"gardenlen" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 11:34:34 GMT, "0tterbot" wrote:

snipped

what pollutants are they?

snipped
kylie

all those household chemicals used on a daily basis.

all the residue in peoples pee from all the prescription medicines
they take

all the medical including low grade radiation residues from hospital
waste including chemotherapy.

all the residues from light/medium industry that go into the sewer
system least of which are the heavy metals and acids.

plastisizers

and the cocktail of chemical residues mixed together make up dioxins
which are in the end product.

the hard to neutralise viruses, bird\flu, bse/cjd, hepatitis. look at
the rise in legionaires disease from people using potting mixes since
they started putting treated and composted sewerage humus in the
mixes.

hormones mainly estrogen.

and probably some we don't even know about. notice i haven't mentioned
pathogens, because yes i believe they can somewaht easily deal with
them, though we would need assurances that there is a safety valve for
when the system breaks down as it does more often than people may
realise.

and all the interviews i've seen "they" never want to talk about the
above issues.

and what are the checks and balances where communitites have allowed
this to happen? was the administrator transparent in saying that
certain things could be there? have they trialed this so they can
create some parameters so that when problems begin to occur they can
address them?

my bet is the community just swallowed the need for greed, and didn't
seek assurances from those in charge.

like i said my bet is those in charge aren't drinking it, and that
those who do have had the wool pulled over their eyes.

it's the accumlative combined effect the legacy which is going to be
for your childrens/children yet to come? and when they find that what
they did has corrupted the fresh water system then what? there won't
be an effective clean up.

i didn't say what i said to cause a debate i had hoped it may open
some eyes to at least ask the rude questions, and if you are happy
drinking it then far be it from me to convince you otherwise. and we
are going to pay money to drink "it".

there might even be a link on my page to something about sewerage
sludge.

i think you mean "sewage" sludge :-)

i'm not understanding what you say the problem is. your other post implied
that water is put into the dam _without_ being cleaned to a potable degree -
which i should think would be illegal. otoh, many places recycle water to a
degree considered well potable (in which case i'm not sure what the problem
is for them, or how the two issues are related).

for example, people who get their water from a river, rather than a dam,
have (in theory) exactly the same situation of "stuff" being in the water
(i'd love to know though how the water could be full of oestrogen!!!)
because it's been used before up-river & ultimately goes back in (as well as
from the dawn of time through precipitiation). are you saying you're against
all water recycling because in your town it's not good enough, or are you
saying no water recycling is good enough, or are you saying water recycling
in your town should be better, or what? since all water is recycled one way
or another, your objection just isn't clear to me. of course we all object
to industrial chemicals in the water system, but that's a different issue to
pre-supposing it's all still there by the time someone drinks it.
?

if there's just not enough water in an area, what's the (short or medium
term) solution beyond recycling it, anyway? if you pipe in water from a
river in another state, it's still the same - been used before by god knows
who, but is nevertheless still potable, but you've used more energy to get
it.
kylie

Farm1 wrote:


By the time we reach adulthood most of us have already had more then
our fair share of pollutants and still continue to get them every day
from our food and the atmosphere without even thinking about the
water.

which is probably why lots of your contemporaries are now suffering from
a myriad of weird and wonderful dieseases/conditions.


And some very nasty chemicals do have some positive side effects -
fluoride being one.

lol, there is no scientific proof that mass feeding of flouride is
beneficial. It is simply a mathematical correlation without a causitive
explanation, like wearing underpants is deadly because everyone who ears
underpants dies. there is also evidence that improved education has the
same effect.

FYI, Canadians are now starting to work against giving flouride to
children because of an increase in bone cancers.

It seems that like DDT, we had to wait a few decades to discover the
picture.



I can't stomach whinging about no water for lawns when I know of one
community where the hairdressers are saying to clients that they can't
wash their hair so come to the appointment with washed hair. And the
hairdressers are only the tip of the iceberg. Everyone in that
community is hurting and going broke. We'll leave this drought with
devastated rural communities.

Well, it must be a real drought if it is finally starting to affect the
hair dressers {:-),or are they just like Qantas and working out how to
use adverse conditions to improve their profit?

Small rural communities have always suffered when the farms suffer. It
is one of the tradeoffs of living in a rural community.

On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 00:14:42 +0000, 0tterbot wrote:

(i'd love to know though how the water could be full of oestrogen!!!)

Apparently it's there from the urine of all you women on the contraceptive
pill. This one of the big dangers touted by a regular player on the "no"
side of recentish debate (and referendum) in Toowoomba here in Qld.

