City Of Sacramento Officials Secretly Added Cancer-Causing Chemicals to City’s Water Supply

Ok, here is a great example of adding poisons to the water supply and not warning people. Of course this was "to save money". They continued even though they almost immediately knew they were producing toxins. City officials were completely aware of the contamination and covered up quarterly tests with the EPA and switched water sources.

Full news video at link:


www.abc10.com...

Thom Jensen, Joe Rubin, ABC10 5:06 p.m. PST November 6, 2015
In 2013 and 2014, the City of Sacramento tested a new chemical at its main water treatment plant, and an ABC10 investigation found the substances that formed in the city's drinking water system as a result, could cause cancer.

Testing of the chemical called aluminum chlorohydrate, or ACH, almost immediately sent up warning signs that something was seriously wrong, and even though those red flags continued for an entire year, the city didn't stop and didn't warn people about a hazard.

The byproducts Sacramento residents were exposed to are called disinfection byproducts, or DBPs. DBPs are considered likely carcinogens. Studies have also linked the byproducts to low birth weight and even miscarriages.

City officials allowed the testing to continue, despite early warnings the new chemical being tested was creating DBPs at levels that the Environmental Protection Agency says could be unsafe, especially with long term use.

It started as a short-term test of ACH to replace another water treatment chemical called ALUM.

Sacramento's Utility Director, Bill Busath told ABC10 the test was all about one thing, "There was an expectation that we would be able to save quite a bit of money."


Sacramento isn't the only city that has had problems with DBPs. Flint, Michigan had a problem earlier this year. But unlike Sacramento, health warnings went out to Flint residents. The elderly, the very young and pregnant women were told they might want to consider filtered or bottled water. Churches even gave away safe water to the poor.

People in Sacramento were never notified about the dangers, never given that choice to opt for bottled water, even though the city had all kinds of data showing they had a serious problem.

The troubling data came fast. A city chemist noticed the problem on the third day of the testing. She wrote in an email to managers, "I'm nervous about the distribution samples." A chart that went along with that email showed DBPs well above EPA limits.

a reply to: infolurker

In America sick = good for business and new job openings every month in the medical field , the food supply is the same what is good in the U.S of A is banned in the rest of the world

Flag and starred.

The truth is that even some bottled water has been deliberately manufactured with carcinogens too.

Fret not, the good guys are laser focused now.

This is why I've been drinking Reverse Osmosis water for 30 years. It gets out 99.99% of pollutants including radioactive components. only water molecules get through the diaphragm filter. 10 times cleaner than bottled water.

ZG

a reply to: infolurker
This isn't something new. This chemical is in anti-perspirants and has been used in water treatment to settle out suspended particles BEFORE it goes through the treatment process. This is done so that the filters can run longer before they need to clean them by backwashing them.

Nothing new to people that work in the business, only new to one city and to the people that have no idea what is used in water treatment or why...

originally posted by: ZeroGhost
This is why I've been drinking Reverse Osmosis water for 30 years. It gets out 99.99% of pollutants including radioactive components. only water molecules get through the diaphragm filter. 10 times cleaner than bottled water.

ZG

Very smart. Reverse Osmosis water has a better concentration of ions, which are substantial electrolytes for the system. Much needed for blood plasma and healthy immune systems.

Ah, never mind. Upon actually reading the article it wasn't the new chemical at all. It was their process.

Now, Sacramento officials acknowledge there was a serious flaw with their chemical test. In a report the city filed with state regulators, the city admits the test caused DBP numbers to rise to "historically high levels when using (ACH) aluminum chlorohydrate."
To make up for the chemical's lack of effectiveness, the city pumped in more chlorine. But, when chlorine and these organic compounds spend too much time together, the chlorine can turn into disinfection byproducts, or DBPs, in your drinking water

The DBPs most likely were THMs. It is very common where there are large numbers of organic contaminants. Although that is just one of the many hundreds of DBPs that are common, just the others are not tested for.

It would be helpful if they would link the dosages and the ppm found of each item tested for before they make such claims.

