It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Don't Drink The Water! 220 Million Americans Exposed To Unsafe Levels Of Chromium-6

page: 2
24
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 20 2016 @ 10:45 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Well... Crap... I've been making tea with my water for years now. Time to invest in a filter of some kind.




posted on Sep, 20 2016 @ 10:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian It's not uncommon to read threads about fluoridated water on ATS and similar sites but less commonly discussed is chromium-6 which many of you may have heard of, called by another name — hexavalent chromium — the carcinogen Pacific Gas and Electric Company was poisoning the people of Hinkley, California with. In 1996, the people of Hinkley won a $333 million settlement against the company. Their story was told in the movie Erin Brockovich, named for the legal clerk-cum-environmental activist whose work was instrumental in organizing the residents. 20 years later there are no federal standands for Chromium-6 in tap water. In fact, since 1996 no standards for previously unregulated chemicals have been established by the EPA according to the report below. Now the non-profit Environmental Working Group is delivering some very concerning news.

Spurred by a groundbreaking 2010 EWG investigation that found chromium-6 in the tap water of 31 cities[6] and a Senate hearing prompted by the findings, the EPA ordered local water utilities to begin the first nationwide tests for the unregulated contaminant. From 2013 to 2015, utilities took more than 60,000 samples of drinking water and found chromium-6 in more than 75 percent of them.[7] EWG's analysis of the test data estimates that water supplies serving 218 million Americans – more than two-thirds of the population – contain more chromium-6 than the California scientists deemed safe.

In 2008, a two-year study by the National Toxicology Program found that drinking water with chromium-6, or hexavalent chromium, caused cancer in laboratory rats and mice.[3] Based on this and other animal studies, in 2010, scientists at the respected and influential California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment concluded that ingestion of tiny amounts of chromium-6 can cause cancer in people, a conclusion affirmed by state scientists in New Jersey and North Carolina. The California scientists set a so-called public health goal of 0.02 parts per billion in tap water, the level that would pose negligible risk over a lifetime of consumption.[4] (A part per billion is about a drop of water in an Olympic-size swimming pool.)But in 2014, after aggressive lobbying by industry and water utilities, state regulators adopted a legal limit 500 times the public health goal.[5] It is the only enforceable drinking water standard at either the state or federal level.
Here are some experts weighing in as reported by Newsweek

Sam Delson, with California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, said that at 0.02 ppb, “if a million people were to drink water with this level of chromium-6 for a lifetime of 70 years, we would theoretically expect one additional case of cancer,” Delson says. The cancer risk at 10 ppb “would be 500 in one million.”

Perry Cohn, a retired environmental epidemiologist with the New Jersey Department of Health, who was involved in setting the state’s standard, said the Environmental Working Group’s conclusions were extremely concerning.

“This is quite shocking, to be honest,” said Brockovich of the level of contamination detailed in the report. She has dealt with issues involving chromium-6 for 25 years, ever since her involvement in the Hinkley case, and said that she knew “it was always lurking around,” and not specific to just that town. But she didn’t know it was this widespread. As a known carcinogen, chromium-6 will lead to avoidable cases of cancers when present at levels above those set by New Jersey and California, she added.
The Newsweek article closes with an example of the lengths sinsister industry goons will go to... well, let's call it what it is... help companies save money at the expense of people's suffering and in many cases, their very lives. In 2005, a WSJ expose revealed that Pacific Gas and Electric had hired a "consulting firm" called ChemRisk who in turn paid a renowned expert and the author of a landmark study into chromium-6's affects on human health, Chinese scientist Zhang JianDong, $2000 to assist with data for a second study. Here where things get really disgusting. In 1987, Zhang JianDong published his study proving the links between chromium-6 and cancer. This study was very influential and regulartory bodies based assessments of the risks posed to people's health on the work. What the PG&E "consultants" was to wait till some point after Zhang JianDong had retired and then took his data, altered it to "prove" an opposite conclusion — that there was no link to cancer in humans — and publsihed a paper under the scientist's name without his knowledge in 1997! As with the conslusions of the 1987 study, those of the "new study" found their way into regulatory assessments. ABC, the Guardian, CNN and others are also reporting on the EWG report.


I work with hexavalent chrome contained in aerospace coatings, the most common one being the green primer used at Boeing commercial aircraft, and it is no joke. I worked at Blue-streak aerospace coatings for 1 day and walked out when I saw all the painters who were using that primer with just the thin latex gloves and wiping the primer off their hands with methyl ethyl ketone, which goes right through those gloves almost instantly and it takes everything on your gloves with it and it instantly enters your blood stream and they were doing this every single day for years.

The management had no clue about the lack of protection that latex gloves offer in conjunction with M.E.K. and whatever other contaminates would be put in the blood stream because of using that solvent to clean body parts with. namely the hands. They had never even heard of barrier gloves. It was the most negligently ignorant management I had ever seen. Some of those painters had yellow eyes and pale jaundiced skin, and when informed about what they were doing got mad and defended what they were doing.

I just hope none of them have kids because they will likely come out as mutants from a nightmare.



posted on Sep, 20 2016 @ 11:12 PM
link   
I had a friend that worked in highrise environmental control systems. There is a chemical that is added to the water that protects pipes from corrosion. It causes cancer even though it is only a few drops per day that goes in. They had to sign severe secrecy agreements to not ever talk about it. Later in life I was in a water treatment facility for a large city and they had the same chemical being added to tap water to avoid pipe corrosion. I don't remember now what it was, but someone in public works that works on water systems at the plant should know what it is.
edit on 20/9/16 by spirit_horse because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 21 2016 @ 12:54 AM
link   
Last time I drank some tap water I got a sore throat. That was probably in 2007 or so.



posted on Sep, 21 2016 @ 01:25 AM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

You know. I never really thought of it before and I don't know why, probably because he died when I was a young teen but my grandfather worked at a Ford plant for 30 years, in and later managing the paint department.

He died of cancer in his early 70s (at a far younger age than either of his parents).



posted on Sep, 21 2016 @ 04:13 AM
link   
I'm so tired of the God of Profit killing off everything and everyone.

If we were a spacefaring race and happened across this jewel of a planet, is THIS how we would manage the resources?



posted on Sep, 21 2016 @ 04:15 AM
link   
a reply to: SentientCentenarian
Plenty of stars. Plenty of planets.



posted on Sep, 21 2016 @ 05:39 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Where's your portable lab-grade spectroscopy (lab-grade spectroscope) when you need it? I want a pocket spectroscope that can ACCURATELY tell me all of the constituents in any object, be it food, water, rocks, or ANYTHING! It should also be able to test any food, drink, pill, etc. to let you know what is in it. This should be an invention that has already been completed. I also want this invention to be free of having to connect to the internet to identify substances. Honestly, it's nobody's business what I scan with it (for advertising potential, etc., etc.).



posted on Sep, 21 2016 @ 07:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: InFriNiTee
a reply to: theantediluvian

Where's your portable lab-grade spectroscopy (lab-grade spectroscope) when you need it? I want a pocket spectroscope that can ACCURATELY tell me all of the constituents in any object, be it food, water, rocks, or ANYTHING! It should also be able to test any food, drink, pill, etc. to let you know what is in it. This should be an invention that has already been completed. I also want this invention to be free of having to connect to the internet to identify substances. Honestly, it's nobody's business what I scan with it (for advertising potential, etc., etc.).


So sad that this is desperately what we need these days :/




top topics



 
24
<< 1   >>

log in

join