Home of British fishing ‘being destroyed by chemicals in cleaning products’

by Hayley Dixon

 

The River Test. The rivers Test and Itchen, famous for their fly fishing, have been found to contain dangerous levels of phosphorus.

 

The home of British fishing is under threat of destruction from chemicals found in dishwasher tablets, experts have warned.

Chalk streams which feed into the rivers Test and Itchen have been found to contain alarmingly high levels of phosphorus.

The element can act as a fertiliser, accelerating the growth of weeds and murkying the clear waters which flow through Hampshire.

Environmental groups blame domestic cleaning products, particularly dishwasher tablets.

The two rivers – both classified as Sites of Special Scientific Interest and famous for their high quality fly fishing – are regarded as the finest chalk streams in the world.

Their waters support a rich diversity of mammal, bird, fish, invertebrate and plant communities, including trout, chubb, tench, grayling and bream.

The Test – which has even attracted former US President George Bush Snr to its banks – is known as the “Mecca” of the sport and is thought to have been popular since the 1880s.

The Environment Agency said the Itchen failed a recent chemical quality test, and officials expect it to fail again in 2015. This now puts the river in the “at risk” category.

The issue was discussed at the Chalk Stream Headwaters Forum, in Winchester, Hants, this week.

Dr Steve Rothwell, from the Vitacress Conservation Trust, said: “The UK is unusual in Europe because many EU countries long ago banned detergent products with phosphorus and the UK never has.

“In Hampshire phosphorus is a big problem. You get too much algae growing in the rivers as a result and it starts to out-compete the other plants you want.

“We know septic tanks are a problem. The chalk streams are so clear because they lack phosphorus, but if you add any it’s like adding fertiliser and you get all this growth.”

Birmingham University academic Alex Poynter, who has researched the issue for Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust, said the number of cleaning products in the UK containing phosphorus is “quite scary”.

The problem is made worse in rural areas because many homes use private drainage, and pollutants can find their way into rivers from septic tanks.

Agricultural run-off, with fertilisers washed off the land and into rivers, also contributes to elevated phosphate.

Graham Roberts, from the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust, called the condition of the Itchen “disgusting”.

He said: “No water should be discharged with a quality worse than when it was abstracted. This is not an unreasonable aim to have.

“This is a real menace and changing the whole ecology of the river. It’s not rocket science, and needs to be sorted.

“I have had 27 phone calls and over 109 emails recently, particularly pertinent to the River Itchen.”

There are 161 chalk streams in Britain – 95 per cent of the world’s total – and most are located in the south-east of England.

An article on the fishing website fishpal.com describes the Test and Itchen as “stunning”.

It says: “Both rivers are stunning and hold any number of opportunities for visiting fishermen for most of the year, keen to enjoy the experience of challenging, exciting fishing on gin clear streams.”

The 39-mile-long river Test rises from the Upper Chalk near the village of Ashe, drains 480 square miles, and average annual rainfall of 32 inches.

Water quality in its upper reaches is so good that it is used for washing and processing paper used in the production of British banknotes.

The 28-mile-long Itchen rises from the upper chalk near New Cheriton, has a catchment area of 280 square miles, and an average rainfall of 34 inches.

 

Source: The Telegraph

Pure Water Gazette Fair Use Statement

How Toilets Change the World


Posted November 24th, 2013

5 Ways Toilets Change the World

By Tanya Lewis

The toilet — one of life’s most mundane objects — plays a fundamental role in society.

Yet more than a third of the world’s population lacks access to even a basic pit latrine, and the problem may get worse. A recent statistical analysis predicts theworld population will hit 11 billion by 2100. From preventing illness to fostering education, here are five ways toilets change the world:

1. Keeping people healthy

Improper disposal of human waste can cause devastating illness. When people don’t have toilets, they defecate in the open, often near living areas or the rivers that supply water for drinking or bathing. For example, about 290,000 gallons (1.1 million liters) of raw sewage goes into the Ganges River in India every minute, according to the World Health Organization. [Through the Years: A Gallery of the World’s Toilets]

Contaminated water causes diarrheal diseases such as cholera, which afflict many people on a chronic basis. In 2012, heavy rains in Sierra Leone and Guinea caused latrines to flood, bringing on a deadly cholera outbreak that killed more than 392 people and sickened more than 25,000 others, according to news reports.

Diseases caused by fecal contamination also lead to malnourishment, low birth weight, cognitive problems and stunted growth. Poor sanitation contributes to two of the three leading causes for preventable death among children under five years old.

2. Preventing blindness

Trachoma, the leading cause of preventable blindness, is carried by a fly that breeds exclusively on human excrement. The disease is caused by Chlamydia trachomatis, a bacterium that also causes the sexually transmitted disease Chlamydia. Flies and contact with eye discharge from an infected individual can both spread the disease.

Trachoma affects about 21.4 million people, according to the World Health Organization. Of these, about 2.2 million are visually impaired and 1.2 million are blind.

3. Keeping women safe

In places without toilets, women must travel farther away to relieve themselves, which places them at risk of sexual violence. To avoid that danger, many women use so-called “flying toilets” — basically plastic bags that they keep in their houses. Flying toilets are a breeding ground for nasty microbes, such as the bacterium responsible for the blindness-causing disease trachoma.

4. Promoting school attendance

Talking about toilet matters is taboo in many places, particularly among women. Young girls may stop attending school if the building lacks private toilet facilities, which ultimately limits these girls’ access to education.

But the solution isn’t always straightforward. For instance, some aid workers have suggested installing public toilet blocks. However, when toilet blocks were installed in Bhopal, India, as part of a study in November 2008, men were twice as likely as women to use them.

5. Saving energy

Wastewater from toilets contains about 10 times the amount of energy, in biochemical form, as that needed to treat it. Scientists and engineers are developing ways of processing wastewater to save energy andreclaim drinking water.

For instance, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation started the Reinvent the Toilet Challenge to develop sanitary, waterless toilets that don’t require a sewer connection or electricity, and would cost less than five cents per user per day.

Clearly, a toilet is far more than a place to store waste.

Source:  LiveScience.

Pure Water Gazette Fair Use Statement

 

Jellyfish Winning the Fight for Food–Against Humans

by Peter Hannam

When it comes to jellyfish on Australian beaches, getting stung may be the least of our worries.

Catostylus Jellyfish

Earlier this year, Whyalla faced a wipe-out unrelated to the predicted effects of the carbon tax when a massive jellyfish bloom threatened local fisheries and ecosystems.

Last month, the Oskarshamn nuclear plant in Sweden shut down a reactor after jellyfish clogged its seawater pipes, the latest in a series of similar incidents.

Wreaking havoc: Sweden’s Oskarshamn nuclear plant shut down a reactor after jellyfish clogged its seawater pipes. Photo: Bella Galil

”Most people just don’t have any idea about the havoc that jellyfish are causing,” said Lisa-ann Gershwin, a CSIRO research scientist and author of Stung! On Jellyfish Blooms and the Future of the Ocean. ”It’s right around Australia.”

Deadly box jellyfish and their peanut-size irukandji relatives are spreading further south along the Queensland coast as waters warm, harming tourism.

But a bigger threat is likely to come to fisheries in much cooler waters that are already being crowded out by blooms, many of them non-stinging jellies.

Virtually everything humans do to the biosphere seems to be to the advantage of jellyfish. Overfishing is removing their predators, such as anchovies, while discarded plastic bags choke sea turtles on the hunt for jellyfish.

