Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 383 posts

Re: Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

#141

Post by dougmwne »

inimino wrote: post #32
z2 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>...plastic bottle I'm even confused by this point--given that some of the water (e.g. San Pellegrino) often comes in glass bottles, can we even assume all bottles measured were plastic? It seems like it should be obvious or else it would be a useless study, but I fail to find a single assertion that all bottled water tested were indeed plastic bottles. That and S. Pellegrino has such a low max count compared with ot…

Would you expect glass dust in a water sold in glass?

Honestly I would, in microscopic quantities.

Re: Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

#142

Post by [deleted] »

djsumdog wrote: post #116
slowmovintarget wrote: post #25

Went looking to see what the comparison to tap water was: > Orb found on average there were 10.4 particles of plastic per litre that were 100 microns (0.10 mm) or bigger. This is double the level of microplastics in the tap water tested from more than a dozen countries across five continents, examined in a 2017 study by Orb that looked at similar-sized plastics. Worse... it's worse than tap water.

Tap water in the developed world is really really good. You can measure a country by the ability of that nation to provide clean water to people. Municipal water supplies in cities like Atlanta and Cincinnati are often tested 200~300 times per month at several pumping and maintenance locations. Bottled water is a scam, and it also is a resources that's often extracted from poor countries and communities. The document…

[deleted]

Re: Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

#143

Post by onion2k »

fireattack wrote: post #126
djsumdog wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tap water in the developed world is really really good. You can measure a country by the ability of that nation to provide clean water to people. Municipal water supplies in cities like Atlanta and Cincinnati are often tested 200~300 times per month at several pumping and maintenance locations. Bottled water is a scam, and it also is a resources that's often extracted from poor countries and communities. The document…

>Bottled water is a scam, and it also is a resources that's often extracted from poor countries and communities Are you sure about this? My impression is that the price/weight ratio of bottled water is way to low to make any sense to not bottle them in close proximity, so "extracted from poor countries " doesn't sound plausible.

The bottled water is produced close to where it's sold. The issue is in countries where the water bottling plant takes up lots of the available local water so the poorer citizens can't access it, and they can't afford the bottled water either. This means they don't have access to any clean water.

One of Nestle's recent CEOs actually went on record to say say he didn't believe access to clean water should be a human right.

Re: Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

#144

Post by jacobolus »

groby_b wrote: post #62
slowmovintarget wrote: post #25

Went looking to see what the comparison to tap water was: > Orb found on average there were 10.4 particles of plastic per litre that were 100 microns (0.10 mm) or bigger. This is double the level of microplastics in the tap water tested from more than a dozen countries across five continents, examined in a 2017 study by Orb that looked at similar-sized plastics. Worse... it's worse than tap water.

Well, for microplastics. If you live e.g. in the Bay Area, your tap water instead has a good chance of having a good helping of hexavalent chromium[1], which... not too healthy. (Neither are arsenic, bromium, etc.) Pick your poison. Literally. [1] https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Tap-water-Bay-Area-datab...

San Francisco water mostly comes from the Tuolumne River (Hetch Hetchy reservoir).

Re: Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

#145

Post by simonsarris »

The paper for people who wanna look at which brands, etc:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327574651_Synthetic...

If you just want the brand summary here is the image: https://imgur.com/a/l2mDlNf

Great detail and work.

Note:

> Of all the lots tested, only one was packaged in glass rather than plastic: Gerolsteiner [...] the same brand of water but packaged in plastic instead of glass was also tested [...] While both of these packaged waters have the same water source, there was considerably less microplastic contamination within the water bottled in glass as compared to that packaged in plastic

Re: Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

#146

Post by outworlder »

groby_b wrote: post #62
slowmovintarget wrote: post #25

Went looking to see what the comparison to tap water was: > Orb found on average there were 10.4 particles of plastic per litre that were 100 microns (0.10 mm) or bigger. This is double the level of microplastics in the tap water tested from more than a dozen countries across five continents, examined in a 2017 study by Orb that looked at similar-sized plastics. Worse... it's worse than tap water.

