culpa.

 

[Thomas Linton]

Thanks buddy! That's what I figured, we use it out here for pools and spas too, but in some cases in remote or sensitive wildlife areas for smaller wells to supply, fire stations, ranger/ med stations. Are there any larger hollow fiber based systems similar to what we use in Sawyer mini's that are more industrial/commercial sized for larger volumes of water? For De-sal? The CA drought has inspired me to start refreshing my knowledge on these systems.

Druid, I'm with ya! :thumbup:

I suggest a Google search. Searching "hollow fiber" water filter, I quickly found KOCH Membrane Systems:

"Handle your highest volumes with ease and efficiency
KMS hollow fiber membranes have been successfully employed in industrial water, industrial wastewater, and beverage processing applications worldwide, and are particularly well suited to the high production demands of municipal drinking water and wastewater treatment plants.

Depending on the technology employed, our hollow fibers can operate with flows from “inside-to-outside” as seen in our TARGA® II HF or from “outside-to-inside” as seen in our reinforced PURON membranes. Regardless of flow pattern, hollow fiber membranes offer a compact, cost-effective solution for filtering large volumes of liquids utilizing minimal space and energy."

So if systems exits for a single backpacker and for cities, I suspect there are products between those two extremes.

I know there are all manner of plans for DIY fixed sills that produce distilled water from salt water or otherwise questionable and commercial products that do the same. Google again. Many choices.

 

[Codger_64]

IIRC the hollow fiber membranes were developed by the medical research industry and are used in kidney dialysis and other applications. Not surprising they are finding their way into water treatment and filtering applications. Like DE and other media, seems like it would benefit from staged filtration to remove turbidity and larger particles before the finer final filtration.

 

[B34NS]

I suggest a Google search. Searching "hollow fiber" water filter, I quickly found KOCH Membrane Systems:

"Handle your highest volumes with ease and efficiency
KMS hollow fiber membranes have been successfully employed in industrial water, industrial wastewater, and beverage processing applications worldwide, and are particularly well suited to the high production demands of municipal drinking water and wastewater treatment plants.

Depending on the technology employed, our hollow fibers can operate with flows from “inside-to-outside” as seen in our TARGA® II HF or from “outside-to-inside” as seen in our reinforced PURON membranes. Regardless of flow pattern, hollow fiber membranes offer a compact, cost-effective solution for filtering large volumes of liquids utilizing minimal space and energy."

So if systems exits for a single backpacker and for cities, I suspect there are products between those two extremes.

I know there are all manner of plans for DIY fixed sills that produce distilled water from salt water or otherwise questionable and commercial products that do the same. Google again. Many choices.

Thanks for your search engine referral

IIRC the hollow fiber membranes were developed by the medical research industry and are used in kidney dialysis and other applications. Not surprising they are finding their way into water treatment and filtering applications. Like DE and other media, seems like it would benefit from staged filtration to remove turbidity and larger particles before the finer final filtration.

Interesting, I knew it came from medical but dialysis, what a trip!