Sweden’s Oskarshamn nuclear plant shut down a reactor after jellyfish clogged its seawater pipes.

Warmer seas resulting from the build-up of greenhouse gases also happens to be to the jellies’ liking, especially as breeding seasons are lengthened. Since warmer water holds less dissolved oxygen, predator fish spend more of their precious energy breathing.

”Warming water is a disaster for things that breathe and a dream come true for things that don’t breathe much,” such as jellyfish, said Dr Gershwin, who will speak at TEDxMelbourne on December 3. ”It amps up their reproduction, it amps up their growth rates … they breed more.”

Not that the jellyfish need much help to reproduce. Despite most jellyfish lacking specialised digestive, respiratory and even central nervous systems, the nebulous, often pulsating creatures have developed a variety of ways to breed over the past 500 million years.

Cloning, self-fertilisation and copulation are among the methods of different jellyfish species, while Turritopsis dohrnii has been dubbed a ”zombie jelly” for its apparent immortality. Cells from the corpse of this jellyfish can reform into a polyp and resume breeding.

As invertebrates, jellyfish lack carbonate hard parts, unlike many rivals and predators, meaning they are coping better as the oceans acidify due to increased carbon dioxide.

”They’re the last [ones] standing when everything else is disintegrating,” she said.

The problem is not just population explosions jamming up pipes and filling fishing nets but also the destruction of fish stocks, as jellies eat fish larvae and vital plankton. Jellyfish, in effect, eat ”up the food chain”, Dr Gershwin said.

”We’re in the weird, unexpected and incomprehensible position of being in competition with jellyfish – and they’re winning,” she said.

”It’s actually really scary.”

Source: The Sydney Morning Herald

Pure Water Gazette Fair Use Statement

  Iron in Well Water

Gazette Introductory Note:  Iron is among the most persistent problems faced by residential well owners.  It is also among the least understood.  The following article from the Minnesota Department of Health website is a concise overview of the iron issue.  Our main website, www.purewaterproducts.com, has in-depth information on the treatment of iron by a variety of methods.  We also welcome phone or email information requests about treatment of iron issues in residential wells.–Gene Franks, Pure Water Products.

What do these have in common – a taconite mine in northern Minnesota, the color of your blood, a rusty pail, and yellow or red stains on sinks and plumbing fixtures? The answer is – Iron. Iron is the fourth most abundant mineral in the earth’s crust. Soils and rocks in Minnesota may contain minerals very high in iron, so high in fact, that taconite can be mined for its iron content. Iron gives the hemoglobin of blood it’s red color and allows the blood to carry oxygen. The iron in a metal pail turns to rust when exposed to water and oxygen. In a similar way, iron minerals in water turn to rust and stain plumbing fixtures and laundry.

Iron in Well Water

As rain falls or snow melts on the land surface, and water seeps through iron-bearing soil and rock, iron can be dissolved into the water. In some cases, iron can also result from corrosion of iron or steel well casing or water pipes.

Health Concerns

Iron in well water usually does not present a health problem. In fact, iron is needed to transport oxygen in the blood. The human body requires approximately 1 to 3 additional milligrams of iron per day (mg/day). The average intake of iron is approximately 16 mg/day, virtually all from food such as green leafy vegetables, red meat, and iron-fortified cereals. The amount of iron in water is usually low, and the chemical form of the iron found in water is not readily absorbed by the body. Iron bacteria, that may be associated with iron in water, are not a health problem.

Iron may present some concern if certain bacteria have entered a well, since some pathogenic (harmful) organisms require iron to grow, and the presence of iron particles makes elimination of the bacteria more difficult.

Iron Problems

Iron in water can cause yellow, red, or brown stains on laundry, dishes, and plumbing fixtures such as sinks. In

Iron Stains

addition, iron can clog wells, pumps, sprinklers, and other devices such as dishwashers, which can lead to costly repairs. Iron gives a metallic taste to water, and can affect foods and beverages – turning tea, coffee, and potatoes black.

 

Forms of Iron

Iron can occur in water in a number of different forms. The type of iron present is important when considering water treatment. Water that comes out of the faucet clear, but turns red or brown after standing is “ferrous” iron, commonly referred to as “clear-water” iron. Water which is red or yellow when first drawn is “ferric” iron, often referred to as “red- water” iron. Iron can form compounds with naturally occurring acids, and exist as “organic” iron. Organic iron is usually yellow or brown, but may be colorless. Water containing  iron bacteria is said to contain “bacterial” iron.

Testing

Yellow or red colored water is often a good indication that iron is present. However, a testing laboratory can determine the exact amount of iron, which can be useful in determining the best type of treatment. In addition to testing for iron, it can be of value to also test for hardness, pH, alkalinity, and iron bacteria. County health departments may offer some of these tests. Private testing laboratories can be contacted about their services and fees. Most advertise in the phone book under “Laboratories-Testing.”

The amount of a dissolved material in water is usually reported as the number of milligrams per liter (mg/L). This is the weight of material in 1 liter (approximately 1 quart) of water. A milligram per liter is approximately equal to 1 part per million (ppm). Iron in amounts above 0.3 mg/L is usually considered objectionable. Iron levels are usually less than 10 mg/L.

Controlling Iron

The most common method for controlling iron in water is water treatment. In some circumstances, another alternative is to use a different water source that is low in iron, such as a public water system or a well drawing water from a different water-bearing formation. In some cases, a new well may be an option, however, it is difficult to predict what the iron concentration will be. Neighboring wells may be an indicator, but the iron content of two nearby wells may be quite different. 

Water Treatment

Treatment of water containing iron depends on the form(s) of the iron present, the chemistry of the water, and the type of well and water system.

Clear-water iron is most commonly removed with a water softener. Manufacturers report that some units are capable of removing up to 10 mg/L, however 2 to 5 mg/L is a more common limit. A water softener is actually designed to remove hardness minerals like calcium and magnesium. Iron will plug the softener, and must be periodically removed from the softener resin by backwashing. Also, if the water hardness is low and the iron content high, or if the water system allows contact with air, such as occurs in an air-charged “galvanized” pressure tank, a softener will not work well. Ion exchange water softeners add sodium to the water which may be a concern for persons on a sodium restricted diet.

Red-water iron can be removed in small quantities by a sediment filter, carbon filter, or water softener, but the treatment system will very quickly plug up. A more common treatment for red-water iron and clear-water iron in concentrations up to 10 or 15 mg/L is a manganese greensand filter, often referred to as an “iron filter.” Aeration (injecting air) or chemical oxidation (usually adding chlorine in the form of calcium or sodium hypochlorite) followed by filtration are options if iron levels exceed 10 mg/L.

Organic iron and tannins present special water treatment challenges.Tannins are natural organics produced by vegetation which stain water a tea-color. In fact, the tannins in coffee or tea produce the brown color. When tea or coffee is made with water containing iron, the tannins react with the iron forming a black residue. Organic iron is a compound formed from an organic acid and iron. Organic iron and tannins can occur in very shallow wells, or wells being affected by surface water. Organic iron and tannins can slow or prevent iron oxidation, so water softeners, aeration systems, and iron filters may not work well. Chemical oxidation followed by filtration may be an option.

