We need to start drinking recycled wastewater • Hacker News Board

Re: We need to start drinking recycled wastewater

#51

Post by ethbro » Fri, Jan 08, 2016, 6:04 PM UTC

logfromblammo wrote: post #47

ethbro wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd imagine (guessing) most pharmaceuticals are fairly short-lived vs biological processes? Otherwise, you'd either only need one pill or it would build up in your body. I suppose it's possible that they're only broken down by human biological processes, but that seems unlikely given the diversity of microbial life in the environment (and inside us!).

Some drugs are not metabolized to a great extent before they exit the body. For instance, an arctic shaman would eat poisonous mushrooms, taking the hit for the dangerous toxins in the fungus, then other people would drink the shaman's urine, which still contained the active hallucinogenic chemical, and go on a much safer trip. The hallucinogen would persist in this fashion through multiple kidneys before it was no l…

I understand the principle (though upvote for the example!), but my question was after leaving a human body whether or not natural processes (e.g. UV) + microbes in the environment would break those chemicals down in a reasonable timescale or if they persist? From s_q_b, it sounds like they do get broken down, albeit with an effect on the flora and fauna.

Re: We need to start drinking recycled wastewater

#52

Post by stcredzero » Fri, Jan 08, 2016, 6:07 PM UTC

jbob2000 wrote: post #33

15charlimit wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the issues with GMO foods is that we don't actually know for a fact exactly how the changes we make in them work, or what effect they may have in the human body over long periods of time. We just don't know.

There are a lot of things we don't know. How do we know that non-GMO foods are good? Just because that's what we've done for thousands of years doesn't mean it's "right". Should we let people starve and die because "we don't know"? It's just intellectually dishonest to not use GMO foods because "we don't know". How will we ever know if we don't try them?

It's just intellectually dishonest to not use GMO foods because "we don't know". How will we ever know if we don't try them?

Is it really intellectually dishonest, or did someone else just come up with a different risk and cost/benefit analysis from yours? I'm not saying they're right, but it's entirely possible they're making an honest mistake. (Also, the ethics of science get tricky when your subjects are human beings.)

Re: We need to start drinking recycled wastewater

#53

Post by cameroncf » Fri, Jan 08, 2016, 6:13 PM UTC

Everyone who lives downstream of a water treatment plant is already drinking (diluted) recycled wastewater. Most of the liquid water on the planet has already passed through a human body countless times. It's all recycled. This is not news.

Re: We need to start drinking recycled wastewater

#54

Post by Roodgorf » Fri, Jan 08, 2016, 6:42 PM UTC

15charlimit wrote: post #31

jbob2000 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same effect is noticed with GMO foods. They're better in all regards, yet there are people who are afraid of them because "not natural". I don't think this has to do with the education system. My friend's father has a terminal illness, and in his attempt to understand and rationalize it, he thought that he did it to himself by leading an "unnatural" lifestyle. The man has a masters in mathematics and owned a soft…

One of the issues with GMO foods is that we don't actually know for a fact exactly how the changes we make in them work, or what effect they may have in the human body over long periods of time. We just don't know.

I think it's a bit disingenuous to paint with such a broad brush the level of knowledge there is about the long-term effects of GMO foods. Numerous studies have been released[0] and more published every year seem to lean towards minimal to no perceivable negative effects.

EDIT: I will grant that all of these studies deal with animals rather than directly at effects on humans, but it doesn't seem there is compelling evidence thus far for one to assume there would be a significant difference.

[0] http://www.fass.org/page.asp?pageID=52&autotry=true&ULnotkn=...

Re: We need to start drinking recycled wastewater

#55

Post by tomjen3 » Fri, Jan 08, 2016, 7:03 PM UTC

noir_lord wrote: post #6

> finding that while 49% were willing to try recycled wastewater, 13% refused, and the rest weren't sure. This is the end result of an education system that has not prepared people for the modern world, if we engineer a solution that produces water of a purity greater than water from a reservoir and and half of people are still not sure it is safe to drink then we have a massive problem. For the record: I've no issue…

It would only be more pure based on what we can currently measure. Supposed we had tried this back when we just had to filter it for things we could see - the water would be clear and also likely still filled with cholera.

We know more about bacteria today, but can we filter for e.g prions?

Anyway the current system works, the new system might be better, but on the off chance that something goes wrong, why risk it?

