Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
AndyGreek1

Avatar / Picture

Owner/Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,964
Reply with quote  #1 
2017.09.21 - Nestle Bottled Water_0.jpg 
download.jpg 

I noticed that Nestle (which is on the GMO list) has bought many bottled water companies across the United States. Two of them are Poland Springs and Arrowhead Water.


First, you have to understand water from your tap. Even if your water comes from the best spring in the world, if it comes through pipes (that are all nasty and corroded), they have to add chemicals like chloride, chlorine, etc to kill the bacteria and pathogens along the pipes underground.

Also, a lot of municipalities around the world add man-made fluoride to the water.  So, you have water with a total-dissolved-solids of up to 1000 ppm (anything over TDS 500 ppm is bad) with nasty ass fluoride and other dangerous chemicals that can scar the inside of your arteries and cause you serious health problems in the future.

Before I go on, I want to tell you how natural fluoride is the 4th most prevalent material in the Earths crust. It is not bad for you like man-made sodium fluoride is bad for you.

Sodium Fluoride, which is an inorganic material, is smelted into the water unnaturally. It is actually poisonous (which is why you must call poison control if you consume too much toothpaste at one time) and is industrial waste that is sold by big factories that should be safely stored as waste, instead of filtered through our bodies. 

OK, the Elite's Nestle buys up a bunch of water companies. The water that is straight from Nestle in the US is always "purified water" which is filtered tap water that still has the sodium fluoride and chemicals. There are more of these bottles than all of the other Nestle water companies COMBINED. The water companies they bought that offered natural spring water never changed their water. It goes through a process like ultraviolet light and ozone disinfection that does not need chemicals. Sodium fluoride is not added to this water. 
download (1).jpg 
BUT, what Nestle did was have bottles with sodium fluoride added to other bottles and printed "ADDED FLUORIDE" on the front label for everyone to see. These bottled water companies never added sodium fluoride AT ALL until Nestle bought them. So, they offer natural spring water, distilled water, sparkling water, and water with sodium fluoride added to it unnaturally.

I say screw all of those waters and buy bottled waters from a Pacific Island that has water in old, deep aquifers that have not touched our polluted rain and atmosphere for approximately 100 years. The expensive Fiji water is one of these brands but they come in plastic bottles that have *BPA's (even though their plastic is rated a "1").

I found a water that used plastic that is BPA free and is from New Zealand called Kiwaii (TDS of 110 ppm). Their website is http://www.kiwaii.com/   It is actually a better quality water than Fiji, a little cheaper than Fiji, and is way more humanely responsible for their product.

Another brand I like comes in a glass bottle as is named "Mountain Valley Spring Water" from Arkansas since 1871 and is the most expensive water I ever buy (probably because it comes in a bottle). It has a pH of 7.8 and a total-dissolved-solids of 220 ppm which is about the same as Fiji.

Lastly, I want to warn you about the hot showers we take and hot tubs we soak in. The chemicals I mentioned above after a few minutes absorb through our skin and we breath in the hot water vapor that has the same chemicals. I believe there is a shower head you can buy that has a bunch of beads in it that help filter out some of the chemicals. I forgot exactly which one it is but I will add it here ASAP when I find out.




*The real threat from bisphenol-A (BPA), the nefarious plastics chemical

linked to endocrine disruption, may have more to do with the substances produced when the

chemical is metabolized by the body rather than with the actual chemical itself. A new

study published in the journal PLoS One explains how a BPA metabolite known as MPB actually tends to

bind 
much more easily to the body's estrogen receptors than BPA does, which may help explain

why some studies have overlooked BPA's tendency to wreak metabolic havoc throughout

the body. This kind of plastic forces young men to grow up with feminine traits. Click below 

to read more about BPA's  

http://andygreek1.forumchitchat.com/post/BPA-in-plastic-causes-devastating-metabolic-changes-inside-the-body-study-finds-6431603?highlight=plastic


__________________
Now On Twitter:
https://twitter.com/AndysForum
AndyGreek1

Avatar / Picture

Owner/Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,964
Reply with quote  #2 
If you are putting big globs of fluoridated tooth paste and brushing with it one, two, three times a day..then who cares whether your water has fluoride since the toothpaste has wayyyy more fluoride than water and is absorbing through your gums, lowering your IQ as well as damaging your body. If you swallow a lot of tooth paste, you are supposed to call poison control immediately. The FDA has never approved fluoride toothpaste to be safe.

Brush with non-fluoride tooth paste or natural tooth oil (with botanical oils of almond, spearmint, peppermint) that I believe works better than any toothpaste!!!