Well Treatment

Iron bacteria are organisms that consume iron to survive and, in the process, produce deposits of iron, and a red or

Iron Bacteria

brown slime called a “biofilm.” The organisms are not harmful to humans, but can make an iron problem much worse. The organisms naturally occur in shallow soils and groundwater, and they may be introduced into a well or water system when it is constructed or repaired.

Treatment options for elimination or reduction of iron bacteria include physical removal, heat, and chemical treatment. The most common treatment is “shock” chlorination of the well and water system. See Iron Bacteria in Well Water. Remember, iron bacteria need iron to survive. Eliminating the bacteria will not eliminate the iron – both well treatment for the bacteria, and water treatment for the iron will be needed.

Source:  Minnesota Department of Health.

Pure Water Gazette Fair Use Statement

The Ogallala Aquifer Is Being Pumped Dry by Texas Farmers

Excerpted from the Texas Tribune: Texans Look Beneath the Surface for Water by Neena Satija

The Ogallala Aquifer is one of the largest groundwater resources in the country, stretching across eight Western states, supplying drinking water for millions and supporting an estimated 25 percent of the nation’s agricultural production.

In the past 60 years, according to the U.S. Geological Survey, the aquifer has been pumped so heavily that water that has built up over 10,000 years is quickly depleting. Unlike most aquifers in Texas, the Ogallala gets very little water from “recharge” — the process by which rain percolates through the ground and replaces lost groundwater. 

Yet when the High Plains district suggested setting pumping limits on the Ogallala for the first time in 2011, the board faced a public outcry. Farmers attended meetings in droves, calling district leaders “socialists” and “tyrannical.” Under the new rules, pumping would be limited to about 570,000 gallons per acre per year in 2012, and restrictions would get more severe in the following years. The district’s board quickly backed down, saying no one would be penalized for violating the rules for at least a year. 

“I was shocked,” J.O. Dawdy, who grows cotton in Floyd and Lubbock counties, said of the restrictions. “It’s too cut and dry. There’s just no allowances for variations.”

Dawdy said that the past two years have been so dry that he needed to pump at least 760,000 gallons per acre each year on much of his land to produce a viable cotton crop. Exceeding the limit could have made him subject to fines as large as $2 million, he said.

“My choice would have been either to have no crop or expose myself to those kind of fines,” Dawdy said. “I would have been out of business either way.”

Dawdy has joined a group of high plains farmers called the Protect Water Rights Coalition. Such groups have helped replace the general manager of 12 years and four of the five members on the High Plains’ water district board with more conservative property rights advocates. Last week, board members voted to extend the moratorium on enforcing the new rules for another year.

Dawdy said farmers can conserve the Ogallala through improved technology and irrigation techniques, in which he has already invested thousands of dollars.

“We’re aware that it’s a dwindling resource. We’re trying to take care of it. We feel like we’re in a position to take better care of it rather than some bureaucracy, or some committee in Austin,” he said.

But without enforceable pumping regulations, it’s unclear whether water-heavy crops like cotton could continue to be produced in the next half-century. C.E. Williams, general manager of the neighboring Panhandle Groundwater Conservation District, which also manages the Ogallala, compares the aquifer to a financial resource.

“I don’t care how big your bank account is. If you’re taking dollars out and you’re putting pennies in, there’s going to be an end to the road,” Williams said.

The Panhandle district introduced pumping regulations in 1999 but didn’t begin regular enforcement until 2004. Users can’t pump more water than would contribute to a 1.25 percent decline in the Ogallala’s levels annually. For many farmers, Williams said, that amounts to an allowance of 400,000 to 500,000 gallons per acre of land per year.

“You’re not going to please everybody all the time,” Williams said. “But as a general rule, we’ve had fairly good buy-in from the general public.” He said that his district’s rules were probably less controversial because, unlike the High Plains district, they weren’t implemented during one of the most severe droughts in recent memory.

But Williams is worried that even those rules could come under attack in the wake of a recent judgment in a lawsuit against the Edwards Aquifer Authority by Glenn and JoLynn Bragg, pecan growers in Hondo. A Texas appeals court ruled that the Braggs’ property had been taken from them when the Edwards Aquifer Authority limited their ability to pump water under their land to sustain their pecan grove.

Dawdy, the cotton farmer in the High Plains district, said that if the district there seriously implemented pumping regulations, he would likely resort to a lawsuit.

Farmers aren’t the only users in the Panhandle who are fighting for water. The growing city of Lubbock has become more reliant on groundwater since its reservoir, Lake Meredith, is now empty. But utility officials there are also keenly aware that the Ogallala has a limited supply of water.

State Sen. Troy Fraser, R-Horseshoe Bay, chairman of the Senate Natural Resources Committee, said districts like the Panhandle and the High Plains, which both manage the same water resource, must work together. Otherwise, the state will have to get involved and force them to cooperate.

“I’ve said, guys, either y’all get together, do this on a voluntary basis, or you’re going to force the Legislature to address it,” Fraser said. “I’m just putting a warning out that you need to solve your own problem, or you’re going to back us into a corner.”

Any attempt to impose statewide control on a locally controlled resource in rural, conservative Texas is sure to be a battle. Efforts to require meters on wells in the High Plains district to allow better data collection were met with opposition, and were shot down in 2012 by moratoriums that were extended last week.

Pure Water Gazette Fair Use Statement

The Three Types of Chlorine Used in Water Treatment

by Pure Water Annie

 Pure Water Occasional Technical Wizard Pure Water Annie Explains the Different Forms of Chlorine Used in Water Treatment. This Really Isn’t Very Interesting, but It’s Something Worth Knowing

The most common use of chlorine in water treatment is to disinfect water, but it has other benefits. As a disinfectant, chlorine has drawbacks, but it also has benefits. Other methods of disinfection such as ultraviolet and ozonation are effective at killing pathogens but they do not provide a residual to prevent pathogen regrowth as chlorination does. When treatment plants are distant from the point of use, chlorination is the best way to provide safe water to the end user. Municipal water providers usually rely on measurements of “chlorine residual”—the amount of chlorine remaining in the water after it reaches its destination—as proof of safety. Residual requirements vary, but typical residual goal would be for 0.2 to 1 mg/L.

In addition to disinfection, chlorine is effectively used to oxidize iron, manganese and hydrogen sulfide to facilitate their removal, to reduce color in water, and to aid in such treatment processes as sedimentation and filtration.

Chlorine and pH

In general terms, the lower the pH of the water, the more effective chlorine is as a disinfectant. Again, speaking generally, a reason for dosing effectively is that chlorination raises the pH of water, so overdosing often raises the pH to levels where chlorine does not work effectively as a disinfectant. More is not always more powerful.  Chemically, this has to do with the relationship between the two constituents of chlorine that together are often referred to as “free chlorine”–hypochlorus acid and hypochlorite ions. Hypochlorus acid is the more effective disinfectant and it dominates at lower pH levels, so a lower pH is preferred for disinfection. Conversely, a higher pH is needed for water treatment strategies that depend on chlorination to oxidize iron and manganese.

Types of Chlorine Used in Water Treatment

“Pure chlorine” is seldom used for water treatment. The three most common chlorine-containing substances used in water treatment are chlorine gas, sodium hypochlorite, and calcium hypochlorite. The choice of the chlorine type to be used often depends on cost, on the available storage options and on the pH conditions required. Chlorination affects pH and pH affects results—a fact that is commonly overlooked in home water treatment.