Poor fellow was apparently concerned about growing breasts from drinking
recycled water that might have had female urine, and thus oestrogen, in it.

Charles
--
If some days are diamonds and some days are stone....
Then some days I live in a quarry!!

0tterbot wrote:


i'm not understanding what you say the problem is. your other post implied
that water is put into the dam _without_ being cleaned to a potable degree -
which i should think would be illegal.

legal/illegal or acceptable/unacceptable may be equally decided by the
dillution effect. sydney Water is allowed to deliver the spores of
debilitating diseases to their customers providing the spore count is
below a certain level.

OPs point is that Tertiary treated water can still contains a lot of
chemicals. If people want to minimise the risks, then they need to
expensively trast the water themselves by triple filter systesm, etc.

There would nowhere in Australia where the OPs concerns would not also
apply to rainwater. Hence my poiting out about PCB migrating to the Artic.

Charles wrote:

Poor fellow was apparently concerned about growing breasts from drinking
recycled water that might have had female urine, and thus oestrogen, in it.

It sounds funny, but there is a serious scientific claim behind it.
considering that it is commonly said that the water from the thames has
already passed through seven sets of Kindeys before it reaches the sea.

On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 14:20:23 +1000, Terryc
wrote:

Charles wrote:

Poor fellow was apparently concerned about growing breasts from drinking
recycled water that might have had female urine, and thus oestrogen, in it.

It sounds funny, but there is a serious scientific claim behind it.
considering that it is commonly said that the water from the thames has
already passed through seven sets of Kindeys before it reaches the sea.

This made me giggle. I realise that it was probably a typo and you
meant "kidneys", but as it stands it reads as if each drop of Thames
water has passed through seven kindergartens before reaching the sea!

Tish

"Farm1" please@askifyouwannaknow wrote in message
...


Some people just take longer in the shower because they like to wash
more
thoroughly, or slower, or like to rinse more. But to have it going
just
while brushing your teeth??!!!!!!!!

That comment is totally illogical. You seem to think it's OK to take
longer to wash but not OK to be a quicker washer and to also do one's
teeth at the same time. And I'm not wasting any water than any other
person can use. I collect my own and have never yet had to buy water.

It's never OK to waste water, whether it's for a longer wash or tooth
brushing. But the only person you can change is yourself. And you can
believe what you want to help you sleep at night.

Jen

"gardenlen" wrote in message
...
you can have it rob,

obviously the chemical residues in the stuff along with possible
viruses is of no concern. then i suppose if it is going into a river
that gets flushed maybe no worries.

ours is going into our dams no flushing there just years of
accumulated pollutants.

to me it seems like an indictment that in this modern world any
community should have to drink recycled sewerage water.

our problem, at least in Hamilton, is not the availability of water but the
cost of getting hold of it and disposing of it. We have a nice big river
that flows right through town. Increasing city population places pressure on
the existing facilites which have to be enlarged to keep pace. That costs
$$. If we decreased our consumption by 20% that would save the city a mint.
The quality of water in the river has actually improved in recent times I
believe.

rob

"Terryc" wrote in message
Farm1 wrote:


By the time we reach adulthood most of us have already had more
then
our fair share of pollutants and still continue to get them every
day
from our food and the atmosphere without even thinking about the
water.

which is probably why lots of your contemporaries are now suffering
from
a myriad of weird and wonderful dieseases/conditions.

That no doubt, plus lifestyle choices, like drinking, smoking, poor
food choices.


And some very nasty chemicals do have some positive side effects -
fluoride being one.

lol, there is no scientific proof that mass feeding of flouride is
beneficial.

I think there is enough.


FYI, Canadians are now starting to work against giving flouride to
children because of an increase in bone cancers.

Which could also be related to the fact that the children are wearing
underwear........

I can't stomach whinging about no water for lawns when I know of
one
community where the hairdressers are saying to clients that they
can't
wash their hair so come to the appointment with washed hair. And
the
hairdressers are only the tip of the iceberg. Everyone in that
community is hurting and going broke. We'll leave this drought
with
devastated rural communities.

Well, it must be a real drought if it is finally starting to affect
the
hair dressers {:-),or are they just like Qantas and working out how
to
use adverse conditions to improve their profit?

Of course it's a real drought. Where have you been for the last 6
years?

"Jen" wrote in message
"Farm1" please@askifyouwannaknow wrote in message

Some people just take longer in the shower because they like to
wash
more
thoroughly, or slower, or like to rinse more. But to have it
going
just
while brushing your teeth??!!!!!!!!