Well, for microplastics. If you live e.g. in the Bay Area, your tap water instead has a good chance of having a good helping of hexavalent chromium[1], which... not too healthy. (Neither are arsenic, bromium, etc.) Pick your poison. Literally. [1] https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Tap-water-Bay-Area-datab...

> If you live e.g. in the Bay Area, your tap water instead has a good chance of having a good helping of hexavalent chromium

And tastes like crap across the bay. I don't care, but my wife is pretty picky about it. I've tried multiple filters, to no avail.

Re: Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

#147

Post by Reason077 »

onion2k wrote: post #143
fireattack wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Bottled water is a scam, and it also is a resources that's often extracted from poor countries and communities Are you sure about this? My impression is that the price/weight ratio of bottled water is way to low to make any sense to not bottle them in close proximity, so "extracted from poor countries " doesn't sound plausible.

The bottled water is produced close to where it's sold. The issue is in countries where the water bottling plant takes up lots of the available local water so the poorer citizens can't access it, and they can't afford the bottled water either. This means they don't have access to any clean water. One of Nestle's recent CEOs actually went on record to say say he didn't believe access to clean water should be a human r…

> "The bottled water is produced close to where it's sold."

Well, not always. Premium brands are often shipped long distances. Evian, Fiji water, etc...

Re: Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

#148

Post by fireattack »

onion2k wrote: post #143
fireattack wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Bottled water is a scam, and it also is a resources that's often extracted from poor countries and communities Are you sure about this? My impression is that the price/weight ratio of bottled water is way to low to make any sense to not bottle them in close proximity, so "extracted from poor countries " doesn't sound plausible.

The bottled water is produced close to where it's sold. The issue is in countries where the water bottling plant takes up lots of the available local water so the poorer citizens can't access it, and they can't afford the bottled water either. This means they don't have access to any clean water. One of Nestle's recent CEOs actually went on record to say say he didn't believe access to clean water should be a human r…

Can't access what, tap water?

That sounds more like a problem of the local government than factories of bottled water.

>he didn't believe access to clean water should be a human right

Depends on the definition of "human right". You still pay for even the tap water in your home after all.

Re: Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

#149

Post by mirekrusin »

cerebellum42 wrote: post #124
wibble10 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of the buildings in Berlin have very old pipes and while the water to the building is alright, we (in Berlin) have to rely mainly on glass bottles of water (bismark) as if you don’t run the taps enough there’s a nice colour that comes out...

I've lived in a few places in Berlin over the years, I've never seen anything but nice clear water come out of the tap (whether at my place or friend's flats). Granted, it's hard water (lots of calcium) but other than that it's perfectly fine. Pipes as bad as you're describing definitely exist but I'd say they're the exception, not the rule.

If there's a lot of calcium old pipes will have nice protection layer, no?

Re: Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

#150

Post by outworlder »

armitron wrote: post #101
hourislate wrote: post #78

I was under the impression Gerolsteiner and San Pellegrino were from deep under ground springs where it took the water decades or more to filter down into the source where the bottler draws it from. Are the plastics somehow in the source or are they being introduced in another way, perhaps when the bottles are washed, handled, etc before filling?

The bottles themselves are suspicious and have been implicated [1]. All plastics have been found to leech chemicals, including PET [2] which is used for bottled water. If you think that in a typical warehouse or storage facility (before it hits a supermarket or sales point), bottled water is never refrigerated and that the temperatures it is exposed to are very frequently 'extreme', it should come as no surprise that…

> and basically treat all chemicals as safe unless proven otherwise.

Shouldn't that be always the case? 'Chemicals' permutations are countless. You and I are a bag of "chemicals", and most of them, even if naturally occurring, are harmful depending on dosage.

Post reply on HN