Re: New Water Regs (170/03)

----- Original Message -----

Sent: Sunday, June 20, 2004 9:42 PM
Subject: water regs

Enclosed is a letter sent to Leona Dombrowsky about Bill C170 - the 'water bill'  that I received 
It contains a lot of pertinent information on why bill 170 should be dumped.
Randy Hillier
President, Lanark Landowners Association
Tel 613-357-7968
Fax 613-259-2741 

Letter to the Minister:

Leona Dombrowsky, June 18th, 2004.
Minister of the Environment,
4 Market Square,
Napanee, Ontario.
K7R 1J3

You were quoted in one of the Bancroft papers when dealing with the sawdust pile, that your only concern was only protecting the environment. In Parliament on June 10th at approximately 11:55 a.m. your associate John Wilkinson and later on Ms. J. Mossop stated the same thing , that their concern was protecting the environment. With what the MOE wish to do with Bill 170/03 negates your comments entirely. I presume that MOE hasnít got the foggiest idea what they are doing. By implementing that bill MOE will be polluting the aquifer right across the Province.

The City of Toronto did some research on their water quality which I obtained for $10.00 from City Hall. Lake Ontario from which Toronto gets its drinking water has 1200 manmade chemicals. Torontoís drinking water after the so-called purification process still has 300 of those chemicals as reported by TVOís H2Overview a number of years ago. Even though Torontoís drinking water has 300 of these chemicals still in it, including Mercury, Lead and Arsenic, the report states as follows: " IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT CHLORINATION IS PROBABLY THE LARGEST SOURCE OF POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS, WE RECOMMEND THAT HEALTH AND WELFARE CANADA BE REQUESTED TO CONSIDER INITIATING A RESEARCH PROGRAM TO INVESTIGATE POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE USE OF CHLORINE AS A DRINKING WATER DISINFECTANT".

With that kind of information available to MOE one has to question the departments integrity when they insist on chlorine as being one of the treatments to be imposed across the Province of Ontario. Chlorine will kill E. Coli from our drinking water but apparently it does not eliminate many other pathogens that are just as detrimental to our health.

By implementing Bill 170/03 you definitely will not be protecting the environment but actually polluting it. The aquifer around the great lakes is polluted beyond manís ability to clean it up. While chlorine is not the only pollutant, it is certainly part of it because one million tons of chlorine is dumped into Canadian water annually as stated in Harrowsmith Magazine June/July 1984. Anybody working with the environment should know that the environment and chlorine donít mix. Chlorine acts with everything it comes in contact with and forms a new family of chemicals called TRIHALOMETHANES. (THM ). At least 600 chemicals in the trihalomethane family have been identified and 67 of them are carcinogens. THMs are not the only pollutant in the aquifer but certainly a big part of it. I will mention only one of these chemicals which nearly everybody is aware of and that is CHLOROFORM. I will do this further down in this article.

The other suggestion which should be used is ultraviolet lights to control microbes and bacteria. Ultraviolet lights are not adequate in controlling the pathogens that have to be eliminated. I dealt with this years ago for the Maple Syrup Industry and contacted Guelph University and obtained the following information. The frequency (angstrom) of the ultraviolet light fluctuates with temperature. Below 65 degrees there is no germicidal effect from ultraviolet rays. The water coming out of the ground will definitely be below 65 degrees most of the time and would therefore negate the lamps ability to be effective in eliminating desired pathogens.

I will now deal with the health problem that you would impose on a very large segment of the public if you continue to apply Bill 170/03 across Ontario.

Because of the chloroform coming out of the ground due to THMs there is a certain amount of chloroform floating in the air. If we take a shower from chlorinated water or if the housewife washes the dishes , the amount of chloroform in the house will be approximately 5 times greater than outdoors. Everytime we drink tea or coffee from chlorinated water we are drinking chloroform plus many other THMs.

Chlorine long believed to be the saviour of drinking water, has now been shown to cause health problems even greater than those it was designed to eliminate. Evidence has existed for some years strongly indicating that chlorinated drinking water used in most municipalities, causes atherosclerosis (clogging of the arteries) strokes, birth defects and cancer of the bladder, stomach, colon and rectum. This was reported by News Research by newscaster Peter Clark (U.S.A.).