Chlorine Gas

Chlorine gas is greenish yellow in color and heavier than air. Its high toxicity makes it an excellent disinfectant for water but also a hazard to humans who handle it. Chlorine gas, of course, is a deadly weapon when used in chemical warfare. It is a respiratory irritant and can irritate skin and mucous membranes and can cause death with sufficient exposure. Because of chemical changes that occur when it is introduced into water, chlorine gas is no more toxic to humans when used to treat drinking water than other forms of chlorine. Chlorine gas, which is actually sold as an amber-colored compressed liquid, is the least expensive form of chlorine and is, consequently, the preferred type for municipal water systems.

Calcium Hypochlorite

Calcium hypochlorite is manufactured from chlorine gas. It is best known as chlorine pellets and granules in residential water treatment. It is a white solid with a very pungent odor and it can create enough heat to explode, so it must not be stored near wood, cloth or petroleum products. Calcium hypochlorite increases the pH of the water being treated.

Sodium hypochlorite

Sodium hypochlorite is a chlorine-containing compound most easily recognized as household bleach. It is a light yellow liquid that has a relatively short shelf life. It is the easiest to handle of all the types of chlorine.  Sodium hypochlorite also increases the pH of the water being treated. A lower concentration of chlorine in this form is needed to treat water than with calcium hypochlorite or chlorine gas.  Regular household bleach, “Clorox,” is usually about 5.25 percent chlorine.  That doesn’t seem like much, but it’s 52,500 parts per million, so a small amount of liquid bleach can treat a lot of water.

 

 

 

 

The Perils of Sewage Sludge


Posted November 16th, 2013

Sewage Sludge: A Pool Of Pathogens

by John Rehill

Waste water treatment plant facilities retrieve millions of gallons a day of toxic water, containing thousands of different chemicals, pathogens and heavy metals. It is all reduced to a thick slurry and in many municipalities that soup is dried and processed into pellets that are then sold or given away to homeowners, landscapers and farmers to use as fertilizer. Could we be disposing our most toxic substances in a way that puts them in our food chain?

 

Dr. Sydney Bacchus demonstrates how municipalities that dry and reuse sludge are at risk of contaminating their communities with heavy metals and pathogens that are responsible for thousands of premature deaths in the United States every year.

 

More than just raw sewage makes its way to a waste water treatment plant. The waste water pumped in is put through a process that reduces it to the sludge and then is sent to an on-or-off property location to decompose. The composted product is sometimes put into pellets or bulk and made available for county projects and the private sector to use as a fertilizer replacement.

 

Bacchus had laboratory analyses performed on samples of sewage sludge compost that Athens-Clark County, GA sells to the public for home gardens. The lab reported the presence of arsenic, fluoride, lead, mercury and the human pathogen Stenotrophomonas.

 

Bacchus notes Stenotrophomnas was featured on public radio’s Fresh Air and on a recent PBS Frontline News episode as one of the “nightmare bacteria” that was “resistant not to just one or two antibiotics, but resistant to everything.”

 

There are an unknown number of bacteria that are becoming increasingly immune to pharmaceutical antibiotics, and a growing number of bacteria that aren’t responding at all. These have been labeled “superbugs” because they are capable of shielding themselves from, or even standing up to the strongest antibiotics.

 

Bacchus recounts a Center for Disease Control (CDC) report which states that 2 million people in the United States are sickened every year with antibiotic-resistant infections, with at least 23,000 dying as a result.

 

The Frontline and Fresh Air programs noted by Bacchus, focused on these “superbugs” and identified many of them as “gram-negative” human pathogens Acinetobacter baumannii and Chromobacterium violaceum. 

 

Bacchus claims samples collected from properties near the Athens-Clark County sewage sludge composting operations contained both pathogens. In addition to those findings, Bacchus discovered another pathogen also immune to most antibiotics, Aeromonas hydrophila, in a tributary of the Oconee River that flows through community property in the same vicinity.

 

The results reported by Bacchus also suggest special attention be placed to the amount of concentrated fluoride, arsenic, lead and mercury that are also making their way back into our food chain, the water we drink and into our pets and farm animals.

 

Most larger towns and cities don’t insure the safety of their discarded sludge when a contracted hauler carries it away, leaving their residents subjected to unintended consequences. No one knows what the actual cost to those who reside in and around land fills, waste water and other toxic compost facilities amounts to in terms of mortality, quality of life and health care costs, but what is clear, is that it’s happening all over the country, including right here.

 

Bacchus’s analysis clearly demonstrates how the danger is no longer limited to the other side of the tracks, where toxic disposal facilities are customarily located. It is now trucked to urban gardens, baseball fields, parks and school grounds; contaminating the soil children play on and the food grown at home.

 

A related petition about this problem is available (here)Its purpose is to bring responsibility and accountability to the Environmental Protection Administration and the US Department of Health and Human Services, by pressuring them to enforce the Clean Water Act, and other environmental regulations currently being violated in Georgia and other parts of the country via the practice.

 

In August of this year, Science Daily reported that it cost the U.S. $20 billion annually to fight off superbugs bacterium.

 

Both Manatee and Sarasota County participate in a sludge-for-sale program, selling their sludge to independent contractors: Manatee to Keen Farm and Grove Services, while Sarasota contracts Syngro to remove its sludge. Both the State of Florida and the State of Georgia have statutes that govern the disposal of sludge, though neither state is equipped to follow-up or inspect the products that return to the public arena.

 

Until these products can get a clean bill of health, might we not continue to circulate what could be detrimental to our health and wellbeing?

 

Dr. Bacchus says, “I haven’t seen any evidence that the composted sewage sludge my municipality is selling to the public is safe.  Even if these dangerous human pathogens could be eliminated, the other contaminants, such as fluoride, arsenic, lead and mercury should not be spread throughout the environment, gardens, playgrounds and parks.”

Source: The Bradenton Times.

Pure Water Gazette Fair Use Statement

 

Extreme Chemical Sensitivity Makes Sufferers Allergic to Life

Its sufferers were once dismissed as hypochondriacs, but there’s growing biological evidence to explain toxicant-induced loss of tolerance (TILT).

By Jill Neimark

Gazette’s Introductory Note:  At Pure Water Products, we get fairly regular calls from chemically sensitive people who have what are usually impossible requests for special water treatment devices. Some are for equipment that we can guarantee to “remove 100%” of a targeted contaminant–like chloramine or fluoride.  We have to tell them that water treatment is always about reduction, not removal, and that if 90% or even 99% reduction isn’t good enough,  we can’t help.  The other most frequent impossible request is for equipment that contains no plastic.  These callers usually are drawn to our website by products with stainless steel housings, but we have to explain that stainless steel units have cartridges inside that have plastic end caps and in most cases plastic binders mixed with the media, plus it is almost impossible to avoid plastic tubing or plastic pipe in installations.  Jill Neimark’s article, reprinted below in its entirety, should help us all  better understand those who are “allergic to life.”Gene Franks,  Pure Water Products.

One night in August 2005, Scott Killingsworth, a 35-year-old software designer in Atlanta, dragged his dining-room table out to the porch and lay down on it. The house he’d just rented — on 2 acres in an upscale suburb north of the city — was meant to be relatively free of man-made chemicals, his refuge from the world. For years he had been experiencing debilitating reactions to a cornucopia of common chemicals that others don’t even notice.

But this house, like the one before it, was making him sick with flulike symptoms — nausea, headaches and muscle stiffness.

