[HN Gopher] I'm Wirecutter's water-quality expert. I don't filte...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       I'm Wirecutter's water-quality expert. I don't filter my water
        
       Author : rufus_foreman
       Score  : 64 points
       Date   : 2025-06-07 17:32 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.nytimes.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.nytimes.com)
        
       | madaxe_again wrote:
       | People are really funny about water. Recently had family visit us
       | in Portugal, and they refused to drink the tap water anywhere -
       | despite it being an EU country and complying with relevant
       | standards, rigorously.
       | 
       | Then again, they also refused to drink our water at home, which I
       | know is nothing but H2O, as we live off grid and it all goes
       | through numerous filters before hitting the RO.
       | 
       | Then again, where they live (and drink the tap water), I also
       | drink the tap water, because again, EU, safe - but it tastes like
       | a swimming pool, as they dose it heavily with chlorine.
       | 
       | Each to their own.
        
         | mig39 wrote:
         | In Portugal, I tend to fill a big jug with tap water (which I
         | know is safe, I watched them put in the treatment plant!), but
         | then leave it in the fridge. After a bit of time, the chlorine
         | just evaporates. So it's nice and cool.
        
           | madaxe_again wrote:
           | The chlorine in the water is still there, but yes, the free
           | chlorine (which is what you smell/taste) dissipates fairly
           | quickly once it isn't contained.
        
         | ajb wrote:
         | My parents drink tap water, but every morning my father would
         | pour away a few liters of water in case the supply pipe was
         | made of lead and the water sitting in it overnight had absorbed
         | some. (This is actually the official government advice in the
         | UK, if your house is older than 1970. Of course, the better
         | option is to replace it with non lead, if you can.)
        
       | vsskanth wrote:
       | It's mostly for taste at this point, rather than safety. For a
       | long time I used to drink right from the tap, now use a filter
       | pitcher simply because it tastes better.
        
         | Crye wrote:
         | does it taste better because of temperature, aeration?
        
           | lagniappe wrote:
           | lower TDS, less chlorine smell
        
           | thrill wrote:
           | Far less of everything that is bigger than a water molecule.
        
             | s0rce wrote:
             | Are you filtering your water with molecular sieves? Most
             | water treatment doesn't work by size.
        
           | torqueehmada wrote:
           | Not the person you asked, but the chlorine level is very high
           | in my muni water so I like running it through a Britta
           | charcoal filter. If I'm in a rush, tap is fine.
        
       | scotty79 wrote:
       | where can I check how much PFAS my local water in EU contains?
        
         | tetris11 wrote:
         | https://foreverpollution.eu/map/
         | 
         | It's not as good as the US's one though
         | 
         | https://www.ewg.org/interactive-maps/pfas_contamination/map/
        
         | constantcrying wrote:
         | You should look at the website of your local water distributor,
         | mine has very local measurements about the tap water.
        
       | username223 wrote:
       | The fact that potable water is so cheap in the developed world
       | that you can use a gallon of it to flush your toilet is a miracle
       | of civilization. Filter it if that makes you feel better, but
       | it's a waste of money, and a dismissal of a major achievement in
       | public health.
       | 
       | But hey, at least it's not bottled water, which is basically tap
       | water that has been put in a single-use plastic bottle and
       | trucked across the country.
        
         | jasoncartwright wrote:
         | Tangential! I bought a 210L water butt to collect rainwater to
         | water plants a while back. It cost PS110 to my door with the
         | all installation parts. Out of interest I looked up that the
         | cost to fill it with pristine London tap water would be ~52p.
         | 211 uses and I'm at breakeven, money-wise.
        
         | formerly_proven wrote:
         | https://imgflip.com/i/2htzm9
        
         | donnachangstein wrote:
         | > But hey, at least it's not bottled water, which is basically
         | tap water that has been put in a single-use plastic bottle and
         | trucked across the country.
         | 
         | Everyone acts like bottled water is evil until there is a water
         | crisis, then it's the lifeline.
        