Dr. Michael Alvonya of the National Cancer Institute in Bethesda, Maryland has pointed to the alarming health risks. "What you could say without any equivocation is that my studies demonstrated that people that lived in areas served by chlorinated water in New York State in seven counties that I studied, did in fact have twice the risk of contracting cancer."

When comparing industrial toxins versus chlorine, Drs. Price and Alvonya and confirmed by recent studies at the Environmental Protection Agencies Health Effect Research Lab in Cincinnati, Ohio, emphasized that people drinking chlorinated water may be facing the greatest danger of all.

Joseph M. Price, M.D., attending physician at Saginaw General Hospital, Michigan, says "In the process of atherogenesis, chlorine is the essential agent (atherogenesis does not occur to a clinically significant degree in the absence of chlorine, regardless of diet and other contributing factors). "Chlorine is the greatest crippler and killer of modern times" he declares. "It is an insidious poison." Most medical researchers were led to believe it was safe, but weíre now learning the hard way that all the time we thought we were preventing epidemics of one disease, we were creating another. Two decades after the start of chlorinating our drinking water in 1904, the present epidemic of heart trouble and cancer began. Furthermore, Dr. Price strongly suggests that senility of the aged really is a combination disease with a single cause Ė chlorine. The blood flow to the brain becomes impaired not only by the development of atherosclerotic plaques in the arteries feeding the brain but also by a direct impairment of the micro-circulation of the brain itself Ė a second and distinct result of chlorine ingestion.

In his book "Coronaries, Cholesterol. Chlorine". Dr. Price M.D. gives two example of the effect of chlorinated water. The first is on chickens housed in the same environment. 95% of the chlorine fed chickens died of heart conditions and circulatory diseases, but the chlorine free group remained perfectly healthy. The second example and the ultimate experiment proved that ingestion of chlorine in water causes clogging of the arteries which then can be presumed to cause heart attacks and strokes later, was done in Vietnam and Korea where the soldiers were given water that had a far higher content of Chlorine in it than is usual in civilian life and consequently developed, shown by autopsy, a far greater degree of clogging of the heart arteries than has been known in civilian life.

A number of articles state that chlorine accumulates in our bodies. I have more information from a book published in 2004 that chlorine in our bodies also kill friendly bacteria in our bowels causing major health problems. The book is by Jordan S. Rubin, N.M.D., Ph.D.

It is generally believed that the governing bodies concerned have either ignored or hidden the facts concerning the toxic effect of chlorine in our drinking water. When governing bodies show concern and publish information about the dangers in our water (Toronto) not only should we be thankful but we should realize the dangers are greater than what we have been led to believe.

Leona Dombrosky MPP. . If this information is not sufficient to convince you that Bill 170/03 must be repealed, I have much more information on this matter. I have researched this for three years a number of years ago and still have a large collection of documentation concerning the detrimental effect to the environment as well as the detrimental effect to the health of the people in Ontario. If this Bill is not repealed I believe the people of Ontario have a right to question whether the people we elect lose the ability to think properly when they go to Toronto. (Torontoís drinking water is chlorinated).

To put it in plain English, implementing Bill 170/03 will cause ground water across the Province to be polluted with many toxins from the THM family. While MOE have denied this in the paper recently there is definite scientific evidence that the constant introduction of chlorinated water into many thousands of septic systems would destroy the good bacteria in the septic tank and then this would go directly into the weeping bed and start polluting the ground with all these THMs. It is almost impossible to evaluate the damage you would create to the environment across the province.

Obviously the people who drafted this bill and the government that passed it didnít have the foggiest idea what they were doing. If you implement this bill I honestly believe the present government would fall in the same category. So please, please, please repeal this Bill 170/03 if you honestly believe what you said that you want to protect the environment otherwise you will be polluting it right across the province.

It is my understanding that your job is to protect the environment and what goes into it. I do not believe that what I put into my mouth is any of MOEs business. I believe that it would be the Health Departments business. In the past the Health Department have done all the testing of our water and have not had any problem doing so.

One of many concerned citizens in Ontario. Denis Nolet.

Palmer Rapids,