__________________
Now On Twitter:
https://twitter.com/AndysForum
AndyGreek1

Avatar / Picture

Owner/Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,964
Reply with quote  #3 
[HSW-Banner_960]
This is the water I now drink. It has a high pH and a low TDS and taste great. The plastic is also BPA -free. I like it more than Fiji or Kawaii water.

__________________
Now On Twitter:
https://twitter.com/AndysForum
AndyGreek1

Avatar / Picture

Owner/Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,964
Reply with quote  #4 

Environmental Groups Sue Forest Service For Letting Nestlé Bottle Water Under 27-Years Expired License

 OCT 15, 2015 8:00AM

[shutterstock_88332616]

CREDIT: SHUTTERSTOCK

 

Nestlé, the food and drink company that sparked outrage among environmentalists earlier this year for continuing its California bottled water operations in the midst of the state’s historic drought, is coming under fire again.

This week, the Center for Biological Diversity and two other organizations filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Forest Service, claiming it allowed the company to use an expired permit to draw water from the San Bernardino National Forest. The permit, the lawsuit alleges, expired 27 years ago, but Nestlé drew about 28 million gallons of water from a creek in the national forest in 2014 alone. That’s not acceptable in the midst of a drought, the groups say.

“We Californians have dramatically reduced our water use over the past year in the face of an historic drought, but Nestlé has refused to step up and do its part,” said Michael O’Heaney, Executive Director of the Story of Stuff Project, one of the plaintiffs in the case. “Until the impact of Nestlé’s operation is properly reviewed, the Forest Service must turn off the spigot.”

The lawsuit also claims that Nestlé’s operations, which include a four-mile pipeline that takes water from Strawberry Creek, are damaging the environment.

Under drought conditions, we don’t want to see these streams dry up

“There would be much more and improved riparian and woodland habitat if natural flows were returned to Strawberry Creek and its tributary,” the lawsuit states. “This habitat is dependent upon consistent availability of surface water or near-surface water. During drought periods, even the areas that have supported this habitat in wetter years are reduced. Species such as canyon live oak, bigcone Douglas fir, and California bay are currently being adversely affected by the removal of so much water.”

Ileene Anderson, a scientist with the Center for Biological Diversity, told ThinkProgress that since the permit hasn’t been renewed since 1988, the U.S. Forest Service hasn’t done any further environmental review on how Nestlé’s operations affect Strawberry Creek.

“Our goal here is to basically get the Forest Service to do that evaluation,” she said. The review would help ensure that too much water isn’t getting taken out of the creek and that the creatures that live in the creek aren’t being seriously affected by the operations. “Under drought conditions, we don’t want to see these streams dry up,” she said.

The Story of Stuff explains the situation further in a video:

California has been in the midst of an epic drought for the past four years. A study last monthfound that the snow in the state’s Sierra Nevada mountains is the lowest it has been in 500 years, and a study last year found that the state’s drought is the worst in the last 1,200 years. The severe dryness has forced the state to ration water and regulate groundwater, and it could end up costing the state’s economy $2.7 billion in agricultural losses.

Nestlé came under investigation from the federal government in April for its expired permits — a review that could take 18 months or more, the Los Angeles Times reports. The news of the expired permit angered environmentalists — about 515,000 people signed a petition earlier this year calling on Nestlé to stop its bottled water operations in California, and protesters gathered at Nestlé plants in May.

Still, Nestlé maintains that its permit is valid. It also says that it uses less than 1 percent of California’s total water supply for its bottling operations.

“Our permit, as told to us by the forest service, remains valid and in effect,” Nestlé Waters North America Spokeswoman Jane Lazgin told the Hill. “And we continue to pay the required fee for the pipeline use and transportation of water at that site.”

And Nestlé hasn’t given any signs that it plans to move out of California. Quite the contrary — Nestlé International Waters CEO Tim Brown said in May that, if he had his way, he’d ramp up California operations.

“We feel good about what we’re doing,” Brown said. “In fact, if I could increase it, I would.”

The lawsuit aims to ensure that doesn’t happen. It calls on the court to shut down Nestle’s water pipeline in the San Bernardino National Forest, and to ensure that the U.S. Forest Service conducts a new permitting process with environmental reviews.

“Water in California is always an issue,” Anderson said. For [the Forest Service] to be negligent for that long is untenable and really unimaginable. I don’t know why they haven’t raised this to a very high priority.”


__________________
Now On Twitter:
https://twitter.com/AndysForum
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.