Lying on the table and breathing in fresh air, Killingsworth thought back to the morning seven years ago when his office was sprayed with Dursban, a potent organophosphate pesticide that has been banned for indoor use since 2000. Within minutes of the pesticide treatment, he was unable to concentrate, and he felt like he had a bad flu. When he returned to the office a week later, he felt sick again. He asked his supervisor to move him to a different office.

“I thought that was the end of it,” he recalls. “But that was the beginning of it.”

Instead of recovering, he got sicker as each year passed. Newly renovated buildings, fresh paint, gasoline odors, pesticides, herbicides — the list of substances he reacted to grew longer and longer. After his apartment was painted by mistake one day while he was at work, he got so ill that he took a leave of absence and moved.

But each subsequent home left him with the familiar panoply of headaches, flulike symptoms, insomnia, the inability to concentrate and fatigue. After sleeping on his dining table for a week, he bought a camping cot and slept on it each night for years. When he became reactive to the almost imperceptible outgassing of chemicals from his own computer, he switched to a Bluetooth keyboard and looked at his computer monitor through the porch window.

 

 

Before he got ill, Killingsworth had a girlfriend and an active social life. As his unusual illness escalated, he began to live like a hermit. During his final two years in Georgia, he had fewer than 10 visitors, he says.

 

Finally, in fall 2007, nine years after his run-in with Dursban, Killingsworth applied for Social Security disability, packed his belongings, and drove west in his Honda Civic to search for housing among a community of folks like himself — all suffering from what is loosely called “environmental illness” — in the remote high desert of Arizona.

Today, in his 40s, he lives in a renovated travel trailer specially designed for his sensitivities: It has porcelain tile floors, sealed walls and sealed wood cabinetry. He camps alone and with friends. He relies on solar power, hauls his own water at times and moves seasonally to avoid extremes of heat and cold. Most days, however, he can tolerate the trailer only for a while, even with windows open, and sleeps on a cot in the back of his truck, under the protective camper shell.

A Two-Step Process

If anybody can understand what happened to Killingsworth, it is physician Claudia Miller, an environmental health expert at the University of Texas School of Medicine in San Antonio, who studies a phenomenon she calls toxicant-induced loss of tolerance (TILT). The word toxicant refers to a man-made poison, such as Dursban, whereas a toxin is a naturally occurring poison produced by living cells or organisms, such as spider venom.

 

TILT, says Miller, is a two-step process: First, a susceptible individual gets sick after toxic exposure or exposures. But then, instead of recovering, the neurological and immune systems remain damaged, and the individual fails to get well. The sufferer begins to lose tolerance to a wide range of chemicals common in everyday life.

The latest research, both in the United States and abroad, suggests that brain processing itself is altered so that the neurological setpoint for sensitivity falls. The person, now sick, becomes highly sensitive to chemical exposures. The individual is like a fireplace after the original fire has died down: The embers still glow a brilliant orange, ready to burst into flame with the slightest assistance.

 

Individuals with TILT can become increasingly more reactive over time, until they find themselves responding adversely to the mere whiff or dollop of everyday chemicals — at concentrations far below established toxicity. The triggering substances are often structurally unrelated and range from airborne molecules to ordinary drugs and supplements, lotions, detergents, soaps, newsprint and once-cherished foods like chocolate, pizza or beer.

Exposures result in a bewildering variety of symptoms such as cardiac and neurological abnormalities, headaches, bladder disturbances, asthma, depression, anxiety, gut problems, impaired cognitive ability and sleep disorders.

 

Because so many substances seem to spike these overlapping reactions, and because not everybody is universally reactive to exactly the same substances, it’s hard to ferret out cause and effect. And that has, until recently, left these individuals consulting many different specialists, presenting a picture that looks deeply neurotic.

 

When chemically intolerant patients first came to the attention of the medical profession in the 1980s, their condition was called “multiple chemical sensitivity” (MCS), and there was enough curiosity to spark studies. But those studies never turned up anything definitive, and nobody thought to look at the actual processing going on in the brain.

They would test patients by exposing them to odors in a “blinded” situation, where they did not know what they were being exposed to, or they were told harmful odors were present when there were no odors at all. The patients often failed to demonstrate any consistent response.

Studies on detoxification pathways — the immune mechanisms by which the body dismantles toxins — were few and far between; research never explained how certain exposures could snowball into the profound dysfunction reported by this hobbled patient group. Immunological abnormalities were investigated, but not one was ever consistently tied to the condition overall.

 

So for decades, these patients were cast aside as mentally ill. If you see a person wearing a honeycomb mask in the detergent aisle of the supermarket, if they tell you that the fabric softener scent you love is making them ill, if they say your perfume is causing headaches and asthma and that the carpet store causes brain fog, irritability and depression, your reflexive response may just be, “You may be sick, but you are probably sick in the head.”

Science for Toxic Times

 

For scientists studying the illness, however, that view has changed, in large part due to Miller’s indefatigable research and her groundbreaking finds. According to a July 2012 study of 400 primary care patients (published by Miller and her colleagues in the popular family practice journal Annals of Family Medicine), 22 percent of individuals with chronic health issues suffer from some degree of chemical intolerance. That’s more than one in five — and, says Miller, they are vulnerable to TILT if life happens to toss them too much toxic exposure.

“The fact that chemical intolerance is so prevalent, yet unrecognized, is important for primary care physicians,” says physician David Katerndahl, Miller’s colleague and lead author on the study. “On the one hand, simple therapeutic approaches (avoiding chemicals) may be quite effective, while on the other hand, conventional treatments (allergy shots, immune suppressants) may fail. This means that we must change our clinical paradigm with these patients.”

 

The new study is based on an inventory of 50 questions called the QEESI (the Quick Environmental Exposure and Sensitivity Inventory, available for free at familymed.uthscsa.edu/qeesi.pdf). The QEESI isolates sensitivities to common triggers, such as diesel, paint thinner, foods and products like fabric softener. It is very effective at culling the one in five individuals who are vulnerable to severe TILT, and it has been validated in Sweden, Denmark, Japan and the United States.

 

It is severe TILT, where the individual’s life is seriously impacted, that worries Miller, however. “In the study, I was astounded to find that over 6 percent of people visiting a primary care clinic for any kind of chronic health condition were greatly affected by TILT, based on their symptoms and chemical and other intolerance scores from the QEESI. By greatly affected, I mean that they had chronic health symptoms that were severe, and they scored high on sensitivities to common chemicals, foods and medications,” says Miller. “Another 15.8 percent were moderately affected, with scores that were still well above average.”

Miller’s mission is to catch those vulnerable folks, like fish in a net, before they run headlong into a toxic exposure that derails their lives. She would like to see the QEESI given as standard practice along with the typical sheaf of forms patients fill out.

 

“TILT describes a genuinely new class of diseases unique to our toxic, modern times,” says Miller. “People suddenly cannot tolerate chemicals and exposures they’d tolerated their whole lives. It’s the hallmark of TILT. Some people I’ve counseled even use it as a verb. They say they’ve been ‘tilted.’”

Navigating a Tilted World

 

The two-step process of TILT — getting sick upon toxicant exposure and failing to get well — may be driven by epigenetic changes, which occur when the environment alters the expression of genes without changing the core DNA code itself. “Environmental events can dramatically impact gene activity,” explains reproductive endocrinologist Frederick vom Saal of the University of Missouri-Columbia.

