Bottled water for all, all the time?
BMJ 2016; 352 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i1214 (Published 01 March 2016) Cite this as: BMJ 2016;352:i1214
All rapid responses
Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed. Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles. The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not including references and author details. We will no longer post responses that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
What about the risk of oestrogenic substances from plastic bottles leaching into the water they contain? How often are plastics used for bottling water checked for this? At the rate that plastic bottles of water are being used by both men and women, they might not only pollute the environment but also contribute to a variety of illnesses (possibly including male and female cancers). Some workers consider that pregnant women should avoid exposure to these plastics. Could long term exposure to oestrogenic effects also exacerbate emotional over-reactions in some people? Reusable glass bottles may be a better option.
Gutman A, Shoenfeld Y. BISPHENOL A--AN INFAMOUS MOLECULE Harefuah. 2015 Nov;154(11):708-10, 742, 741.
Chevalier N, Fénichel P. Endocrine disruptors: new players in the pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes? Diabetes Metab. 2015 Apr;41(2):107-15. doi: 10.1016/j.diabet.2014.09.005. Epub 2014 Nov 20.
Gowder SJ .Nephrotoxicity of bisphenol A (BPA)--an updated review. Curr Mol Pharmacol. 2013 Nov
Wolstenholme JT, Goldsby JA, Rissman EF. Transgenerational effects of prenatal bisphenol A on social recognition. Horm Behav. 2013 Nov;64(5):833-9. doi: 10.1016/j.yhbeh.2013.09.007. Epub 2013 Oct 5.
Lazúrová Z, Lazúrová I. The environmental estrogen bisphenol A and its effects on the human organism]. Vnitr Lek. 2013 Jun;59(6):466-71.
Competing interests: No competing interests
Water is a fascinating subject. Compared to other substances water shows many properties that are abnormal to the laws of physics as we created them (1,2)
For one thing, water has a phenomenal memory!
It was Wolfgang Ludwig who showed that water contains the frequency information of all the substances it has been in contact with, including those of water ‘purification’… More importantly, he showed that it is not the chemicals, toxins and other impurities in the drinking water that may be harmful to the body — it is the frequency information of all these substances that speak to our cells.
Dr Ludwig: “Water charged with harmful substances such as we normally find today in our wells, which is contaminated with lead, cadmium, nitrates and many other harmful substances, is certainly chemically purified by water treatment plants and rid of bacteria, yet, despite all this, this water continues to display certain electromagnetic frequencies; oscillations which can be attributed to these harmful substances. So, even after treatment, water contains certain signals which can be detrimental or harmful to our health.”
Jacques Benveniste not only involuntarily showed how homeopathy works, but also that he could send the frequency information of a specific substance per email to someplace else, where it would generate the same effect when put into water. (3,4) Of course these findings ruined Benveniste’s life before they could ruin Big Pharma…
Buddha said: “Three things cannot long stay hidden: the sun, the stars and the truth.”
Luc Montaigner showed that water carrying only the electromagnetic signature of a DNA sequence can make a replica of the sequence out of simple building blocks…(5)
I think it is time the scientific community accepts that Mother Nature has aspects that will not fit into their scientific little boxes.
One of the substances in the bottled water will be bisphenol A, the xeno-estrogen the will keep the plastic flexible…
1. http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/physical_anomalies.html)
2. http://www.idea2ic.com/FUN_DOCUMENTS/anomalies%20of%20water.pdf
3. http://www.acquaphi.com/jacques_benveniste_water_memory.html
4. http://www.csicop.org/si/show/e-mailed_antigens_and_iridiumrsquos_irides...
5. http://www.i-sis.org.uk/DNA_sequence_reconstituted_from_Water_Memory.php
Competing interests: No competing interests
All drinking water should be filtered to remove toxins.
Professor Jonathan R Kerr is so right but why did nobody else think of it?
In 1969-72, I used the scanning electron microscope (SEM) at Sydney University. The technician told me that soon after the SEM was installed it broke down. The European manufacturer asked for a sample of the water used in the cooling system. (The University used tap water.) Soon, a letter from the manufacturer arrived, saying, “This is not water for human consumption”. The University had to install a proper filter.
Some time ago, despite mass protests of people in the Blue Mountains (where I live) against fluoridation of drinking water, the Health Department just barged in and started putting fluoride in our water. Many people, including myself, installed a reverse osmosis filter. When the filter business performed a routine change of my filter for the first time I could see just how much muck was in the tap water. And that was just the visible muck.
Not much appears to have changed with tap water, but I am sure that the water that is used to cool instruments and machinery is properly filtered; otherwise they would not work.
People do not seem to matter.
Competing interests: No competing interests
The environmental impact of excess bottled water consumption is well stated, however, the potential health impacts of either tap or bottled water consumption have not been considered.
Toxins in tap water include arsenic, aluminium, fluoride, trace amounts of discarded medications, chlorine and chlorine disinfection by-products. Arsenic is carcinogenic and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reduced the maximum level of arsenic permitted in drinking water from 50 to 10 µg/L. The US Natural Resources Defense Council estimates that as many as 56 million Americans living in 25 states drink water with arsenic at unsafe levels (http://www.nrdc.org/water/drinking/qarsenic.asp). Aluminium has been linked to Alzheimer´s disease and several other problems (1). Fluoride is a neurotoxin (2). Leaching of water through landfills which contain discarded medications results in their presence in drinking water (3), the effects of which remain undetermined. Chlorine and chlorine disinfection by-products are also present in tap water, both of which are toxic to mammalian physiology (4).
