Nnanji -> RE: Brain eating Bacteria in Louisiana tap water. (7/3/2017 7:27:05 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: BoscoX quote:
ORIGINAL: tj444 Funny.. I just watched a vid done by PBS Nova called Poisoned Water which is about Flint & how the lead poisoning was discovered & how the govt tried to cover it up & doctor test results.. one of the way they did this is by telling the people whose water was being tested to run their taps for 5 minutes before taking the water sample.. doing that lowers lead levels dramatically, cuz the water that has the highest lead is the water that has been sitting in the pipes while lead is dissolving into it.. Anyone that can should watch that show cuz it is an example of how little you can trust any of them.. and btw,... one of those people who turned a blind eye to the whole thing was a former head & other employees of the fucking EPA!!!! So much for the EPA protecting your water... [8|] "The following month, six more state employees were charged with misconduct in office for their alleged roles in contaminating Flint’s water supply. Those charges, against three Department of Health and Human Services employees and three from the Department of Environmental Quality, included claims that some had hid or disregarded test results showing high lead levels in the blood of Flint residents and had tampered with water test results sent to federal officials." https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/20/four-more-officials-charged-with-felonies-in-flint-water-crisis/ A Democrat-run state, during the Obama years Now to be fair, that's how water samples are taken from a tap. You want to sample the "general" water supply not that which has been sitting stagnant. Of course the leftist PBS would find something nefarious about it. But consider, say there was 1 PPM of something in the general water supply. But you sample at a stagnant point source and get a spike reading of 3 PPM. You have an erroneous false reading. An instantaneous extra 2 PPM isn't going to affect you personally but a false reading of an extra 2 PPM will affect the perception of the entire supply. Keep in mind that the vast majority of the samples taken in this manner are taken to determine chlorine content. Chlorine degrades as it comes in contact with organic matter. So a degradation of chlorine in a stagnant point source tells you there has been a degradation of organic matter as well, which is a good thing. But it doesn't tell you if the chlorine content of the general supply is high enough to reach that point source with enough disinfectant properties active. I think this is more a comment on PPS making something nefarious that really isn't.
|
|
|
|