First.. the Good News about drinking Coffee.
The benefits of coffee consumption have long been questioned, but now a new group of experts have given it the thumbs up – at least for one issue.
A review of studies published in the journal Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics says that increasing coffee intake could help reduce the chances of developing alcohol-related cirrhosis.
To examine the relationship between coffee consumption and the risk of cirrhosis, a research team from Southampton University, analyzed nine studies involving more than 430,000 participants. The studies included 1,990 cirrhosis patients. The length of the studies varied, but one lasted nearly 20 years.
In eight of the nine studies analyzed, increasing coffee consumption by two cups per day was “associated with a statistically significant reduction in the risk of cirrhosis” – specifically by 44%.
And.. compared to no coffee consumption, researchers noted approximately one cup per day was linked to 22% lower risk of cirrhosis, three cups helped decrease the risk by 57%, and four cups significantly dropped the risk to 65%. “However, there may be an upper limit beyond which there is no further benefit,” expressed Kennedy. Nevertheless, the researchers cautioned caffeine enthusiasts not to immediately load up on fancy lattes and sugar-laden frappes.
It’s not yet clear what compound in coffee or even which type of coffee bean leads to a healthier liver. The team noted that the potential link between coffee’s health benefits and cirrhosis isn’t a new discovery; however, health care professionals often find this a difficult concept to accept. Additionally, researchers expressed some of the studies reviewed did not account for other risk factors for cirrhosis, like obesity and diabetes.
Now for the Bad News
Chlorine in your coffee water has a dirty little secret. When chlorinated water meets organic matter like coffee grounds, or even tea, it forms carcinogenic trihalomethanes. So unless you have a water filter that removes chlorine and its even nastier alter ego, chloramines, you’re ingesting carcinogens with every sip.
Here’s the conversation we overheard from top water quality specialists from around the world on LinkedIn.
Franz Dillard: “Dear All,
I suppose many of us drink coffee or tea using tap water without removing chlorine from it and we do it every day. I was wondering if the process of coffee or tea making could produce THMs when using chlorinated drinking water?
~ THMs (Trihalomethanes) are carcinogens, byproducts of the reaction between chlorine and organic matter in water.
~ Drinking water has a free chlorine concentration from 0.2 to 0.5 mg/L and coffee or tea are a concentrate of organic matter.
~ During the water treatment process, we avoid the production of THMs by removing as much organic matter as we can before chlorinating the water.
~ But with the coffee or tea preparation process, we put chlorinated water in contact with a concentrate of organic matter.
Owen Boyd : FYI..Trihalomethanes (THMs) are suspected carcinogens and reproductive toxicants commonly found in chlorinated drinking water. This study investigates THM formation during the preparation of beverages and foods using chlorinated drinking water.
A total of 11 foods and 17 beverages were tested. Under the experimental conditions, each food and beverage formed THMs, primarily chloroform, although low or trace levels of brominated THMs were also detected. Tea formed the highest THM levels (e.g., chloroform levels from 3 to 67 microg l(-1)), followed by coffee (from 3 to 13 microg l(-1)), rice (9 microg l(-1)), soups (from 0.4 to 3.0 microg l(-1)), vegetables (<1 microg l(-1)), and baby food (<0.7 microg l(-1)). Chloroform formationwith instant tea, used as a highly reproducible model system, increased with free chlorine concentration, decreased with higher food (tea) concentration, and was unaffected by reaction (steeping) time and bromide ion concentration.
Erik Desormeaux There is not always a silver bullet in terms of water distribution or food and beverage. TTHM’s are just a fraction of the disinfection byproducts that can be of concern. When not utilized properly, Ozone can create bromate that exceeds regulated levels and chloramines can lead to NDMA and other nitrosamines with potential risks that we do not yet fully understand. So the best solution will likely be different at different places based on specific needs.
Also, cold brewed coffee is becoming a popular way of making coffee without boiling.
Hoda Tafvizi I think the best idea is using a filtering device on the tap including activated carbon filter and then you can be sure about THMs!
Ian: Now here’s the silver lining to this bad news. It’s a secret Brita and other filter jug sellers definitely DON’t want you to know!
Thierry Minguet Just put tap water in an open bottle in your fridge. After about half an hour, the chlorine dissolved in the water , maintained in solution under pressure in the pipes, will evolue into gazeous chlorine and evaporate Under atmospheric pressure. Hold the water into the fridge to avoid an infection under room temperature. Don’t hold the water for a long time. Use/replace it. Very cheaper and tasty, not only for coffee.