           | username223 wrote:
           | I don't understand your point. That $8/gal water next to the
           | Starbucks checkout is not addressing a crisis when the
           | baristas are rinsing out people's cups with equivalent water
           | for free. The bottled water isn't next to the prepper-sized
           | cans of dehydrated food in your supermarket.
        
       | ghostly_s wrote:
       | Wirecutter "expert" doesn't hold much sway for me with the
       | quality of their reviews these days.
        
         | aprilthird2021 wrote:
         | Wirecutter is just a worse version of Consumer Reports where
         | they don't guarantee they aren't running ads and accepting
         | money from the retailers whose products are featured in the
         | media
        
           | fossuser wrote:
           | It's even worse than that - they have the same anti-tech
           | political bent as the rest of the legacy tech press.
           | Thankfully we have better options now.
        
             | righthand wrote:
             | Question: Is there some implied negative critique of
             | Consumer Reports here? I rather enjoy their work and the
             | fact they're reader funded, but I wouldn't be surprised if
             | there's something I should be aware of that's not clear
             | from it (the way they test or how they accept another type
             | of money). I know they review too many cars (every issue
             | lately features a car banner at the top of the cover).
        
               | brookst wrote:
               | Not the person you asked, but I find consumer reports
               | useless because they typically conflate functional
               | evaluation (does the product do what it's supposed to)
               | with non-functional factors (warranty, price) in a one-
               | size-fits-all manner.
               | 
               | If I'm shopping for a hand mixer, I want to get a list of
               | the best ones and then make my own call on price /
               | performance. I don't want to be told a $19 product is the
               | best and have to carefully dissect the article to learn
               | that it's not actually the best, CR has just decided on
               | my behalf that the actual best product isn't worth $10
               | more.
        
               | rufus_foreman wrote:
               | So what review site would you go to if you're shopping
               | for a hand mixer, or is there no such animal?
        
               | torqueehmada wrote:
               | Incoming anecdata:
               | 
               | I'm in my 50's and consult consumer reports whenever I
               | need to buy a white-box appliance. I've moved a few times
               | so I find myself having to do this more than most people.
               | 
               | The qualm I have with CR goes back to the 1980's when I
               | was a bike mechanic for many years. I had a broad
               | knowledge of all the current brands, and knew which bikes
               | were cheap junk. CR had incorrectly ranked the quality of
               | the bicycles largely due to how they "felt" while riding
               | them. One bike, which was actually good quality, got
               | dinged because it wasn't adjusted properly ("Shifter did
               | not engage lowest gears." or something like that). That
               | one article tainted my opinion of them for anything that
               | requires "tuning" by an expert.
               | 
               | YMMV. Mine has for 40 years. :)
        
               | righthand wrote:
               | Thank you that is very informative in the context as I'm
               | rather new to Consumer Reports. There definitely articles
               | strange rankings. For example I was looking for an
               | reverse osmosis filter and this is something consumer
               | reports just doesn't really have ranked (at least no
               | searchable from their website). They have 1-2 models and
               | they're both not brands that match "reddit reverse
               | osmosis filter" when I do a web search.
               | 
               | I do enjoy their studies on things like: the percentage
               | of plastic particles in General Mills products.
        
               | aerostable_slug wrote:
               | > they review too many cars
               | 
               | What do you mean by that? Do think they review new cars
               | they shouldn't?
               | 
               | Also, I suspect they may have found that they attract
               | many new subscribers from people researching car
               | purchases, so it makes sense to have fresh content on the
               | subject to ensure those new eyeballs find value in the
               | publication and decide it might be for them in the long
               | term.
        
           | bobxmax wrote:
           | If I need something I usually just buy what Wirecutters
           | recommends and I'm rarely disappointed.
        
         | Uehreka wrote:
         | I love this guy's review of the Molekule air purifier where he
         | rips it to shreds while detailing his methodology. If nothing
         | else, I definitely trust this guy.
        