Vom Saal has spent several decades researching the potent effects of everyday low-dose exposure to chemicals like bisphenol A (BPA) that are known as endocrine disrupters. These chemicals act like hormones and have profound influences on health, particularly during fetal development. It turns out that surprisingly low doses can be potent regulators of gene activity, while high doses simply shut activity down.

“Once genes are switched on,” says vom Saal, “and once you are sensitized, you essentially have a reprogrammed cell. And it’s hard for that cell to go back to its original state. You will find, for instance, that mammary tissue is more vulnerable to cancer later in life, or puberty occurs earlier than normal because of low-dose exposures in the womb. Although I personally study epigenetics during development, evidence suggests these kind of events occur throughout life.”

 

In the world of TILT, dose does not make the poison. Dose plus host makes the poison — and host susceptibility is the missing link. In the genetically vulnerable, too much toxic exposure seems to recalibrate the body for life. “All changed, changed utterly,” as poet William Yeats might say; a new person emerges, for whom the ordinary world is now littered with seemingly toxic land mines, often not perceived until stumbled upon, and yet the sufferer looks on as others blithely dance over those same land mines without the hint of a problem.

 

To Miller, the kind of pesticide poisoning Killingsworth suffered is a truly elegant, if terrifying, example of TILT. In the mid-1990s, she and her colleague Howard Mitzel surveyed 37 individuals who had become permanently ill after an exposure to organophosphate pesticides, and another 75 individuals who got ill after extensive remodeling in the home or office.

In both cases, exposure to toxic substances left a permanent damaging footprint, though pesticide sufferers were by far the sicker group. At the time of their pesticide exposure, 26 of the 37 pesticide individuals were working full time. By the time of the survey (an average of about eight years after exposure), only two of the pesticide individuals were able to work full time. They reported that their illness had affected every aspect of their lives.

 

TILT looks much the same across cultures and countries. Miller co-authored a textbook, Chemical Exposures: Low Levels and High Stakes, with MIT policy and technology professor emeritus Nicholas Ashford. In that book, Ashford reported on his research in nine different European countries, and he found the same patterns of inexplicable new-onset intolerance to chemicals.

“I simply asked physicians if they’d ever had patients who developed unusual and inexplicable responses to anything that had never bothered them before,” he says, “and I inevitably got a nod yes, and stories.” Miller, meanwhile, has documented similar reports from the United States, Canada, Japan, New Zealand, Great Britain and Australia.

 

New-onset intolerances and multisystem symptoms have shown up in sheep dippers in rural areas of Europe (sheep dip is an organophosphate pesticide), homeowners in Germany exposed to a toxic wood preservative, individuals breathing fumes from massive oil spills, radiology workers in New Zealand who inhaled chemicals while developing films, and individuals living or working in newly remodeled buildings.

In 1987, 225 workers renovating the EPA’s headquarters in Washington, D.C., got sick after extensive remodeling of a poorly ventilated office building that included the installation of 27,000 feet of new carpet. Although most recovered, 19 developed TILT and became so disabled over the long term that they sued the building owners.

 

Gulf War veterans were another “tilted” group. Their illness was long the subject of controversy, and even dismissed as a form of post-traumatic stress disorder, but it has recently been accepted as genuine. Miller found that a surprising number of Gulf War veterans turned out to suffer from TILT.

“Of 700,000 who went to war in 1990, 250,000 came back with chronic illness,” she says. “A CDC study found that sick Gulf War veterans reported more chemical intolerances than their healthy counterparts. They had multiple toxic exposures, including pesticides in their tents, smoke from oil fires, anti-nerve-gas pills and diesel fuel poured on the ground to keep the sand down.”

 

When Miller visited veterans, some had signs on their room doors: “Don’t enter if you’re wearing fragrance.” Many were having trouble tolerating medications. One veteran had sent his wife a favorite perfume from overseas, but when she wore it on their car ride home, he became so sick he asked her never to wear it again. They’d report they felt better on a vacation in, say, the high mesas of Colorado, and spaced out and sick driving in heavy traffic.

A Radical Path

Miller did not start her career thinking about low-dose poisons. She was a newly minted industrial hygienist with long, blond hair and wide-set blue eyes when, in 1979, she was hired for the United Steelworkers union in Pittsburgh. The union had 1.2 million mostly male members. “I loved visiting steel mills, smelters and mines,” she recalls. “I found it fascinating to go to coke ovens and see steel being made in the blast furnace and watch parts made by pouring molten metal into molds in foundries.”

Miller sometimes got headaches after a few hours in the same environments the workers had worked in for decades, but she didn’t think much about those headaches at the time. She was just trying to make sure the companies complied with standards set by the Occupational Safety and Health Association (OSHA).

But then the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) asked her to examine some female steelworkers diagnosed with psychological and management problems. The women soldered piecework for electronics in two different plants. They worked in rooms without fume vents, and they complained of headaches, fatigue and difficulty concentrating.

In a paper she presented that year at a NIOSH symposium, Miller proposed that toxicants in fumes from the soldering might be responsible for their complaints. “I was the only non-psychiatrist at the meeting,” she recalls, “and by the time I finished my talk, the experts were lined up at the microphone to attack my ideas.”

It was another heretic, controversial Chicago allergist Theron Randolph, who first lent support. Randolph broke with his profession around 1950 and had begun to test and treat individuals for a wide range of sensitivities vastly different from typical allergies, which could be diagnosed through the appearance of elevated immune cells, called immunoglobulins, in the blood. Randolph was convinced that his patients suffered from food and chemical sensitivities that couldn’t be measured in traditional ways. He invited Miller to attend his weekly staff meetings, where cases were discussed.

When Randolph took a patient history, Miller recalls, it lasted hours. He would begin an appointment by saying, “Tell me the last time you felt truly well, and go from there.” He would type out the history directly as the patient talked. Miller remembers details like, “She felt ill in the train station in Chicago. … She felt nauseous on the foam rubber mattress.”

Randolph would “hospitalize” patients for a few weeks in specially constructed units near his Chicago offices. During their confinement, they breathed filtered air, slept on untreated cotton bedding, drank purified water and fasted for days. Their symptoms, from arthritis to headaches to fatigue, would often melt away.

Then he would do blinded challenges on patients — feed a patient an organic apple and a sprayed apple, or expose them to a whiff of copy paper in a glass jar. Symptoms such as migraines or joint pain would recur in response to whatever substances the individual patient was sensitive to. Avoiding those triggers was the inevitable prescription when they left the clinic.

“Many patients were able to get off their medications and get well. These people were reacting to tiny doses of substances, doses that simply should not be causing symptoms. It broke every paradigm of medicine I knew,” explains Miller. “I decided to go to medical school, and then to work as a researcher within a university setting, to establish scientific credibility for this amazing work, which at the time, virtually nobody in academic medicine or science believed.”

Body of Evidence

Two decades and hundreds of peer-review papers later, Miller has amassed a fascinating body of research that suggests a model by which a genetically vulnerable person might succumb to TILT. One major insight draws on the fields of epilepsy and chronic pain syndrome, both of which are associated with abnormal brain activity. In some cases of chronic pain, what begins as an acute, localized injury spreads and becomes a generalized pain syndrome known as reflex sympathetic dystrophy. Pain signals seem to flame across the entire body, and the condition is debilitating and difficult to treat.

Similarly, abnormal brain activity and processing is well known in the field of seizure disorders; temporal lobe epilepsy has been traced to a phenomenon called limbic kindling, in which repeated, intermittent, low-intensity stimulation across the limbic structures of the brain may eventually lead to a seizure.