That comment is totally illogical. You seem to think it's OK to
take
longer to wash but not OK to be a quicker washer and to also do
one's
teeth at the same time. And I'm not wasting any water than any
other
person can use. I collect my own and have never yet had to buy
water.

It's never OK to waste water, whether it's for a longer wash or
tooth
brushing. But the only person you can change is yourself. And you
can
believe what you want to help you sleep at night.

I sleep very well thank you.

On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 14:20:23 +1000, Terryc wrote:

Charles wrote:
Poor fellow was apparently concerned about growing breasts from drinking
recycled water that might have had female urine, and thus oestrogen, in it.

It sounds funny, but there is a serious scientific claim behind it.

What? A serious scientific claim behind the link between oestrogen in
recycled water and male breasts? Where pray tell?

considering that it is commonly said that the water from the thames has
already passed through seven sets of Kidneys before it reaches the sea.

If this is true, and most likely it is, then the lack of London
males growing unexplained breasts surely puts the lie to that particular
scaremongering pseudo-factoid (that oestrogen in urine could lead to male
breast growing).

The concept of water passing through several kidneys before reaching the
sea makes sense to me in any long standing area. In an city/town i, say,
Europe that stands on a river, they are/have been drinking the treated
effluent of the town upstream for centuries.

And the nay-sayers claim there are no long-term studies...maybe not, but
I think the sheer weight of anecdotal evidence has to tip the balance.

Charles
--
If some days are diamonds and some days are stone....
Then some days I live in a quarry!!

"Charles" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 00:14:42 +0000, 0tterbot wrote:

(i'd love to know though how the water could be full of oestrogen!!!)

Apparently it's there from the urine of all you women on the contraceptive
pill.

well you're clearly overestimating 1: the number of women who take the pill
at all, and 2: the amount of oestrogen which is in the pill anyway (both
progestogen and oestrogen in the modern pill are mere fractions of the
amounts which used to be in the older varieties - and yet no men were
claiming to be growing breasts from stuff in the water in the 1970s when the
pill was greatly more popular than it is now, were they?).

in short, if you're actually serious with that statement, you might need to
just talk yourself down, i think...

This one of the big dangers touted by a regular player on the "no"
side of recentish debate (and referendum) in Toowoomba here in Qld.

the naysayers in toowoomba didn't acheive anything beyond making everyone in
toowoomba look like a barking ninny, and they still haven't solved their
water problem. perhaps they are unrepresentative?

Poor fellow was apparently concerned about growing breasts from drinking
recycled water that might have had female urine, and thus oestrogen, in
it.

yeah? what happens to us from drinking man-wee? do we grow beards and chest
hair?
kylie

"Farm1" please@askifyouwannaknow wrote in message
...
I've got no sympathy with whingers who live in the city and complain
about the nasties in their water or the lack of it or anything about
it. They need to get off their arses and see what is happening in
some of our rural communities. It's simply appalling and sucking the
guts out of the country. I know you've lived in the country so you
have some idea, but most people are simply clueless except for how it
impacts on them as the water comes readily from their taps.

since i got here (the country) i've really noticed what a gap there is
between city people & country people. sadly, it's the majority (city people)
who just haven't got the first idea about anything! but the onus is on
country people to stop whingeing & educate them. the two lots are entirely
interdependent, but you wouldn't know that from observing them.

I can't stomach whinging about no water for lawns when I know of one
community where the hairdressers are saying to clients that they can't
wash their hair so come to the appointment with washed hair. And the
hairdressers are only the tip of the iceberg. Everyone in that
community is hurting and going broke. We'll leave this drought with
devastated rural communities.

i agree, but equally, now is the time for rural peeps to be rethinking how
they do things. i realise they ARE rethinking how to do things, of course,
but frankly they can't rethink soon enough. they need to have rethought 5
years ago, because implementing change takes time. but 5 years ago they
thought they were a protected species & change hasn't been fast enough.
climate change & global warming were known phenomena 5 years ago; i find it
sad things need to become critical before people rethink some of their
methodology, but there you have it, it's the way it's always been.

i think this post sounds like i'm really down on farmers & of course i'm
not. the whole country needs a reality check while they're sitting with
their air-conditioning on worrying about climate change. it defies belief,
really. i blame the government g
kylie

I could be taking the wrong end of the stick here, but you do know that I
was being sarcastic in my original post don't you? I think the man in
question in Toowoomba was/is a fool. Perhaps I was too subtle for you?

On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 10:20:23 +0000, 0tterbot wrote:

"Charles" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 00:14:42 +0000, 0tterbot wrote:

(i'd love to know though how the water could be full of oestrogen!!!)