       | BugsJustFindMe wrote:
       | Money quote:
       | 
       | > _readings of PFAS that exceed EPA limits have been found in
       | just 8% of small public water systems (those that serve fewer
       | than 10,000 people) and 15% of large ones_
       | 
       | 15%!
       | 
       | Anyone who trusts their municipal water supply because of
       | *handwave* regulations and reports needs to read that again.
       | 
       | Even if my water were 100% pristine as the author's apparently
       | is, which they only know for their own homes because they've
       | tested it at their taps half a dozen times with different
       | laboratories, my tap water still tastes awful, and maintaining a
       | dedicated three stage filter spout next to my kitchen faucet
       | costs me approximately nothing and provides substantially better
       | tasting water. And I don't need to worry about whether I live in
       | the next Flint, Michigan.
       | 
       | It took two whole years for administrators in Flint, Michigan to
       | acknowledge their lead pipe crisis. What your treatment plant
       | claims it does and what your municipal government claims your
       | safety profile is do not matter one bit if you aren't constantly
       | testing the water actually coming out of your taps.
       | 
       | I'd rather just filter my water. It's much less hassle and I get
       | better tasting water as a nice bonus.
        
         | timr wrote:
         | I'm failing to see your point. If you think it helps -- whether
         | because of taste or personal trust issues or something else --
         | then great, filter your water. You do you.
         | 
         | The article is clearly for someone who is otherwise on the
         | fence and doesn't have those issues.
        
           | BugsJustFindMe wrote:
           | > _I 'm failing to see your point_
           | 
           | That's weird because I'm pretty sure that my point is
           | explicitly spelled out. But just in case, here it is again:
           | 
           | If your trust is based in municipal numbers or statements,
           | you should be aware that municipal numbers and statements are
           | not trustworthy because there's a lot of widespread decaying
           | infrastructure (and coverup!) between where they test, what
           | they make public, and where your water comes out of your
           | faucet.
           | 
           | And if your trust is based on "Rah, rah, America!", you
           | should know that 15% (!!) of water systems serving over 10k
           | people have PFAS levels measured above what the EPA says is
           | safe. (And if you don't think that 15% is a lot, holy smokes,
           | that's nuts.)
           | 
           | So if you aren't testing your tap constantly then you have no
           | idea what your water is like, no matter what the city says
           | their water is like.
           | 
           | And if you are testing your taps constantly, it's less hassle
           | and gives a better result to just filter your water instead.
           | 
           | The author says "I don't filter because I constantly test my
           | taps and they're good each time." That's not the same at all
           | as saying that filtering isn't a generally good idea,
           | especially for anyone who isn't constantly testing their
           | taps. The author ALSO says "a fuckton of you have more PFAS
           | in your water than the EPA says is safe, just not me, lol".
           | The author also chooses to ignore that their good water today
           | may become bad tomorrow.
        
             | rufus_foreman wrote:
             | >> municipal numbers and statements are not trustworthy
             | 
             | The claims of the manufacturers of filters, of course, are
             | completely trustworthy. If you aren't testing the
             | capabilities of your filters constantly, this is fine.
        
               | BugsJustFindMe wrote:
               | You can sue a manufacturer for lying about independent
               | testing and certification. Good luck suing your county.
        
               | rufus_foreman wrote:
               | If you win the lawsuit against the manufacturer, do you
               | get your health back?
        
               | Xss3 wrote:
               | The point is they have a reputation to uphold and not
               | just skin in the game but multiple peoples livelihoods.
               | 
               | Just one or two bad test results, or one failed audit,
               | can sink a business like that.
               | 
               | The county can have thousands of people scream for years
               | (flint, Michigan) without panicking.
        
               | mousethatroared wrote:
               | I don't trust the manufacturer, but I can test the
               | manufacturers water.
               | 
               | I don't trust my municipality because they cheaped out on
               | the corrosion inhibitors chemistry, leached lead into the
               | water and my house is now filled with developing pinhole
               | leaks. I've had five in four years.
               | 
               | Hint, I don't live anywhere near Flint MI.
        