In fact, Miller hypothesized that a process similar to kindling may be driving the pain and sensitivities documented in TILT. Toxicants like solvents, pesticides or volatile molecules from oil spills can travel straight into the brain via the olfactory receptors — nasal neurons that number in the many millions, thickly studding the inner lining of the nose. Our brains are exquisitely primed to respond to nasal receptors. Not surprisingly, even healthy individuals show significant changes in brain wave activity during brief exposures to olfactory stimuli that are actually below the sensory threshold and not even consciously perceived.

“The lack of a blood-brain barrier in the olfactory system allows chemicals direct access to the limbic system,” says Miller. “And the olfactory pathways are already known to be particularly susceptible to electrical and chemical kindling. Moreover, most chemical exposures are intermittent, which is the kind of exposure known to potentiate kindling and sensitization.” Intermittent lower-dose exposures can be as toxic as a single higher-dose exposure; Miller cites monkey research showing that either 10 nontoxic weekly doses or one toxic dose of an organophosphate pesticide led to the same increase in brain wave activity as measured by electroencephalogram, or EEG.

Miller hypothesizes that exposure to toxicants permanently decreases the threshold needed to excite the limbic network, setting the stage for a phenomenon much like kindling. “It’s not actual kindling in the strict scientific sense of inducing a seizure,” she notes, but that sensitization could theoretically lead to permanent changes in function — and permanently increased reactivity to chemicals processed through the olfactory neurons.

Supporting her view is research from the Danish Research Centre for Chemical Sensitivities at Copenhagen University Hospital Gentofte, where scientists have demonstrated that individuals with chemical intolerance show greater sensitization in the central nervous system. The center’s research has found that 27 percent of the Danish population has some noticeable sensitivity to chemicals. A much smaller number, 0.5 percent, is so sensitive that lifestyle must dramatically change.

In another study, researchers at the center chose 15 chemically intolerant patients from those who had come to the center asking for help. They also looked at 15 healthy individuals. Then they injected capsaicin, the active molecule in hot pepper, under the skin and lightly tapped the area with a blunt, rigid nylon filament — starting at six centimeters away, and tapping closer and closer to the injection site. When the pricking sensation changed to pain, it was recorded.

Not only is capsaicin odorless, it is known to induce a pain response modulated specifically by the central nervous system. “It was really interesting,” comments dermatologist Jesper Elberling, the lead author on the study. “In chemically intolerant individuals, the area of skin pain was significantly greater, as were the reported levels of pain. Something is going on in the central nervous system — some process of sensitization and heightened response.”

The center is now planning a study to look at genes involved in sensitization in the brain, to see if they are activated in chemically sensitive individuals. “In 2010, we unsuccessfully tried testing genes involved in detoxification and concluded that variants in detoxification genes and pathways are less important than previously thought,” says the center’s director, Sine Skovbjerg Jakobsen. “We don’t find consistent immunological abnormalities, nor do we find an abnormal sense of smell.”

Click Picture to Enlarge

So something else is going on in the brain. Much like Miller, the Danish researchers suspect that sensitization of the brain, probably by some kind of kindling process, could be at the root.

Astoundingly, in 2010, Elberling reported on a single case study where electroshock therapy (ECT) actually put severe chemical intolerances in remission. ECT has been proven effective in severe depression and refractory pain syndromes — its impact is in the brain itself, where it seems to reset thresholds of reactivity.

The 45-year-old male patient had become so chemically intolerant that he had been on sick leave for two years, had moved out of his home and could only see his children outside, not indoors. He was so isolated, he felt “a desperation he feared would lead to severe psychological breakdown,” says Elberling.

Before his illness, the patient worked as a stock manager in an industrial spray paint company. “At pre-ECT baseline,” says Elberling, “his self-rated chemical sensitivity symptom severity was 95 out of 100. After the third ECT treatment, he declined to 30 out of 100, and he gradually resumed ordinary life activities.” He was able to entertain, shop and spend time with family and friends. He was put on standard maintenance therapy (an ECT treatment every two weeks) for four months with only mild residual sensitivities.

“It is likely that ECT triggered the recovery process of brain regions reorganized in this chemically intolerant patient,” Elberling says. Although this example is extreme, it does point to a brain-driven mechanism that could inform future research.

Chemically intolerant individuals also show dysfunction in brain imaging on a SPECT scan, which tracks blood flow through tissue. That work was done at the University of Hebron in Barcelona, where researchers followed 10 chemically intolerant patients over a two-year period. Patients’ symptoms were chronic and reliably triggered by exposure levels that previously did not bother them.

To do their study, the Hebron scientists evaluated intolerant patients by SPECT scan. Then, a week later, each of those patients entered a chamber with a healthy individual. For varying periods of time, both were exposed to ordinary fumes from paint, perfume, gasoline and an aldehyde substance of the sort often used to manufacture perfumes or drugs. After exposure, there was a significantly greater decrease in blood flow in specific brain areas, particularly those involved in odor processing, in the chemically intolerant patients.

Miller, meanwhile, has found decreased blood flow through the central artery in the brains of Gulf War veterans suffering from TILT. Eight male veterans complaining of Gulf War illness and eight healthy veterans participated in her study. The veterans were stationed in front of a computer and given routine short-term memory tasks while being exposed to clean, filtered air or air with imperceptible amounts of acetone. Miller and the team told the subjects the air contained acetone whether it did or not. The content of the air had no impact on healthy subjects, but for sick Gulf War veterans, it was a different story. When the air contained trace amounts of acetone, the blood flow through their large middle cerebral artery was significantly slowed.

“I didn’t think TILT was real until we completed this study,” says physiologist Leonid Bunegin, a colleague of Miller’s at the University of Texas, who helped design and carry out the research. “It was the first hard-core study to show a definitive correlation between brain function and low-level chemical exposure.”

Controversy Reigns

Of course, skeptics remain. Not everybody is convinced the new model is valid. As recently as 2008, an Italian case study by University of Padova psychologist Gesualdo Zucco concluded that a chemically intolerant individual had “a debilitating psychological disorder in need of treatment.” After a car accident in 1992, the 36-year-old patient complained of chemical sensitivities so severe she sometimes vomited or fainted.

In a laboratory setting, she was exposed to a “blank stimulus” (no odor at all), odors she’d earlier rated as pleasant (coconut, banana) and odors she said caused symptoms (turpentine, paint). Symptoms she reported were directly related to the information she was given about the safety of the odors. If she was told that a blank stimulus or a pleasant odor was actually harmful, she reacted badly; if she was told it was an odor she’d rated as pleasant, she did not react badly. “There was remarkable consistency across trials,” says Zucco, “and it is noteworthy that at first the patient truly believed her disease was biological in origin.” This is an attitude very common among TILT patients, since they label themselves as afflicted by a physical disease.

After the study, the patient accepted Zucco’s conclusion that the symptoms were psychological. Cognitive psychotherapy, he says “allowed her to manage most of her symptoms, and for several years she sent me Christmas cards letting me know she remained improved.”

But even Zucco doesn’t insist that all cases are psychological. Some may “have a biological or organic origin,” he says. “The point of this study was that it was able to distinguish the difference.”

Miller has a different point of view. TILT, she says, emerges from a more sensitive, highly excitable limbic system. Asthma, depression and panic disorder run in families of sufferers. Shyness, which can be an avoidance behavior to control stimuli, is more prevalent, too.

