Flood water

[karen2205]

Am I right in thinking that flood water could be drunk if it was filtered and then purified with water purifying tablets/solution?

I'm shocked that bottled water isn't suitable for babies. You'd have thought at least one manufacturer of bottled water would bottle water with sufficiently low trace elements that it could be used for babies.

I'm not surprised at people hoarding water/taking more than their 'fair' share. Water is such a essential resource that people are going to fight about it if they've not got enough. Human nature, the survival instinct and all that. The time to be stockpiling water is at some point when there is no imminent danger of its loss.

Comments

[cultureofdoubt.livejournal.com]

I don't think it's ever an optimal solution. And using tablets makes water taste awful I hear - it really is a last resort thing.

[arkady.livejournal.com]

The tablets aren't so bad if you leave the water overnight so the chlorine generated by the tablets has a chance to evapourate off, but yes - it's a last-resort thing.

[evath.livejournal.com]

lots of tablets, lots of results. I'm sure plenty of them aren't good for babies. As for boiling water, it doesn't sterilise that well anway so thats not great for babies anyway. I've only seen it suggested for partially contaminated water e.g. flood water in the mains. Where chlorine etc is already helping, I guess.

Certainly I've seen stuff grow in media after autoclaving which is something like 12-15 mins under pressure at 130 C. Which is considered sterile. But that only aims to removes bacteria not any toxins. Boiling in a kettle is nowhere near as efficient.

Since we have the option of bowsers for water, the risks are a lot lower using it from them. It's the best choice and I assume with the lowest risks, so why use anything else?

As for bottled water I did a quick pub med search and people here are just commenting on the sodium content for babies.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=ShowDetailView&TermToSearch=1662352&ordinalpos=2&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

"For babies under 4 months of age, it is better to use bottled water with a low mineral content (nitrates less than 15 mg/l). " Is quoted, so I'm guessing it's not that simple.

To sides to the coin though another paper claims drinking mineral water with higher magnesium content would lower cot deaths:

"Some data support the hypothesis that magnesium deficiency contributes to SIDS [cot death]. "

Complex area of debate it would seem so the choice of giving simple advice wins out. I'm guessing nearly every salt in that water has a paper on it effects which could be hyped and modified to prove a point.

Also I don't remember water purification kits being that cheap.

[hairyears.livejournal.com]

Osmotic loading is the danger - overall 'salts' (not just sodium) below 20 is mandatory for small babies. This danger is immediate, unlike (say) nitrates, which have a cumulative effect over time: water containing 15mg/L would be acceptable as an emergency measure for a couple of weeks.

[evath.livejournal.com]

I agree.

Though more of my point is it's complex, and the simple option is the way forward. You also have to remember the press can just pull out a paper like that and use it for hysteria. My point wasn't trying to say you can or you can't, more they're using a solution that works for them politically.