             | jay_kyburz wrote:
             | Do you test your water after its been through the filters?
             | I'd have some concerns about putting my trust in some
             | random filter company.
        
               | SvenL wrote:
               | And to that extend do you trust the company creating the
               | test kit? Or their suppliers?
        
         | donnachangstein wrote:
         | > and maintaining a dedicated three stage filter spout next to
         | my kitchen faucet costs me approximately nothing
         | 
         | Calling bullshit on this one. I have one, it's positively
         | wonderful, but the filters are expensive and per the
         | manufacturer's recommendation you're supposed to change them
         | all simultaneously. So when one times out, they all time out.
         | This runs approximately $150 a year minimum depending on usage.
        
           | BugsJustFindMe wrote:
           | > _This runs approximately $150 a year_
           | 
           | $150 per _YEAR_ at american prices is approximately nothing.
           | That 's a measly 41 cents a day.
           | 
           | People spend far far more than that on far far more frivolous
           | things without thinking twice.
        
             | EA-3167 wrote:
             | People spend an order of magnitude (and much more) on
             | coffee every day, never mind smokers or drinkers who spend
             | crazy amounts just to hurt themselves.
             | 
             | Not that I don't love and respect Wirecutter (I don't), but
             | I'm on team "I like how my water tastes when it's
             | filtered."
        
           | kelnos wrote:
           | I suspect for most people posting here, $150 per year _is_
           | "approximately nothing".
        
           | tguvot wrote:
           | filters are cheap if you don't use fancy branded system that
           | came up with it's own filter that incompatible with anything
           | else
        
             | an_aparallel wrote:
             | You generally want to avoid cheap filters as they
             | apparently can be tainted with formaldehyde
        
           | bernawil wrote:
           | > So when one times out, they all time out
           | 
           | Some units give you different fixed timespans for each. For
           | that reason, I just use the Reverse Osmosis stage and ignore
           | the rest. RO is the last step, and in theory it renders pure
           | water meaning the only reason to have the previous ones is to
           | pre-filter somewhat the water and extend the RO cartridge
           | lifespan. Problem with that is, first, there's no way to
           | gauge when each filter is spent. Second, they're priced the
           | same anyway, so why even bother. Just go straight from tap to
           | RO! Keep the post re-mineralization stage if you want.
        
             | tguvot wrote:
             | pre-filters typically have specified "capacity" in gallons.
             | which is measurable. also if water is very dirty filters
             | get clogged and pressure dropped. it's also measurable.
             | 
             | "post re-mineralization stage" is actually "ph adjustment".
        
               | Xss3 wrote:
               | It isnt merely ph adjustment... You want some amount of
               | minerals in water for your health, plants, and taste.
               | Changing the PH isnt the concern in most cases, its just
               | part of the result.
        
               | mousethatroared wrote:
               | Food gives you all the minerals you need. Matter of fact
               | food can cover most of your hydration needs.
        
           | mousethatroared wrote:
           | What system are you using? My five stage filter system has me
           | replace the charcoal filters once a year and the RO every...
           | three? Maybe five?
           | 
           | But let's assume it costs you $150 a year. Thats less than
           | $0.50 a day for drinking and cooking water. I doubt you could
           | buy any significant amount of bottled water for fifty cents.
        
         | zahlman wrote:
         | > three stage filter spout
         | 
         | ... But does it remove the PFAs?
        
           | BugsJustFindMe wrote:
           | You can read the independent test data sheet:
           | https://www.brondell.com/content/UC300_Coral_PDS.pdf
           | 
           | But if you want a full RO system, go for it. They cost only
           | slightly more and just take up more room under the sink.
        
         | OptionOfT wrote:
         | Your filter system is not set up for water that is
         | microbiologically unsafe to drink.
         | 
         | And if that filter setup also has an RO system your cost is
         | more, as with RO you have a certain amount of rejection rate.
        