However, bottled water is not necessarily better, as much of it is actually bottled tap water. In addition, drinking any water from a plastic bottle is hazardous due to leaching of bisphenol A (BPA) which is a hormone disruptor (estrogen mimic) which has been associated with multiple health problems, including early puberty, risk of obesity and various cancers (5). There are additional problems with distilled, alkaline and ´vitamin´ waters.
To preserve health and prevent disease, all drinking water should be filtered. The best type of filter is a granular-activated carbon block filter (as recommended by the EPA), which removes most harmful chemicals and metals. Filtered water is best carried in bottles made of steel or glass, but not plastic.
References
1. Yegambaram M, Manivannan B, Beach TG, Halden RU. Role of environmental contaminants in the etiology of Alzheimer's disease: a review. Curr Alzheimer Res. 2015;12(2):116-46.
2. Choi AL, Sun G, Zhang Y, Grandjean P. Developmental fluoride neurotoxicity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Environ Health Perspect. 2012 Oct;120(10):1362-8.
3. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3099454/British-drinking-water-ma...
4. Nieuwenhuijsen MJ, Toledano MB, Elliott P. Uptake of chlorination disinfection by-products; a review and a discussion of its implications for exposure assessment in epidemiological studies. J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol. 2000 Nov-Dec;10(6 Pt 1):586-99.
5. Gao H, Yang BJ, Li N, Feng LM, Shi XY, Zhao WH, Liu SJ. Bisphenol A and hormone-associated cancers: current progress and perspectives. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015 Jan;94(1):e211.
Competing interests: No competing interests
Dear Editors
Prof Kamerow described a commonly seen trend of the purchase and use of bottled water in social settings in the real world in contrast to reusing bottles refilled with tap water.
I would like to report an even more disturbing trend happening in many public hospitals in Sydney in the last decade, in which patients are supplied with new 500 mL bottled water up to 5 times a day with meals or tea snacks. Whatever happened to nurses and kitchen helpers filling up plastic jugs that come with plastic tumblers and a straw, no one really knows but somehow someone high up in the food chain decides to spend good money on these luxuries while hospital staff and patients put up with budgetary belt-tightening.
Typical reasons heard from lower echelon managers include
Safer processed thus cleaner water for patients (Sydney water some 20 years ago struck by Giadia contamination news in the water supply)
Frees up time for nurses and kitchen helpers who need to spend a finite (though short) time in filling the water jugs
Bottled water less likely to create a mess when accidentally tipped over compared to water jugs
You can estimate better how much water the patient actually consume by telling how many empty bottles per day
Bottled water portrays a sense of value for money (ie freebie) for public patients who did not have to pay out of pocket (ie something for nothing). Some patients actually ask their visiting family members to bring unopened bottles home.
No cleaning or sterilisation required for disposable bottles compared to water jugs and tumblers. Thus cheaper (!)
Patients allegedly can drink from bottles easier than from tumblers or through straws
(These are various reasons collated over the last 10 years; I am not aware of any single directive from NSW state ministry of Health that justifies or encourages the use of bottled water, but I am happy to be corrected on this)
Such practices normalised the use of new bottled water in the regular Australian punter rather than reusing used bottles. Some commercial companies even took the "environmentally friendly" stance by selling reusable plastic bottles (all aesthetically designed and excitingly coloured) with water filters for tap water use; they are pretty popular on supermarket and sports shops in Australia.
I suppose Heaven will just have to protect those who are either unenlighted or unable to afford the AUD 15 - 30 to purchase reusable water bottles with a filter.
I wonder if the same hospital administrator factored in the cost of sending bags of empty bottles to be sent to land fill (garbage disposals charge by volume not weight), but no, I was reassured that someone did their maths.
I doubt very much Mother Earth was on that hospital committee that approved bottled water though
Competing interests: No competing interests
Water is life, and the water cycle is the fountain of life. Drenching and quenching, water hydrates and animates, then liquifies and purifies life's essential and existential, but unmentionable, stenches.
Competing interests: No competing interests
I quite agree with this article. However, there is one context where bottled water can be useful (even if the bottle only refills tap water). Patients in hospital who are disabled and find it difficult to reach for a glass of water should be given a bottle instead. This is easy to manage, and will prevent the serious dehydration that we have all heard about in hospitals.
Competing interests: No competing interests
Re: Bottled water for all, all the time?
Risk of infections from reusable water bottles
Reusable water bottles, although popular, are a potential breeding ground for harmful bacteria and viruses. This potential hazard might be going unreported. Additionally, thorough and regular cleaning of bottles may not be widespread. Furthermore, bottles with harder to clean areas, or added extras like straws, pose added challenges in preventing growth of microorganisms, and some bottles are not dishwasher safe.
Some groups of individuals, including children and the elderly, will be especially vulnerable to waterborne infections from organisms such as Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus and E. coli, and common symptoms might include nausea, diarrhoea, intestinal cramping, stomach pains, and gastrointestinal problems leading to dehydration. However, metallic water bottles are also used to store other liquids including soups and hot drinks, which might further exacerbate the risk of bacterial growth in particular.
Manufacturer do not consistently appear to include detailed information about washing of reusable bottles or warnings about possible infections. Outlining potential health risks, and instructions for proper and regular cleaning of bottles, should be standard practice with recommendations for regular cleaning for safe use.
To reduce the probability of bacteria growth, we recommended washing bottles daily with soap and water, scrubbing hard to reach areas ensuring they are thoroughly cleaned, and keeping the bottles dry when not in use.
Hafsah Nasir, Alex Stonehouse, Joginder Anand, Nirmal Vadgama, Jamal Nasir
Competing interests: No competing interests