Moustafa Hedayah Before I make my tea and coffee I boil the water ,,, and that will remove Chlorine gas in case if you don’t have carbon filter.
Richard Ebong There is need for in depth and independent study on this subject. The effect might vary with geographical location and race.
Joy Montgomery How much do bleached coffee filters add?
John Robertson If we were to drink 10 cups (2L) of water from a tap or 10 cups (2L) of boiled water from the same tap per day which would be safer. Safe water needs to be available to the broad population which economically precludes carbon filtration at the point of consumption.
Ian: So.. we’ve learned that if we consume a sixpack of beer a day, it’s a good idea to drink coffee.
But if we do.. we’re ingesting a known carcinogen.
Strange world. Here’s my tuppence worth.
1. If you have a coffee maker, see if the water tank in it is vented. If it is, you’re lucky, becasue as discussed here, chlorine is a gas and will ‘outgas’ from your coffee maker water if it has sufficient surface area.
2. Ring your local council to see if they are using cheap n’ nasty chloramine. This is a mix of ammonia and chlorine which does NOT outgas, but still has the same effect on organics like tea leaves and coffee grounds.
3. If you bought a water filter jug to remove chlorine you were gypped. As you’ve seen here, the chlorine will outgas anyway.
4. Want a better coffee anyway? A good water filter like the UltraStream will remove a far greater range of contaminants and it will alkalize the water, making it take up coffee flavour better. You’ll get more from your coffee dollars and enjoy it more. just like us here at home.
California state reservoir levels have been declared dangerously low, with residents being told to cut back their water usage drastically. There was concern that even aquifers would be milked dry, but this water crisis might soon be over due to a $1 billion dollar water desalination plant that was in the works for 20 years.
The Claude “Bud” Lewis Carlsbad Desalination Plant began operations on Monday, churning out 50 million gallons of drinkable water each day. Taking in 100 million gallons of seawater every day from the adjacent Agua Hedionda Lagoon, the plant puts the water through numerous processes designed to make it potable.
Impurities and particles are removed, and reverse osmosis makes the water fit enough to drink. The concentrated brine leftover is then diluted with seawater and piped back out to the ocean. Though the plant has critics already due to its unknown environmental impact, for now it will supply hundreds of thousands of Californian’s with clean water.
The plant is the largest desalination project in the Western Hemisphere to date, and with the help of Poseidon Water and the San Diego Water Authority, it was constructed in record time.
Officials claim the plant’s energy efficient processes allow the plant to run on half the energy other plants of the same capacity would require. That technology reportedly saves 146 million kilowatt-hours of energy each year, which is the equivalent of 9,000 cars. It will supply 300,000 San Diego residents with water, and if it is successful, other desalination plants will also be erected.
The Surfrider Foundation, a nonprofit working to protect the world’s ocean, opposes the project. In a statement, the organization says desalination “should be the last tool in the tool box, not the first.”
Given that RO water contains no minerals, this will mean that every owner of an electric water ionizer will get vastly reduced or no performance from their ionizer. Electric ionizers require minerals (acid and alkaline) to perform. Luckily the UltraStream water ionizer performs perfectly with RO water, uses no electricity and costs far, far less.
When an international group of pro medicos tells us our ability to reproduce is being affected by toxins, it’s probably worth taking notice.
A new report by a group of international medicos published this week says just that. Who? The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO), that’s who!
They are talking about exposure to toxic chemicals in food, water and air being linked to millions of deaths, and costing billions of dollars every year.
Among the poor health outcomes linked to pesticides, air pollutants, plastics and other chemicals, according to the report, are miscarriage and stillbirths, an increase in cancer, attention problems and hyperactivity.
“Exposure to toxic environmental chemicals during pregnancy and breastfeeding is ubiquitous and is a threat to healthy human reproduction,”
can we believe this report? We see so many. Well, the report was written by a team of physicians and scientists from the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada, including from the World Health Organization. It was published in the International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics ahead of a global conference on women’s health issues next week in Vancouver, British Columbia.
“We are drowning our world in untested and unsafe chemicals and the price we are paying in terms of our reproductive health is of serious concern,”
~Gian Carlo Di Renzo, a physician and lead author of the FIGO opinion.
So is it getting better? Nope. We just move the dirty industries into thirdworld countries where the enviro controls are lax.
Our new international trade agreement, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TPP), lacks much-needed protections against toxic chemicals. It doesn’t make it better.
The report also cited several examples of the range of the problem.
- Seven million people worldwide die each year because of exposure to indoor and outdoor air pollution.