           | tguvot wrote:
           | last time i made calculation, it was still cheaper than
           | bottled water
        
           | mousethatroared wrote:
           | I trust my municipality to give me microbiologically safe
           | water.
           | 
           | Because I trust bleach, not my local water authority.
           | 
           | I certainly do not trust them to give me chemically clean
           | water. So I have a $150 under-sink RO system.
        
             | bilsbie wrote:
             | Is there a chance it can get contaminated with bacteria? I
             | worry about the water sitting in there.
        
               | Xss3 wrote:
               | A properly working RO system will prevent viruses and
               | bacteria from passing. For the extra paranoid you can get
               | systems with a UV sterilisation step.
        
               | Xss3 wrote:
               | Just to add, most municipalities chlorinate the water
               | slightly, so its highly unlikely youll find anything
               | alive in it.
               | 
               | My water is fairly heavily chlorinated where i live
               | compared to my previous county.
               | 
               | Letting the glass of water sit in open for a few minutes
               | after pouring helps with taste because the chlorine
               | evaporates.
        
               | vel0city wrote:
               | If you have a lot of chlorine taste just having a pitcher
               | in the fridge will nearly eliminate the chlorine taste.
        
               | mousethatroared wrote:
               | I've thought about this, but I don't think so. My last
               | two paragraphs addresses what I think are RO's risks.
               | 
               | First there has to be bacteria in the municipal water.
               | The city does a pretty good job there,
               | 
               | Second there has to be organic matter for the bacteria to
               | grow. Again, cities are good with that.
               | 
               | But even if you have bacteria in your water, a good RO
               | system's pores should be smaller than a virus (really
               | smaller than a prion) or it won't be able to remove
               | metallic ions.
               | 
               | But let's assume after two years these assumptions fail
               | because the filters get old. Replace the filters and
               | flush the system with bleach.
               | 
               | My fear with RO are bad filters. I once had a Zero
               | pitcher and it tasted bad, acidic. A few weeks later
               | there was a recall that the RO membrane was leaking
               | ionomers.
               | 
               | Moral of the story- trust your senses. If municipal water
               | tastes bad, it's bad. If bottled water tastes bad, it's
               | bad. If RO water tastes bad, it's bad.
        
               | malfist wrote:
               | From someone that keeps aquariums, municipal water that
               | is stripped of it's chlorine by carbon has the
               | ingredients to grow bacteria. They need three things,
               | carbon, phosphate and nitrogen, all of which will be
               | present to varying degrees. Particularly nitrates and
               | phosphates. They're not harmful until concentrations are
               | really high but certainly enough to grow bacteria.
               | 
               | Also consider what your holding tank and supply to the
               | water, either through leaching, accumulation or simply
               | time
        
       | StopDisinfo910 wrote:
       | I think the writer is sidestepping the main issue most of the
       | people who want to filter their water are thinking about. Sure,
       | your tap water is within the federal limits for contaminants. The
       | issue is that these limits are significantly too high for PFAS
       | out of convenience for the water supplying side.
        
       | cypherpunks01 wrote:
       | A surprising amount of Americans refuse to drink tap water
       | entirely, in their own suburban homes with quality municipal
       | water, or anywhere else they travel, holding the opinion that
       | plastic bottled water is safer and better. Of course bottled
       | water is regulated far less than tap water, and contains an
       | ungodly amount of microplastics from manufacturing and storage.
       | 
       | Under-sink RO systems seem pretty great to me, anywhere you live.
       | With a small holding tank, municipal water pressure is enough to
       | drive small RO cartridges, requiring no electrical power to run,
       | and giving more than sufficient flow rate for all drinking water.
       | I think the biggest downside is a few hundred dollars in initial
       | setup, and cartridges every year or two. This seems safer than
       | relying on the changing opinions of experts as to what amount of
       | harmful chemicals are safe to drink.
        
         | BugsJustFindMe wrote:
         | > _A surprising amount of Americans refuse to drink tap water
         | entirely, in their own suburban homes with quality municipal
         | water_
         | 
         | It shouldn't be surprising that Americans might understand that
         | their water might not actually be safe despite the municipal
         | government saying it is. It took two whole years for
         | administrators in Flint, Michigan to acknowledge their lead
         | pipe crisis. Trust needs to be earned and maintained, and
         | America is notoriously bad at maintaining critical public
         | infrastructure.
        