Re: We need to start drinking recycled wastewater

#56

Post by tomjen3 » Fri, Jan 08, 2016, 7:06 PM UTC

jbob2000 wrote: post #33

15charlimit wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the issues with GMO foods is that we don't actually know for a fact exactly how the changes we make in them work, or what effect they may have in the human body over long periods of time. We just don't know.

There are a lot of things we don't know. How do we know that non-GMO foods are good? Just because that's what we've done for thousands of years doesn't mean it's "right". Should we let people starve and die because "we don't know"? It's just intellectually dishonest to not use GMO foods because "we don't know". How will we ever know if we don't try them?

We know it is safe to eat because we have tested it for thousands of years. Call me up when we have tested GMOs for that long.

Exceptions can of course be made for places that are experiencing acute malnutrition, but even so it probably makes much more sense using the same money to make sure the African farmers have access to fertilizer so they can get better yields.

Re: We need to start drinking recycled wastewater

#57

Post by Skunkleton » Fri, Jan 08, 2016, 7:10 PM UTC

SubZero wrote: post #12

maaarghk wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disturbingly, your extremely condescending idea is probably exactly the kind of thing that would actually work.

A condescending idea would have been to call it Brawndo. "It has electrolytes..."

Hey! That's got what I crave!

Re: We need to start drinking recycled wastewater

#58

Post by rsync » Fri, Jan 08, 2016, 7:34 PM UTC

noir_lord wrote: post #6

> finding that while 49% were willing to try recycled wastewater, 13% refused, and the rest weren't sure. This is the end result of an education system that has not prepared people for the modern world, if we engineer a solution that produces water of a purity greater than water from a reservoir and and half of people are still not sure it is safe to drink then we have a massive problem. For the record: I've no issue…

"This is the end result of an education system that has not prepared people for the modern world, if we engineer a solution that produces water of a purity greater than water from a reservoir and and half of people are still not sure it is safe to drink then we have a massive problem."

It has nothing to do with the education system and everything to do with human social evolution and evolutionarily stable strategies.

You're looking at the problem "like a nerd"[1] wherein you have a fixed set of definitions and guidelines and the end product (the water) fits or exceeds all of them and therefore, presto! Anyone who disagrees with your framework is therefore an idiot.

But these people aren't disagreeing with the stats - they don't care about the stats. They have a built-in, knee-jerk revulsion to drinking anything that came from sewage. That might not be rational or useful in 2016, but it has been tremendously useful over the past hundred thousand years of human social evolution. In fact, so useful, that people without that revulsion have been heavily selected against.

If your response to this is to show them more and more data and "proof" you're missing the point.

[1] ... to use Nassim Taleb's technical term.

Re: We need to start drinking recycled wastewater

#59

Post by rsync » Fri, Jan 08, 2016, 7:39 PM UTC

s_q_b wrote: post #24

djrogers wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very few cities don't 'just dump the water back' - that's actually the way it works outside of a very very small handful of places. The reason for these treatment plants is so that the water that gets dumped into the environment is clean. Well, pretty clean - there are still things that aren't removed today with even the most advanced treatments, such as hormones/contraceptives...

My family owns a civil engineering company that deals with wastewater management. A lot of it is treated with bacterial vats, chemicals, and UV, and then run back into local tributaries, because while it's safe for the environment, it isn't quite safe for human consumption. A glass or two won't hurt you, but I wouldn't want to drink it regularly, mostly due to the cocktail of pharmaceuticals that can't be filtered. A…

"My family owns a civil engineering company that deals with wastewater management."

Did you win the Putnam ?

Re: We need to start drinking recycled wastewater

#60

Post by s_q_b » Fri, Jan 08, 2016, 7:46 PM UTC

rsync wrote: post #59

s_q_b wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My family owns a civil engineering company that deals with wastewater management. A lot of it is treated with bacterial vats, chemicals, and UV, and then run back into local tributaries, because while it's safe for the environment, it isn't quite safe for human consumption. A glass or two won't hurt you, but I wouldn't want to drink it regularly, mostly due to the cocktail of pharmaceuticals that can't be filtered. A…

"My family owns a civil engineering company that deals with wastewater management." Did you win the Putnam ?

If everyone had to win the Putnam to understand the basics of wastewater treatment, we'd be in deep... well, shit.