- Healthcare and other costs from exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals in Europe are estimated at a minimum of 157 billion euros a year.
- The cost of childhood diseases related to environmental toxins and pollutants in air, food, water, soil and in homes and neighborhoods in the United States was calculated at $76.6 billion in 2008.
OK. More nasty news… But if we aren’t personally healthy how can we take action to change the world? It may seem selfish to clean up your own life by removing chem-laden ‘frankenfoods, toxic cleaning products, excess detergents, and.. gosh, I could write a book on it, couldn’t I? But it does seem to me that I am not selfish if I ‘take care of business’ personally and then give service to the world by example and by action.
My Quick Home list.
Clean up your food.
- Clean up your water.
- Clean up your personal products.
- Clean up your home cleaner products.
- Reduce your detergent use.
- Properly dispose of old pharma.
- Weed instead of spray.
- Invest in clean technology!
Then talk about it.
What are they, you ask?
They are tiny bits of plastic used for all sorts of weird purposes. Over 800 trillion microbeads enter US wastewater daily, and because water treatment plants were never designed to handle this new source of pollution, a lot of the microplastics end up in rivers and lakes, get ingested by various creatures, and then make their way up the food chain back to us.
here’s the big story on my fave blog, TreeHugger.
Nearly three- quarters (72 percent) of Americans will be committing to “drinking enough water” in 2015, according to a new survey conducted online by Harris Poll on behalf of the Council for Responsible Nutrition.
“Water is a must! It’s essential to many bodily functions for people of all ages. We’re encouraged to see that people recognize the importance of appropriate levels of hydration,” said Duffy MacKay, N.D., senior vice president of scientific and regulatory affairs, CRN. “But water is only one of the healthy habits that this survey demonstrated people found most important. Let’s remember that the key to good health is a constellation of healthy habits, not just one habit in isolation.”
According to the survey, “drinking enough water” was the number one health and wellness habit American adults are committing to in 2015, with the following four options rounding up the top five:
- eating healthy/healthier in general (66 percent)
- getting more physically active (62 percent)
- getting more sleep (49 percent)
- taking vitamins (47 percent)
In the bottom five were starting the day off right with..
- a healthy breakfast (37 percent)
- spending more time with family and friends in real life, instead of online (34 percent)
- staying cool, calm and collected when stuck in traffic (30 percent)
- visiting the doctor before getting sick (23 percent)
- tracking meals/exercise via mobile app(s), online tool(s) or personal gadget(s) (17 percent)
Over one in five (22 percent) selected “other health and wellness habit(s)” and eight percent responded that they are not committing to any health and wellness habits in 2015.
This survey was conducted online within the United States by Harris Poll on behalf of CRN from Dec. 8 to 10, 2014, among 2,021 adults ages 18 and older. This online survey is not based on a probability sample and therefore no estimate of theoretical sampling error can be calculated.
Could you live on four liters of water per day?
A nonprofit is challenging people to try it for a day to encourage conservation and highlight the distress of those who live in places where clean water is not readily available.
“Fill a one liter water bottle and use it for everything: cooking, cleaning, drinking and bathing. You can refill your bottle 3x. Try to use all four liters without going over. Stay hydrated!” the human rights non-profit DIGDEEP says.
Four liters is the “minimum necessary to survive,” according to a Forbes columnist. That said, “between 50 and 100 liters of water per person per day are needed to ensure that most basic needs are met and few health concerns arise,” the United Nations says, citing the World Health Organization.
DIGDEEP founder and executive director George McGraw explained the challenge.
“People know we’re in the middle of one of the worst droughts in history, but it doesn’t feel real to most of us,” he said. “There has never been a better time to learn why water matters and how to protect it. Even without a drought, the USGS estimates we’ll run a deficit in the Colorado River by 2060 the size of the annual consumption of LA.”
In a Triple Pundit column, Michael Kourabas, who attempted the challenge, explained why it’s so hard.
“Most of us use nearly 4 liters of water — in other words, all of the water allotted in the challenge — every time we wash our hands or face. Most Americans use more than 400 liters of water every single day, or 100 times what the challenge requires. A single toilet flush uses about 6 liters of water, and a mere three flushes amounts to more water than most other people in the world use all day to clean, cook, drink and bathe,” the columnist said.
Ian: I have to add that it would depend on what sort of water I had to drink!
Bottled Water versus owning your own UltraStream Alkaline Water Ioniser
Author Diana Michaels is one of our many Alkaway distributors, way down in Busselton, Western Australia .