It could have been accidental or maybe it is to force more people to feel good about spending $10/gal on bottled water. Let see, force the folks in CA to conserve water by making them pay heavily for their usage, the water in the reservoirs can then be used to fill the agricultural need since the bottled water can be trucked in at the consumers expense.

Genius, don't you think?

a reply to: infolurker

Cancer is very big business and you have to keep the pharma corps going with there profits, I have no doubt this is exactly what has gone on here.

God bless those innocent victims of yet another corporate life endangering and health destroying scam, whoever ticked this off as fine to do need's to be lynched with extreme prejudice as when the law fails it is the responsibility of the citizen to restore it especially under the US constitution, a constitution which I envy but not it's application over the past 60 plus years.

originally posted by: ZeroGhost
This is why I've been drinking Reverse Osmosis water for 30 years. It gets out 99.99% of pollutants including radioactive components. only water molecules get through the diaphragm filter. 10 times cleaner than bottled water.

ZG

Drinking only RO water is horrible to your health unless you are taking mineral supplements.

a reply to: trifecta

Who are the good guys?

originally posted by: TheLotLizard

originally posted by: ZeroGhost
This is why I've been drinking Reverse Osmosis water for 30 years. It gets out 99.99% of pollutants including radioactive components. only water molecules get through the diaphragm filter. 10 times cleaner than bottled water.

ZG

Drinking only RO water is horrible to your health unless you are taking mineral supplements.

Complete nonsense!
Minerals and everything else are in abundance by eating food!

Well, those city officials are certainly going to lose their jobs...NOT!

S&F thanks for sharing more need to see this.

Avoid water bottled from Sacramento; One source on it:Wal-Mart Bottled Water Comes From Sacramento Municipal Supply

originally posted by: VoidHawk

originally posted by: TheLotLizard

originally posted by: ZeroGhost
This is why I've been drinking Reverse Osmosis water for 30 years. It gets out 99.99% of pollutants including radioactive components. only water molecules get through the diaphragm filter. 10 times cleaner than bottled water.

ZG

Drinking only RO water is horrible to your health unless you are taking mineral supplements.

Complete nonsense!
Minerals and everything else are in abundance by eating food!

www.waterfyi.com...

Say what you will. But it's widely believed drinking RO is bad for you.

originally posted by: NewzNose
a reply to: trifecta

Who are the good guys?

You are.

originally posted by: infolurker

She wrote in an email to managers, "I'm nervous about the distribution samples." A chart that went along with that email showed DBPs well above EPA limits.

Nervous eh! and that's from the 'good' guy.

Oh # that! Thank God I have well water.

originally posted by: TheLotLizard

originally posted by: VoidHawk

originally posted by: TheLotLizard

originally posted by: ZeroGhost
This is why I've been drinking Reverse Osmosis water for 30 years. It gets out 99.99% of pollutants including radioactive components. only water molecules get through the diaphragm filter. 10 times cleaner than bottled water.

ZG

Drinking only RO water is horrible to your health unless you are taking mineral supplements.

Complete nonsense!
Minerals and everything else are in abundance by eating food!

www.waterfyi.com...

Say what you will. But it's widely believed drinking RO is bad for you.

Did you notice the following in the link you provided?

In a world where our soil is virtually devoid of nutriets from too many crops and not enough recovery time, and where diets are anything but healthy, it is very important to your long term health that you ingest calcium and magnesium from drinking water.

You see, its not that RO water is bad, because its not! What they are saying is for people who have an unhealthy diet, they can get 6% to 30% of the daily requirement of essential elements from tap water.
So, RO water is not bad! its just that people have bad diets!

Now, take into account the nasty chemicals that are in tap water! Even when a person eats a healthy diet those nasties are still bad for them! SEVENTY % of british people have weed killer in their urine!

Saying that RO water is bad is just playing with words, you should note that the person you made that comment too has been using RO water for thirty years!

a reply to: infolurker

I live in Sacramento.

Looks like I'll be purchasing an expensive water filtration system soon...