Poison tap water outside FR3 standards

Work concerning plumbing or sanitary water (hot, cold, clean or used). Management, access and use of water at home: drilling, pumping, wells, distribution network, treatment, sanitation, rainwater recovery. Recovery, filtration, depollution, storage processes. Repair of water pumps. Manage, use and save water, desalination and desalination, pollution and water ...
dedeleco
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9211
Registration: 16/01/10, 01:19
x 10

Poison tap water outside FR3 standards




by dedeleco » 17/05/10, 22:01

Right now, France 3, presents a very beautiful report asking for accounts and explanations, to the water suppliers on the respect of the standards for water, aluminum, pesticides, atrazine, nitrates, radon, (it is necessary a nuclear mask, to measure city water at 250000 Becquerel / m3), cocktail of medicines, etc ... which worries because this risk is underestimated by all suppliers and government which gives exemptions !!
Fish, feminized, are less resistant to our pill than we are !!

Nevertheless, when I think that, as a child I ate foods cooked in aluminum pans, my Alzheimer risk is clearly increased, but I compensate more, by eating fruits and vegetables since childhood, by stimulating my brain on econology and kistinie, and I did not live in a radon region !!!

Children have a cancer rate increasing by 1 to 2% per year for 30 years !!! Cause, mystery ???? but it's scary.

In comparison aluminum and old with Alzheimer's are negligible.

What do you think??
0 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 17/05/10, 22:34

Humor mode on:
"What is a harmless product? Something that has not yet been shown to be toxic."
Humor mode off

For each chemical substance is determined an "acceptable" dose which is assumed without too much harm to health: compromise between that of individuals and that of the economy!
As for the interactions between the various molecules ...

Our health system being almost exclusively * dedicated to the curative aspect, it is not surprising to observe both progress in the fight against the consequences and progress in the causes!

* In the "prevention" section, cancer screenings are counted, for example, which is absolutely not prevention since cancer can only be detected (theoretically) if it exists; this shows the profound deviance of medicine, which prefers to cure ** cancer than to avoid it !.

** In fact, the ideal expressed openly would be to transform cancer into a chronic disease ...
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
elephant
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6646
Registration: 28/07/06, 21:25
Location: Charleroi, center of the world ....
x 7




by elephant » 17/05/10, 23:15

Ahmed said:

this shows the deep deviance of the medicine which prefers to cure ** a cancer than to avoid it !.


Well yes, what: a healthy man does not report! : Mrgreen:
0 x
elephant Supreme Honorary éconologue PCQ ..... I'm too cautious, not rich enough and too lazy to really save the CO2! http://www.caroloo.be
User avatar
zorglub
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 501
Registration: 24/11/09, 10:12




by zorglub » 18/05/10, 09:08

radioactive water?
not new, in the 50s we advertised these radioactive waters (big brands today)
are they still? it would be good to control

ps: i will try to find the article

as for the rest, I am not surprised by the carelessness of certain mayors, who, as for the particular zones (zac, zup, plu ect) do anything!
we did not leave the inn .......;
0 x
every morning you look naked in a large ice after 3 minutes you will see that your home and your worst picture ......
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749




by sen-no-sen » 18/05/10, 16:04

"Water is life"

The multinationals take care of the rest ...

In France 100% of rivers are polluted (chemically, biologically, radio-actively ... the choice is yours ...).
The jackpot in the key is huge !!!
It is one of the many means of establishing the "control society" by making people totally dependent on transport, reprocessing, water purification companies ...
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
User avatar
Former Oceano
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 1571
Registration: 04/06/05, 23:10
Location: Lorraine - France
x 1




by Former Oceano » 18/05/10, 19:10

Nothing to do in theforum "New transport, technologies, policies or organizations" 8)

So I move.

Ha la la, there is always one to put the cayon :!:
0 x
[MODO Mode = ON]
Zieuter but do not think less ...
Peugeot Ion (VE), KIA Optime PHEV, VAE, no electric motorcycle yet...
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 19/05/10, 03:39

Message published on May 20 at 00:27.
--------------------------

Without making in the paradigm of the conspiracy theory (lol) the message of Ahmed brings on my part some reflections.