Ian: Diana, thank you so much for this!
The cost of 15 litres of bottled water delivered to your home is about $19.95. A commercial price could be as low as $13.00 per 15 litres. Note that the costs used in this comparison for the bottled water were actual costs quoted by one of the largest distributors in Australia for the supply of water to a medium size corporate business earlier this year, 2014.
The cost to a business who used 1 x 15 litre of spring water weekly at a cost of $13.00 per 15 litre with a fortnightly delivery would be:
At $13.00 per week for only one 15 litre bottle the annual cost would be $676.00 – (780 litres of water per annum) . The cost of the UltraStream replacement filter cartridge is $199.00 and it produces 3000 litres of alkaline and ionised water.
Both the chilled water dispenser and the UltraStream unit cost to initially purchase – the water dispenser is approximately $200 the UltraStream is $499 (and for a commercial application an undersink kit is recommended which is $175). If no power source is available that would need to be installed for the water dispenser but not required for the UltraStream. The UltraStream does not require a plumber to install the Unit it can he installed by anyone who is handy;
The cost in the first year of the chilled water dispenser (buying only 1 x 15 litre bottle delivered fortnightly) is $676 for the water; approximately $200 for the dispenser; an additional cost of $1.25 fuel levy per delivery ($1.25 x 26 fortnights) adds 32.50; and in some cases the cost of installing a powerpoin and some power consumption – amounts to an estimated $908.50;
The cost in the first year of the UltraStream plus the undersink kit and a replacement filter is $499 for the UltraStream; $175 for the undersink kit; and $199 for the replacement filter (this is for next years 3000 litres of water); – this amounts to $873.00;
The cost in the second year of the chilled water dispenser with exactly the same usage (assuming that there has not been a price rise) is $676 for (780 litres of water) plus $32.50 for the fuel levy and some power consumption – amounting to around $708.50;
The cost of the second year of the UltraStream is $199.00 for the replacement filter (which you already purchased in your UltraStream Startup Kit). If you buy a replacement filter in the second year you will always have one on hand;
Subsequent years (assuming no increase in price) the bottled water will cost at least $708.50 plus power and the UltraStream will cost $199.00 for the replacement filter, plus a small amount for shipping;
UltraSteam wins hands down!
To read more click on this link …… In my capacity as a Occupational Health and Safety Advisor
Diana Michaels – Starlight Wellness Centre July 2014
This week I’m talking about filter performance claims.
It’s a big issue that just gets below the radar of most consumers.
If you’ve never sighted our ‘whole-of-life’ laboratory test results, click here.
How we calculate a ‘whole of life’ filter test.
Firstly we make a calculation on how many litres we expect the filter to process. In our case we based it ona family of four drinking 2 litres per day every day. Multiply that out and we came up with the ‘target’ litre count.
Then we had to find a laboratory willing to run the UltraStream for the target litres. This costs a lot more because most tests are of a simple sample: a single test performed once.
In our case it was a local university. We still needed them to pass through a ‘witches’ brew of chemicals to see how the filter reacts to them. To run it continually would require 25 200 litre drums of poisons, so we do the ‘witches’ brew at the beginning of the test and at the end, but we actually run water from the laboratory supply through the UltraStream to the target litre total.
This tells us how the UltraStream filter performs if poisons/contaminants are introduced at the beginning of filtration and at the end of filtration. Ultimately it’s the only honest way to prove a filter.
Very close to home… a very good reason NOT to buy a water filter.. a cheap one anyway. And all the people affected by NTM disease are on TOWN WATER.
High strontium levels found in eastern Wisconsin groundwater.
By Don Behm of the Journal Sentinel
Add naturally occurring strontium to the list of contaminants — along with arsenic, bacteria and nitrates — possibly lurking in the groundwater of eastern Wisconsin and capable of causing health problems for people drinking water from wells, a University of Wisconsin-Green Bay scientist says.
Families with young children using deep wells in eastern Wisconsin should have their drinking water tested at least once for strontium, a metal that dissolves out of bedrock, according to John Luczaj, an associate professor in the department of natural and applied sciences. This is not radioactive strontium, a byproduct of nuclear energy and nuclear weapons testing.
Tests of water from wells in northeastern Wisconsin, primarily in Brown and Outagamie counties, found unhealthful amounts of natural strontium in 73 of 115 samples, or 63%, Luczaj says in a report summarizing the department’s ongoing study of strontium in groundwater in the region. The report was released last week by the University of Wisconsin Water Resources Institute in Madison.