In other words, she says, personality constructs emerging from the basic biology of the brain can be yet another marker that the individual is at risk for TILT, and easier to sensitize to the disease.

Someday, Miller hopes, you will walk into a physician’s office for a consultation, and along with the typical sheaf of papers about your health history, you’ll be given a different set of questions: the QEESI. You’ll checkmark, on a scale of one to 10, if you feel sick after breathing diesel exhaust or paint thinner, have unusual food cravings, use a gas stove or fabric softener at home, seem oddly sensitive to medications, or suffer inexplicable complaints such as dizziness, rashes, difficulty concentrating, headaches and mood swings. You will be given your QEESI score. And if you’re one in every five who appears to be at risk for TILT, you will be counseled on lifestyle and dietary changes.

You will be like the psychologist that Miller spoke to after presenting findings at a conference.

“The woman took the QEESI, and found she was at greater risk for TILT. She had just ordered new, synthetic carpet for her entire house, and she said to me, ‘I’m not sick, and I don’t want to get sick. I’m canceling the carpet order and installing ceramic tile instead.’”

 

 

 

Reference Source: Discover.

Demand Pumps: How to use them with residential reverse osmosis units

 by Gene Franks

Demand or Delivery Pumps are pumps used to send water from a storage tank to a point of use. They should not be confused with “booster pumps,” which are used to increase the pressure going into the the reverse osmosis unit. Typical applications for demand pumps are to send water from a non-pressurized tank to a water vending machine or to increase water pressure from an undersink reverse osmosis unit to a refrigerator or icemaker that it is supplying.

Demand pumps are versatile tools that can also be used to send water to a car wash location, a fish pond, aquarium,  or a hot tub. They are sometimes used to move water from a non-pressurized distiller tank to a sink-mounted spigot. They work anywhere a pump is needed to move water to a point of use. They work with a non-pressurized water source or they can increase the pressure from bladder tanks like RO tanks

When there is a “demand” for water, the pump comes on and supplies it. When the demand is removed, the pump shuts itself off.

When you push a button to fill a water bottle from a supermarket’s water vending machine, the button-push activates a solenoid that opens a closed valve in the water line. When the valve is open, the pump senses a demand for water and comes on. It pumps water through the open line until you release the button, closing the solenoid-controlled valve and shutting off the demand. Closing the valve causes pressure to build in the delivery line and the pump senses the pressure and stays off until there is another demand for water.

In the pump pictured above, the water line is installed in the ports marked by the yellow fitting protectors. The pressure switch is the appendage at the extreme left in the picture. It simply shuts off the pump’s electrical supply when water pressure builds builds in the water line.

Small demand pumps are usually trouble free operators, but in some installations a pump tank should be added to assure smooth operation. Without a tank to provide constant back pressure for the pump’s pressure switch, a phenomenon called “pump chatter” sometimes occurs. If the pressure drops slightly, the pump has to turn on briefly to renew the pressure when no demand for water has been made. Installation of a pump tank prevents this constant on/off cycling and also provides more water in storage and protects downstream plumbing and appliances from the shock of sudden pressure surges. A pump tank, while not always essential, improves the performance of virtually any demand pump installation.,

The illustration below shows a demand pump installation on an undersink reverse osmosis unit designed to send pressurized water to a remote refrigerator or icemaker. This is a good design, but there are other placement options. If the pump is installed in tube labelled “Outlet to Refrigerator,” the sink-top spigot will get water only from the tank at right and the pump will not turn on to serve the sink-top spigot.

The pressure tank at right is the RO unit’s regular storage tank. The tank at left is an additional “pump tank” added to smooth out the pump’s operation and to provide extra storage. Water in the second tank is available for both the kitchen ledge faucet and the refrigerator. A check valve (one way valve) built into the pump head prevents migration of water back to the RO unit.

More about Demand Pumps.

One-Quarter of World’s Agriculture Grows in Highly Water-Stressed Areas

By Francis Gassert – October 31, 2013

 

All living creatures need two things to survive: food and water. A new WRI analysis shows just how much tension exists between those two essential resources.

A new interactive map from WRI’s Aqueduct project reveals that more than 25 percent of the world’s agriculture is grown in areas of high water stress. This figure doubles when looking at irrigated cropland, which produces 40 percent of global food supply.

This analysis highlights the tension between water availability and agricultural production. Finding a balance between these two critical resources will be essential—especially as the global population expands.

Agriculture Under Stress

Already, water demand in many parts of the world is meeting or exceeding natural supply. Overlaying global crop production maps with Aqueduct’s Water Risk Atlas reveals agriculture’s current exposure to water stress.

In the face of this water-food nexus, three major points are important to keep in mind:

Different crops face different levels of stress in different regions. More than 40 percent of wheat is grown in areas facing high or extremely high levels of water stress. Fiber crops, such as cotton, are grown under even more stressed conditions. More than half of global cotton production happens in regions of high or extremely high stress.

Water consumption levels vary by crop type. Globally, roots (carrots and beets) and tubers (potatoes) require an average of 0.5 liters of water per calorie, whereas legumes (lentils and beans) require 1.2 liters per calorie, according to researchers at the University of Twente and the Water Footprint Network. In other words, different types of crops create different water footprints.

Irrigated land is twice as likely to be highly stressed. Irrigation alone – which can use surface water, groundwater, or both – can dramatically increase crop production. However, it is an enormous water consumer and the single-largest driver of water stress around the world. As ever-higher food demand drives more farmers to irrigate their land, the world’s rivers and aquifers will be increasingly strained.

These strained resources are a problem in themselves, but they also affect water users’ and managers’ ability to respond to droughts and other severe or chronic shortages. In areas where water is plentiful or where fewer users are competing, the excess supply acts as a buffer when droughts settle in. Droughts are more damaging in more arid areas or places where too many people compete for limited resources.

A Growing Risk

The tension between crop production and available water supply is already great, as agriculture currently accounts for more than 70 percent of all human water withdrawal. But the real problem is that this tension is poised to intensify. The 2030 Water Resources Group forecasts that under business-as-usual conditions, water demand will rise 50 percent by 2030. Water supplies, however, will not—and physically cannot—grow in parallel. Agriculture will drive nearly half of that additional demand, because global calorie production needs to increase 69 percent to feed 9.6 billion people by 2050.

The food-water tension won’t just be felt by agriculture, either. Agriculture’s growing thirst will squeeze water availability for municipal use, energy production, and manufacturing. With increasing demand in all sectors, some regions of the world, such as northern China, are already scrambling to find enough water to run their economies.

Ensuring a Water- and Food-Secure Future

Only by looking at food and water together is it possible to address the challenges within both. That is why WRI is working on mapping how the world’s relationship with water will be changing in the coming decades and identifying sustainable solutions to increase food production. For example, future food demand will only be met if farmers increase crop yields through better soil and water management. Furthermore, water use can be reduced through a suite of solutions like reducing food loss and waste, shifting to healthier diets, reducing biofuel demand, andachieving replacement fertility rates.

These are just a few of the solutions that will be necessary if we are to ensure a water- and food-secure future. With better data on where and how agriculture is constrained by water, countries and companies can create a more robust agricultural sector—without overtaxing water and other natural resources.

LEARN MORE: View the interactive map of agriculture’s exposure to water stress.

Article Source: Water Efficiency.