Everyday we read about new things being discovered in our water.� Pesticides and Nitrates from runoff in our lakes and streams. Even Seagulls have been blamed for polluting our lakes and streams. In some older communities they still have lead pipes!

If you think that buying bottled water is the way to go, think about this. If you are making a pot of spaghetti, where are you going to get the water for it?� �Will you use that $1.25 bottle of water that you just lugged in from the grocery store or the $1.50 a gallon water that is delivered every week or two?� I doubt it. But with a Reverse Osmosis Water Purifier you won't think twice about it. I have heard some say that you are only boiling the noodles in it. True but they do grow over 100% and that growth is from the water being absorbed. Another thought here is this; how much water evaporates into the air during the boiling process. That is distilled water being taken away, making the remaining PPM (Parts Per Million) of contaminates in the pot higher.

Do you have a service that delivers 5 gallon bottles? The next time you change that bottle put your hand in the reservoir and feel the slim in the dispenser.� From the first day that you started using that dispenser bacteria has been growing. The top of those bottles are handled many times by many people and the contamination starts.� This no so with the RO system,�it is never touches air until you use it. Man never touches it. It stays in the same environment that it came from, no outside contamination.

Do you refill your water bottles at the store?� Do you sanitize your bottles before filling them?� Do you know if the water system at the store is serviced? If you don't sanitize your bottles, you are looking for trouble from bacteria and viruses. Does anyone in the house drink from the bottles?� I know that sounds bad but it is more common than not.

RO water is cheap, only pennies a gallon. It is handy, always at your fingertips. �It is the best water you can get for your home or business.��

If you have a link that you think is relevent, please forward it to us at John@5starwater.com

WASHINGTON (AP) - The debate about perchlorate contamination in drinking water is getting more heated as environmentalists object to a report claiming the widespread toxin is far less dangerous than was thought.

A National Academy of Sciences panel said Monday that perchlorate, a toxic chemical used in rocket fuel and explosives, is safe for consumption at levels 20 times the standard being considered by the Environmental Protection Agency.

The study is expected to influence the EPA as it develops its first national standard for perchlorate in drinking water. But environmentalists contended such a high standard could endanger children's health while letting defense contractors off the hook for cleanup costs.

"Wherever this standard is applied, most perchlorate contamination sites will be wiped off the map," said Lenny Siegel, director of the Center for Public Environmental Oversight in Mountain View, Calif. "Millions of children and pregnant women will continue to be guinea pigs in the great perchlorate exposure experiment."

The study comes after years of disagreement over how dangerous it is for people to drink water tainted with perchlorate, a pervasive leftover of Cold War defense manufacturing that has been found in drinking water in 35 states. The chemical, which leaches easily into groundwater from defense and manufacturing sites, can inhibit thyroid function and is considered particularly dangerous to children.

While the chemical also is found in nature, the panel said its presence in the environment primarily comes from the manufacture and use of rocket fuels as well as explosives and fireworks.

The NAS panel recommended a level for safe human consumption that translates to approximately 20 parts per billion in drinking water. Two years ago, the EPA issued a preliminary recommendation of 1 part per billion.

"The committee disagrees with EPA's conclusion and thinks that perchlorate exposure is unlikely to lead to thyroid tumors in humans," the panel said in a statement accompanying its report.

The academy study was ordered by the Bush administration in 2003 to review the stricter standard the EPA had proposed in 2002. The Pentagon had criticized that standard as too stringent and recommended one as high as 200 parts per billion.

The Natural Resources Defense Council contended that documents obtained under Freedom of Information Act requests showed the Pentagon and the White House had sought to influence the scope of the academy's study in order to get a weaker standard.

Local governments around the country already have begun trying to hold defense contractors and the Pentagon liable for huge cleanup costs to rid groundwater of the toxin.

Bob Hopkins, spokesman for the White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy, said accusations of improper influence by administration officials "couldn't be further from the truth."

The academy defended its work. "The government had no influence over the conduct or outcome of this study," said E. William Colglazier, the academy's executive officer. "The committee members were highly competent, there were no conflicts of interest, and we have full confidence in the report."

A few states have defined their own proposed limits on perchlorate contamination in drinking water, though none is finalized. California's standard is 6 parts per billion, while Massachusetts' is 1 part per billion.

Although California's standard would remain in place even if the national standard were more lax, Californians would still be affected. Contamination in the Colorado River, which provides drinking water to 20 million people, comes from a site in Nevada.

If you have any articles that are of interest, please forward them to webmaster@5starwater.com