The telling tale here is to look at the EPA web site. If this was such
a huge problem, you would see something on their site that referenced it.
If you visit the EPA site, the main focus is on lead in the soil, lead paint
and such. There is scarcely a mention of lead in water other than
indicating that some older homes are plumbed with lead based solder.
Tim
-----Original Message-----
From: Art Bahrs [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 10:56 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] OT: Lead Levels in Water Misrepresented Across
U.S
Hi Art & Brice and All :)
Art has some very good points... tho' I will point out that a lot of
medical instruments use mercury for accuracy reasons (thermometers,
pressure meters of all sorts and so on) but these are heavily controlled
and regulated as to their maintenance and disposal for the reason of
mercury's toxic properties.
Also, a point of control about 'testing your water'... remember that the
tap water in your home/office/portapotty/etc... has gone thru the pipes in
your home/office/portapotty/etc... and will reflect the type and quality of
said pipes... A lot of homes were built with lead pipes and lead solder...
that is why the EPA and most water bureaus (that is what they are called
here in Oregon for the most part) suggest running the water each morning
before using it ... the water that sits in the pipes all night is not as
clean as what has been running for a minute or so...
I know that in the mid 70's my Dad and Uncle put in "indoor" plumbing
to my Aunt's house in Boring, Oregon (btw, appropriately named town! hehe)
... when we pulled out the pump on the kitchen sink... it was piped with
piping and fittings from the late 1800's (house built sometime in the
1890's no one is really sure) ... This pump was fed from a spring... we had
the water analyzed ... Good Stuff Maynard! but the piping had really been
making it bad! Dad had the water tested from when it came out of the pump
(after priming!) and it was just this side of "unfit for human
consumption"! So beware your pipes and what they do to your water quality.
I personally am more concerned about where these 274 water bureaus are
and what is being done to bring them into conformance with the EPA's
standards for water....
Art "ramblin' at the start of a day :) " Bahrs
=======================================================
Art Bahrs, CISSP Information Security The Regence Group
(503) 553-1425 FAX (503) 553-1453
|---------+-------------------------------->
| | "Arthur Frank" |
| | <[log in to unmask]> |
| | Sent by: "HP-3000 |
| | Systems Discussion" |
| | <[log in to unmask]
| | DU> |
| | |
| | |
| | 10/05/2004 05:04 PM |
| | Please respond to |
| | "Arthur Frank" |
| | |
| | |-------------------||
| | | [ ] Secure E-mail ||
| | |-------------------||
|---------+-------------------------------->
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------|
|
|
| To: [log in to unmask]
|
| cc:
|
| Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] OT: Lead Levels in Water Misrepresented
Across U.S |
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------|
Brice,
Once again, I must ask, did you actually read the article? Please
allow me to post this simple quote once again:
"EPA data analyzed by The Post identified 274 utilities, which
together
serve 11.5 million people, that have reported unsafe lead levels since
2000. Those numbers do not include cities where testing methods
concealed
true lead levels."
Now, I suppose that the EPA is not qualified to test water supplies
either, are they? This is EPA data, not the Washington Post's data. I
think the Post's "analysis" consisted of comparing the lead levels in
the EPA data with "safe" lead levels and observing that they're higher.
You want to debate about "safe" lead levels? You think the EPA's
assessment of a "safe" lead level is junk science? Prove it. Don't
toss around the claim of "junk science" without any evidence. And I'm
skeptical that the EPA is in bed with the Post. If you think so, cite
your evidence.
<<<< snip >>>>
Art Frank
Manager of Information Systems
OHSU Foundation
[log in to unmask]
(503) 220-8320
>>> Brice Yokem <[log in to unmask]> 10/5/2004 3:20:19 PM >>>
Mr Frank -
The Washington Post is not qualified to test water supplies, unless
they
<<<< snip >>>>
When I said 'go to the press' I meant 'local' press, if an appearance
at the city council gets no results.
<<<< snip >>>>
===========================================================================
==
IMPORTANT NOTICE: This communication, including any attachment, contains
information that may be confidential or privileged, and is intended solely
for the entity or individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the
intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified
that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message is strictly
prohibited. Nothing in this email, including any attachment, is intended to
be a legally binding signature.
===========================================================================
==
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
|
