The article refers to "ppt" as parts per *trillion*.

Ah... DHMO, the source of and Solution to all of life's problems (to borrow Homer's Beer phrase). <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Sadly, people simply aren't aware of the dangers that DHMO brings... did you know it is an almost universal solvent and used as a kitchen and bathroom cleaning agent? And sometimes it's even used to clean cars (though rarely my own.. I like the crusty look)

Thanks to all who replied to my post:

1. First of all it's nice to hear some one else's 2 cents on the subject.
2. Yes, I know that all those kinds of messages are to be taken with a grain of salt (or some even a bag of salt :-)). It is not even safe to breathe anymore...
3. the word "poison" might have been unapropriate. Since english is not my "native" language I had trouble finding a better word (no dictionary at hand) and figured that you guys would get the point (more or less).
4. What I wanted to communicate: maybe you're better off (safer) using and rotating the water into your daily use than storing a quantity of water only for long-term-emergency-use and stretching the "usefull life" tot the limit of it before replacing it with a new supply. I have no experience in the long term storage of water. I just stock up a nice (larger) quantity of bottled (glass & plastic bottles) water for daily use with a "first in - first out" order of use.
If you really want to stock up large quantities of tap water, isn't it possible to rotate it (depending on the number of containers and quantity) e.g. having 6 batches of water of which one batch is used & replaced every month. This way you total stock is renewed every six months. If you'r stocking up more than needed for cooking and drinking, the replaced water could maybe be used for washing/flushing the toilet:...?
5. DHMO => I had never heard about it. Looks nasty.

tranx
It's a joke. DHMO = 2H, 1O = water

OOOOOOOO man ! :-}}} You've got me ...

I should have been paying more attention.
I am truely ashamed.

I must even admit having read some previous thread about
some congressman (? or how do they call them) wanting to ban H2O. My first tought was: how can you possibly do such a thing without properly informing yourself.

I already tought the name "DHMO" to be a strange one. A bell was ringing very faintly when reading:



and this should definitely have woken me up.
But while quickly reading the posts, I didn't watch wich post replied to wich.



Guess the ETS "STOP" priciple is usefull allways and everywhere even for posting on a forum: Stop - Think - Observe - "Post"

Too funny about the hydrogen and DMHO; there's even oxygen present to feed the hydrogen fire <img src="/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

FYI on the Hindenburg - There was a special on PBS where a NASA scientist theorized that the Hindenburg burst into flames initially because of the flamable materials used to seal the convas exterior skin. It appears that the Zeppelin engineers used a mixture of Iron Oxide and powdered Aluminum as a sealant (and reflective coating). The proportions in the doping mixture were similar to the solid rocket boosters used on the shuttle. The hydrogen burning was secondary as opposed to the primary cause.

Pay attention!!! (just kidding)

Maybe I shouldn't have just given it away, but I'm always greatly impressed by the fluency in English that so many outside of former British colonies have and feel badly when little details (like the prefixes di- and mono-) might possibly have gotten lost in translation.

Don't feel embarassed at all. I know a lot of people who wouldn't have gotten the joke, and they do know english well, so that can't be their excuse. I like the dhmo.com website, it's done in a very realistic manner, almost like an official governemnt warning site. <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Anyway, you brought up a good issue. I never really thought that the bottles could be contaiminating the water. I don't think it'll stop me from drinking, but it's always nice to know. But I wonder if rotating the drinking water isn't worse than just letting it sit there. By rotating it, you are basically getting a consistent long term exposure in small doses, rather than just using it during an emergency where you would just have a higher short term exposure. I really doubt it makes any difference, but it's just something I'm curious about, which is why I wonder if the absorbtion stabilizes after a certain amount of time. Either way, I really wouldn't worry about it all, I still feel safe drinking bottle water.

I do think it's important to note that it doesn't really matter what the source, you will never have perfectly pure water. Everything we drink or eat has trace amounts of some type of contamination in it. If you think about it, a lot of people add poison to their water. And they're doing it voluntarily <img src="/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> Chlorine is a known poison, and it CAN kill you. But it all depends on the concentrations in the water.

No matter what, having even "expired" or contaminated water is better than having none at all.

Not to get off topic, but isn't powdered aluminum and iron oxide just thermite? Not the best thing to cover a hydrogen balloon in. That thing was a floating bomb waiting to explode.

Here is some info from Wikipedia on antimony in PETE plastics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyethylene_terephthalate):

'Antimony trioxide (Sb2O3) is a catalyst that is often used in the production of PET. It remains in the material and can migrate out into food and drinks. The Swiss Federal Office of Public Health compared the amount of antimony in waters bottled in PET and glass: the antimony concentrations of the water in PET bottles was somewhat higher, but still well below the allowed maximal concentrations.[2] (report available in German and French only) The Swiss Federal Office of Public Health concluded that the health risk of these low concentrations is negligible (1% of the "tolerable daily intake" determined by the WHO) ? although antimony is very toxic at much higher concentrations . A later (2006) study by a group of geochemists headed by Dr. William Shotyk [3] finds similar concentrations of antimony in water bottled in PET and, comparing it with concentrations in groundwater and in natural water bottled both in polypropylene and glass, concludes that Sb is leaching from PET. While ground water contains approximately 2 parts per trillion (ppt) of antimony, freshly bottled water averages 160 ppt. Samples left up to six months had levels as high as 630 ppt.'

And from WHO 'Guidelines for Drinking Water Safety'
(http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/chemicals/antimonysum.pdf):

'Daily oral uptake of antimony appears to be significantly higher than exposure by inhalation, although total exposure from environmental sources, food and drinking-water is very low compared with occupational exposure.

'... Conventional treatment processes do not remove antimony. However, antimony is not normally a raw water contaminant. As the most common source of antimony in drinking-water appears to be dissolution from metal plumbing and fittings, control of antimony from such sources would be by product control.

'... Toxicological review -- There has been a significant increase in the toxicity data available since the previous review, although much of it pertains to the intraperitoneal route of exposure. The form of antimony in drinking-water is a key determinant of the toxicity, and it would appear that antimony leached from antimony-containing materials would be in the form of the antimony(V) oxo-anion, which is the less toxic form. The subchronic toxicity of antimony trioxide is lower than that of potassium antimony tartrate, which is the most soluble form. Antimony trioxide, due to its low bioavailability, is genotoxic only in some in vitro tests, but not in vivo, whereas soluble antimony(III) salts exert genotoxic effects in vitro and in vivo. Animal experiments from which the carcinogenic potential of soluble or insoluble antimony compounds may be quantified are not available. IARC has concluded that antimony trioxide is possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B) on the basis of an inhalation study in rats, but that antimony trisulfide was not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans (Group 3). However, chronic oral uptake of potassium antimony tartrate may not be associated with an additional carcinogenic risk, since antimony after inhalation exposure was carcinogenic only in the lung but not in other organs and is known to cause direct lung damage following chronic inhalation as a consequence of overload with insoluble particulates. Although there is some evidence for the carcinogenicity of certain antimony compounds by inhalation, there are no data to indicate carcinogenicity by the oral route.'

Of course, carcinogenity is hardly the only concern with drinking water. For instance, I've never heard of cyanide as a carcingen, but it kills you anyway. <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Sue