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

291–300 of 383 posts

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

#291

Post by ip26 »

samcheng wrote: post #218
Moru wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just another personal anekdote: A friend bought a water destiller because of some health-theories. You are supposed to drink distilled water in the morning and so on... He is usually using it on tap water because he believes the water isn't pure enough (Germany, should be pure enough). One day he figured he could try the bottled water, maybe less build up of chalk in the sistern. This area has a lot of chalk in the g…

Distilled water, particularly if heated, is dangerous to drink, according to some chemists I know. The concept is that the ultra-pure water leaches potentially harmful ions from its surroundings, for example chromium from stainless steel fixtures. Better to drink some harmless sodium and chlorine ions.

What's their take on reverse osmosis?

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

#292

Post by peteretep »

dual_basis wrote: post #258
fingerlocks wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The tap water in the vast majority of the US is superior to bottled water. I'm surprised this myth gets repeated so often on HN. It's not true- the standards for purified bottled water are quite high[0]. [0] https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/bottled-water...

1. The link you provided suggests that some bottled water comes from Municipal sources, ie. it is tap water. This would logically imply that the standards for bottled water are 2. The original article you are commenting on suggests that bottled water contains more microplastics than tap water.

> This would logically imply that the standards for bottled water are That’s not how logic works. That there are instances of municipal water supplies whose quality is sufficient to meet bottled water standards doesn’t tell you anything about minimum standards for either municipal supplies or bottled water.

Further: I would expect quality of municipal supplies to vary widely. A city built on the side of a mountain with access to springs can just provide that water, and it’s still from “municipal” supply.

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

#293

Post by ip26 »

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…

Well... it's good in many ways, but on the other hand my local water supply still has Cr(VI)

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

#294

Post by ben509 »

copperx wrote: post #112
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>long term subtle effects The longer term, and subtler the effect is, the safer a substance is. My educated guess is that microplastics are going to cause a lot fewer human deaths and ingury than any of the following natural stuff: Bees, coffee (see acrylamide), peanuts, mosquitoes, arsenic, mushrooms, and bodies of water.

What's dangerous about peanuts and store-bought mushrooms?

Peanut allergies. And I imagine mushrooms weren't qualified as "store-bought" because there are plenty of lethal wild mushrooms.

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

#295

Post by toasterlovin »

Judgmentality wrote: post #246
mehrdadn wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about purity but the taste can indeed be better than tap.

It can also be worse. I'd guess for almost everybody the difference in taste is dominated by the placebo effect. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIJEw5aDzOo

I guess you haven't lived in Los Angeles?

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

#296

Post by kccqzy »

bonoboTP wrote: post #196
lukaa wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For practical purpose does it matter? It detects non-water particles(pollution) in twice higher ratio than in tap water and plastic bottled water is sold as way purer than tap water with 1000 time higher price. Basically it's scam.

There's a lot of glass bottled water too, at least in Germany.

And plenty of aluminum cans of water as well, not to mention aluminum recycling is perhaps the most implemented recycling effort of any materials.

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

#297

Post by elif »

kccqzy wrote: post #296
bonoboTP wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a lot of glass bottled water too, at least in Germany.

And plenty of aluminum cans of water as well, not to mention aluminum recycling is perhaps the most implemented recycling effort of any materials.

Aluminum cans are typically lined with plastic.

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

#298

Post by ehnto »

lukaa wrote: post #131
Isamu wrote: post #4

It's good to see the honest qualifications in the article: >Mason's team was able to identify specific plastics over 100 microns (0.10 mm) in size but not smaller particles. According to experts contacted by CBC News, there is a chance the Nile Red dye is adhering to another unknown substance other than plastic. >Mason leaves open that possibility but leans strongly to the smaller particles being plastic. >The develo…

For practical purpose does it matter? It detects non-water particles(pollution) in twice higher ratio than in tap water and plastic bottled water is sold as way purer than tap water with 1000 time higher price. Basically it's scam.

Does the plastic come from the bottle, or from the water source?

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

#299

Post by ant6n »

bonoboTP wrote: post #196
lukaa wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For practical purpose does it matter? It detects non-water particles(pollution) in twice higher ratio than in tap water and plastic bottled water is sold as way purer than tap water with 1000 time higher price. Basically it's scam.

There's a lot of glass bottled water too, at least in Germany.

(that's carbonated water in glass bottles)

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

#300

Post by elif »

cortesoft wrote: post #197
lukaa wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For practical purpose does it matter? It detects non-water particles(pollution) in twice higher ratio than in tap water and plastic bottled water is sold as way purer than tap water with 1000 time higher price. Basically it's scam.

Plastic bottled water is not bought because it is higher quality. People buy it because it comes in a disposable container.

For the majority of the population of South America, it is bought because the tap water is not potable. I imagine that is the case in other continents as well.
Post reply on HN