Apparently it's there from the urine of all you women on the contraceptive
pill.

well you're clearly overestimating 1: the number of women who take the pill
at all, and 2: the amount of oestrogen which is in the pill anyway (both
progestogen and oestrogen in the modern pill are mere fractions of the
amounts which used to be in the older varieties - and yet no men were
claiming to be growing breasts from stuff in the water in the 1970s when the
pill was greatly more popular than it is now, were they?).

I am not overestimating anything, I was relaying to you who asked the
original q re how did the oestrogen get in the water, the reason given by
those who make this claim.

in short, if you're actually serious with that statement, you might need to
just talk yourself down, i think...

Sorry, I thought it was obvious that I was *not* serious in that
statement, but was merely telling you the statement being made by some
who, unfortunately, are serious.

Poor fellow was apparently concerned about growing breasts from
drinking recycled water that might have had female urine, and thus
oestrogen, in it.

Now y'see I figured that this was probably the big give away, the use of
"poor fellow" to me just screams sarcasm, but as I said above, I must be
too subtle, laconic and dry (no pun intended given the discussion re
water! :-) )for my own good.

I think Toowoomba residents missed a good opportunity, but one must not
discount the role both the local media (by refusal to use neutral and
noninflammatory terminology in its reporting) *and* the Federal Govt (by
demanding that a referendum had to be held and won in order to get Fed
funding for the project) had in the defeat of the referendum.

Charles
--
If some days are diamonds and some days are stone....
Then some days I live in a quarry!!

"0tterbot" wrote in message
"Farm1" please@askifyouwannaknow wrote in message

I've got no sympathy with whingers who live in the city and
complain
about the nasties in their water or the lack of it or anything
about
it. They need to get off their arses and see what is happening in
some of our rural communities. It's simply appalling and sucking
the
guts out of the country. I know you've lived in the country so
you
have some idea, but most people are simply clueless except for how
it
impacts on them as the water comes readily from their taps.

since i got here (the country) i've really noticed what a gap there
is
between city people & country people. sadly, it's the majority (city
people)
who just haven't got the first idea about anything! but the onus is
on
country people to stop whingeing & educate them. the two lots are
entirely
interdependent, but you wouldn't know that from observing them.

Having lived in the country for the majority of my life, I strongly
think that country people have more idea of the interdependance and
the realities of life than city people do. We've been in drought for
6 whole years but it is only now that the major metro papers seem to
have woken up about it and only then because the cost of food is
really going to bite the city residents. Lord knows where they
thought (if they did think at all) of where their food came from.
Water and how much of it is available has really been much lower down
the agenda because in comparison to the country, our major cities are
relativeley well supplied and taking it from miles and miles away into
the cities..

I can't stomach whinging about no water for lawns when I know of
one
community where the hairdressers are saying to clients that they
can't
wash their hair so come to the appointment with washed hair. And
the
hairdressers are only the tip of the iceberg. Everyone in that
community is hurting and going broke. We'll leave this drought
with
devastated rural communities.

i agree, but equally, now is the time for rural peeps to be
rethinking how
they do things. i realise they ARE rethinking how to do things, of
course,
but frankly they can't rethink soon enough. they need to have
rethought 5
years ago, because implementing change takes time. but 5 years ago
they
thought they were a protected species & change hasn't been fast
enough.
climate change & global warming were known phenomena 5 years ago; i
find it
sad things need to become critical before people rethink some of
their
methodology, but there you have it, it's the way it's always been.

They've been doing soemthing about it for many more than 5 years with
a few exceptions (like Cubbie).

Farmers were talking about Global warming and climate change long
before the bulk of the population. Only the real lunatic city fringe
were talking about those things when I knew of dead boring and very
conservative farmers who'd noticed the impact on their land. They had
not only started talking about it but were also doing something about
it. It all started with dry land salinity problems anfdGod knows
farmers have been working on that problem for at least the last 15-20
years..

i think this post sounds like i'm really down on farmers & of course
i'm
not. the whole country needs a reality check while they're sitting
with
their air-conditioning on worrying about climate change. it defies
belief,
really. i blame the government g

:-)) Well don't we all. But it is a long and not well publicised
battle. If people don't buy or read the rural newspapers or follow
rural issues then they certainly don't see or know of what is
happening. Farmers are **** poor at getting their issues across to
the wider population and I'm not sure if that is because farmers are
such a conservative bunch or because the rest of the population would
rather watch idiot shows on TV to finding out what could come around
and bite them on the arse or what it is.