Is there a "progress" of the causes?
Ahmed wrote:Our health system being almost exclusively * dedicated to the curative aspect, it is not surprising to observe both progress in the fight against the consequences and a progress of causes!

lol. I am not sure I understood correctly. Is the "joke" mode still active? : Cheesy: Otherwise the situation is serious and it would have been necessary to put the word "progress" in inverted commas!
In any case what we see from another angle thanks to you Ahmed, is that the health system being what it is, the audacious interpretation that you have of it in the cause and effect relationship is quite mind-blowing (as usual in your approaches which will revisit the "semantics" as much as the logic, and question us!) ;–)

Do you not tell us somewhere that the obstinacy to concentrate - to treat only the effects (ie the curative) - and this in most of the cases (firefighter medicine) would amount to seeing the causes progress? ! In any case, it already has a name: iatrogenesis, and this can be seen in the purely physiological field of medicine as well as in the field of psychiatry or even upstream to that of culture!
A good part of the answers would lie on the fact of knowing if the progression of the causes would not also come (above all !!?) Of the individual responsibility? So it's up to everyone to pay attention to what they consume, play sports, do not expose themselves to dangers without protection, fasten their seat belts in the car, etc ...). Certainly it is true and it is essential, but is it enough? Because in the previous examples, we see to what extent it is especially the multiplication of causes that poses a problem. Therefore multiplication is an obstacle to the containment of their progress. I don't have a ready-made answer on this point, but I will try to clear the ground a little, to launch some ideas "to try to understand and see more clearly".

REACH and individual responsibility ...
Ahmed wrote:For each chemical substance is determined an "acceptable" dose which is assumed without too much harm to health: compromise between that of individuals and that of the economy!
As for the interactions between the various molecules.
..

It seems that this is quite clear. Following the problems of Bophal, of Basel chemistry which had dumped tons of chemicals in the waters of the Rhine, of Seveso, of POPs, the advance of infertility, the emergence of opportunistic diseases etc. It was clearly admitted that the curative almost absent in certain cases as much as the fight against the consequences * had led to a progression towards the causes since this prompted action by the European Commission, which had looked into the problem. Which resulted in REACH...>. But we did not leave the hostel, because it is not retroactive. Suffice to say that we are still sitting on a time bomb according to some experts. We tried to make the industry responsible ...
But even with REACH we are not immune to the dangerousness of pollutants and especially their unexpected crossing in the human body. The system chosen would always maintain a progression of causes for failure to anticipate.
*(in Bophal, the survivors would never have received the $ 192 million in compensation paid to the government by Union Carbide, people would continue to live on the unpolished site because they cannot afford to go elsewhere and to die there).

Codex Alimentarius and individual responsibility ... (in the food industry)
Here is an area where all the aspects of the previous point are expressed and which makes the aspect of "causal control" rather illusory if it were to be based exclusively on individual responsibility. (VS action on the causes). The consumer having become completely captive of the offer that is offered to him. He is deemed to trust the "system" and therefore has a choice only in the context of a biased offer.
By way of example, when one buys in supermarkets foodstuffs containing products which may prove to be toxic and / or dangerous in the long term for health (carcinogens, immunity inhibitors, etc.) and for which the services of health know very well the harm and the existence. We cannot say that it is irresponsible for the consumer to choose them. On the other hand, the system absolutely ensures that there is "progression" of causality since the terrain allows it (ie the introduction of omega-6 acids into margarines which are toxic because they are full of "trans" fatty acids even though 'they are sold in the most perfect legality ... for example)

