Water purification and such

1.He brought up conspiracy and whine and cheese...I was pointing out trying using conspiracy as a way to attack or belittle the other person in an argument is itself a conspiracy.. a real one started by the CIA.

2.Chlorine was brought up due to his statement its not effective... and when it actually is however its not suitable for instant water say for a person hiking but larger bodies of water for large amounts of people over an extended timeframe. its still good information for people in a crisis

3.He also has not specified many studies, as a matter of fact he only did ~2, only one of which has full article I could find published online... also failed to publish the actual lab results and only a summery and couple of pages how nothing more was needed. It was also not an independent study.
As it stands however until I can put up lab results myself I dont really have any position to continue arguing from.

The fact does exist however that every outbreak in the USA happened at a utility that met state and federal requirements(which were considered sufficient to stop such an outbreak from happening)... that were deemed sufficient to stop Cryptosporidium


4.I was not attacking America, I was stating a fact(at least as far as I see it). If I say your car is running rough I am not attacking the car, I am stating it has a problem... problems can be fixed. My brother was not working at some backyard lab, he was employed at Scripps Research Institute, he was warned by multiple colleagues when he first applied for positions in the USA about the conditions to expect. At Scripps he had his experiments contaminated, he ended up having to clean and autoclave equipment that was fresh out of autoclaving, he had to redo lab work done by colleagues because of contamination... I brought up the CDC because its seriously compromised and lists exist of the serious accidents, including exposure of lab staff to weaponized pathogens which could have been introduced into the wild though their famileis... Any reasonable person should be seriously concerned about the history of accidents at CDC labs.


5.Yes incidents exist of people boiling water and still getting sick(such as campers and hikers), lack of evidence however is not evidence of absence. Even if bringing to boil and letting cool instantly is sufficient, reintroduction from other sources such as dirt in a cup cant be ruled out. As such the fact people have been infected after boiling water in no way supports boiling for 3 mins or just bringing to a boil.

essentialsplus said:
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).
Click to expand...
 
.....and yet some of us [me in particular] have managed to survive more than 30 years unscathed by simply tee shirt-filtering and boiling water for consumption. No extraordinary measures, no super filters or UV pens..........and no sickness from anything waterborne from an 800 mile area of those 30+ years of travels.

I think there's merit in the following suggestion........."ya'll need to relax"...
 
Ok I actually found two independent studies that found 67.5c for 1 min =100% deactivation rate.
All experiments however used chemically cleaned oocysts added to clean/environmentally sourced water.
"DEATH" though heat in this instance is due to exhaustion of TDP due to increased metabolic rate(no physical damage is caused to the oocyst)... at which point they are considered to have insufficient energy to infect a human cell... though its only been tested on mice.

Oocysts free in natural water sources are killed in a few hours by Rotifer's, following this simply leaving water standing for a few hours should kill oocysts... Of course no one would want to try this...

because

In nature many are embedded in fecal particulate not free...
No experiments I have found not a single one has tested fecal particulate containing oocysts in temp test.
Did find an experiment of chemical disinfecting of oocysts in fecal particulate which found it is ineffective, that oocysts remained highly viable in fecal particulate no matter the chemical saturation.

This is just speculation, but I would not be surprised to find that Oocysts wont activate to a higher metabolic state while still embedded in fecal particulate, at which point heating to exhaust TDP supply will fail, and only heating to a level sufficient to damage the Oocysts themselves will deactivate them. As oocysts do contain water such moisture turning to a gas will cause physical damage.

Tomas links you provided and and I found myself refers to older experiments(Including results requiring higher temps)... yet I have not been able to find any data on such older experiments if you could find any I would be appreciative.
 
Context - I'm very illiterate on these things so my following questions come from that perspective.

Ok, so the one study says that heating to 67.5c (that's about 150 f right?) will kill them, but only because they metabolize themselves to death...right? Why do you think that even embedded in particulate, using the same (sub-boiling) temperature, but perhaps given more time, that the oocysts would not exhaust themselves to death also?

In this experiment you found on chemical disinfecting, did it mention how big fecal particulate is? Is it something that prefiltering with say, a coffee filter or as druid mentioned a tshirt would remove? If that's the case, and larger particles are filtered out to an adequate level, then based on all this information I would feel very confident of boiled water after a very short time as it would seem to be supported by the first studies you mentioned (only more so since it's actually reached a much higher temp).
 
I'm not an expert either, my knowledge is just gained having many late night conversations with my brother and reading science journals etc.

The thick walled Oocysts may remain dormant until a specific conditions come to pass, heating before that time may not cause a metabolic increase.
Dormancy could cease simply by a drop and then rise in temp(at which point all lab data would be correct), or it could be something else, exposure to air... or the lack of chemicals say alkaline/acidic environments or a combination of things.
This is just my speculation, and it seems to me that tests should use real world environments... Free oocysts in water are actually eaten by other microorganisms and they dont actually survive very long.
For this reason Ooysts sent to labs for experiments are actually suspended in a chemical and antibiotic solution.

I found this rather disturbing tidbit as I was looking for previous articles, to respond to your particulate size question.

"While mouse infectivity assays have become recognized as the reference method for establishing the ability of oocysts to cause infection, they too have limitations. A major concern is the variability associated with the neonatal mouse model. There are also problems with respect to using these assays to determine the infectivity of oocysts recovered from environmental samples, as the numbers of oocysts present may be insufficient to induce infection in mice. More recently, molecular evidence for exclusively human (type 1) and human and animal (type 2) isolates of C. parvum has also emerged"
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC92099/

Lab results even if 100% correct, may not represent even closely infection rates at X Temp/Time for humans.

I cant find the article I read before so I cant tell you if it stated fecal matter size, I should have posted a reference, I apologise.

essentialsplus said:
Context - I'm very illiterate on these things so my following questions come from that perspective.

Ok, so the one study says that heating to 67.5c (that's about 150 f right?) will kill them, but only because they metabolize themselves to death...right? Why do you think that even embedded in particulate, using the same (sub-boiling) temperature, but perhaps given more time, that the oocysts would not exhaust themselves to death also?

In this experiment you found on chemical disinfecting, did it mention how big fecal particulate is? Is it something that prefiltering with say, a coffee filter or as druid mentioned a tshirt would remove? If that's the case, and larger particles are filtered out to an adequate level, then based on all this information I would feel very confident of boiled water after a very short time as it would seem to be supported by the first studies you mentioned (only more so since it's actually reached a much higher temp).
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top