Health system and individual responsibility ...
This is how the health care system works in many countries: you pay a premium for health insurance that is supposed to protect you against all risks. Isn't that as much a boon as a trap, when it comes to individual responsibility? If we had no protection, would we adopt the same social behavior? The same eating habits? Would parliaments pass the same laws with the same flippancy while letting the markets "regulate"? Would the development of "responsibility" towards oneself and others be the same? Of course not. There is much to rethink here. In this area the fight against the consequences is permanent, but the carelessness of the system is the breeding ground for the progression of the causes, often in unsuspected ways. And this is emphasized by the previous two points. It still seems that we are playing balancing on a thread and that making people believe that we have put a net below, could be enough to protect us. The temptations of transgressions are great.
To push the reasoning to its climax, we see the same phenomenon with car insurance, which until recently, drivers were taking advantage of a kind of impunity in the event of death due to road accidents. There the crumbling that you describe elsewhere, is not virtual, it becomes ... total! The curative aspect is reduced then to rehabilitation to see to the psychological support of those who remain ... Typical cases where the victim can become potentially guilty of not assuming the situation which happened to him unexpectedly (sometimes ground of predilection of psychiatry) . For a long time the causal relationship in these situations ... we didn't care! Putting it on the account of fatality!
One of the two greatest betrayals in this system of making victims feel guilty is especially when a "client" becomes a bad risk for his "insurance" company ... which then refuses to apply the principle of mutuality (yet the very raison d'être of insurance) and which then turns to an "administrative" way of "cleaning up the problem". Needless to say what proportion this took in some countries, to the point that it was necessary to reform the health system as Pdt Obama is trying to do.
How indeed could we hope in such a mixture of genres to promote a little pedagogy?

Prevention and individual responsibility ...
Ahmed wrote:* In the "prevention" section, cancer screenings are counted, for example, which is absolutely not prevention since cancer can only be detected (theoretically) if it exists; this shows the profound deviance of medicine which prefers to cure cancer ** rather than avoid it!.

It is probably in this area where the worst rub is and where we are swimming in the middle of a paradox: we call prevention in the strict sense, that which is interested in "individual responsibility" and prevention in the broad sense, that which INCLUDES all the repressive aspects of prevention (which ranges from the increase in insurance premiums to the ticket for not wearing a seat belt, including deprivation of liberty or the obligation of care ...). This point clearly shows the paradox between the causal relationship and the resignation of the system which can no longer provide a satisfactory solution due to the ceiling ... It was Robert King Merton, in 1949, who had given logical reasoning. He had observed a strategic anomaly that had not been anticipated, and which could be "at the origin of a new theory". It seems to me that this is a bit like how it works but I could be wrong. We start from a fundamental bad reasoning, then we build new opportunistic theories, one after the other, because of an endemic lack of anticipation.
This is how screening should not be part of prevention, but the emphasis should be placed upstream as early prevention on the ground, which can potentially lead to illness (food, healthy lifestyle, etc.). ).
However, there is a list of tests that can effectively detect even before cancer is declared. This list and the results of the tests which concern it, are absolutely not transmitted to the patients. I had discovered its existence by buying computer equipment from a health center. The list was stupidly stuck to the very frame of the screen as a "sticky note" ...
And the debate on the incidentality of the causes, the causal relationship, the reasons for which they "progress" or not, the effectiveness and the follow-up of the preventive treatments, the ethical questions, the psychological approach relating thereto etc: All these questions are far from having found universal answers and will not be ready to be, as long as there is the state of gain and beforehand the cognitive-behavioral conditions which make everything probable ... essential cause? Obviously, the barriers are receding, but rather than seeing the expected results, we see above all an ever greater complexity of the world, which ends up creating such barriers that they prevent de facto to achieve the progress objectives envisaged in a sort of continuation of the myth of Sisyphus.
Ahmed wrote:In fact, the ideal expressed openly would be to transforming cancer into a chronic disease ...
You are not wrong to say it, but on the one hand is it deliberate or conditioned? And on the other hand it is very unlikely that someone will ever do this with great certainty as to the "result" of the operation (even from a seasoned Machiavelli). If only because it is very (too) difficult to "control the metabolism of patients" like that. Not all of them strictly follow the treatments given to them (for example) and especially the metabolic response of the body can change completely, from one patient to another ... It is also almost impossible to know at which crossing of products the doctor might have to do in a patient's body, for example. Finally, it should be remembered that the human being himself is very imperfect ... which makes him a relatively unpredictable subject ... And obviously once again, everything is in the field of the "progression" of the causes.

Suggestion
The working and study hypothesis in this case: accidentology. Gather all the incidental and temporal parameters for an "accident" to take place ........... and it will take place!
8) :D
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Go back to “Water management, plumbing and sanitation. Pumping, drilling, filtration, wells, recovery ... "

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 120 guests