           | n4r9 wrote:
           | > America is notoriously bad at maintaining critical public
           | infrastructure.
           | 
           | How does that compare with food safety in commercial
           | products? That's the question.
        
         | porphyra wrote:
         | Even if safe, municipal water where I live (San Jose,
         | California) contains a ton of chlorine and is super hard,
         | making it unpleasant to drink. In contrast, bottled water
         | consistently tastes fine.
        
           | adastra22 wrote:
           | San Jose water is absolute trash. There may not be (much)
           | lead, but there are a host of other minerals and
           | contaminants. It's also a roll of the dice whether you'll
           | find Legionnaires' disease in your pipes.
           | 
           | I have a whole-house soft-water filter for general use, and
           | for drinking/cooking get 5-gallon bottles filled with RO
           | purified water from The Water Spring on Homestead in Santa
           | Clara. The municipal source for RO water matters, and Santa
           | Clara has the best utilities in the valley.
           | 
           | http://waterspring.com/
           | 
           | Stay safe out there.
        
           | Barrin92 wrote:
           | sorry if this is a stupid question because we don't have
           | chlorinated water in Germany, but do people brew green tea or
           | good coffee with tap water? Doesn't it taste god awful? One
           | of the things which I remember from my holidays in Spain as a
           | kid, which is one of the few countries which adds it here, is
           | that the water tasted like pool water.
        
             | shigawire wrote:
             | If you drink it all the time you are used to the taste. At
             | least that's how it is for me
        
             | donnachangstein wrote:
             | > but do people brew green tea or good coffee with tap
             | water?
             | 
             | I use filtered tap water (under-sink type) which removes
             | most of it.
             | 
             | A lot of the higher end coffee makers like Keurig have
             | built-in filter cartridges in the water tank.
             | 
             | Most commercial coffee maker setups I've seen (hard-
             | plumbed) in offices have a filter attached to the plumbing
             | behind the appliance.
             | 
             | Water can be safe/potable and taste terrible, and vice
             | versa.
        
             | justincormack wrote:
             | Water is chlorinated in Germany [1]. There may be less as
             | ozone may be used as primary disinfectant.
             | 
             | [1] https://www.lenntech.com/processes/disinfection/regulat
             | ion-e...
        
               | lxgr wrote:
               | At imperceptible levels.
               | 
               | Compared to that, in New York, I can definitely taste it
               | and it took some getting used to. (Ironically, at this
               | point my senses seem to have been rewired to associate
               | the taste of chlorine with fresh, i.e. non-stale tap
               | water.)
        
             | mousethatroared wrote:
             | Its extremely unlikely that German water isn't chlorinated.
             | Perhaps you are thinking about fluorinated?
             | 
             | Chlorine in water is actually fine and tasteless at the
             | concentrations it reaches at the taps - it's basically
             | extremely diluted stomach acid.
             | 
             | The problem is chloramines caused by chlorinated organics.
             | These give water the swimming pool smell and are bad for
             | you.
             | 
             | The solution is easy - reduce the organics in the water
             | before chlorination, and oxygenate (aerate) the water
             | before delivery. But systems can get overwhelmed by too
             | much rain and runoff.
        
               | lxgr wrote:
               | Chlorination of drinking water is indeed uncommon in
               | Germany.
               | 
               | If it's done, the level is often imperceptible, contrary
               | to the US (I actually had to look this up - I've never
               | tasted it in German drinking water in various cities
               | myself).
        
               | mousethatroared wrote:
               | How do they sterilize it?
        
             | an_aparallel wrote:
             | My general experience in Australia when i talk about
             | drinking RO water is that im looked at like a crazed madman
             | who drinks "holy water"... So atleast hear i daresay its
             | safe to say the average persons taste and smell must be
             | piss poor
        
               | rincebrain wrote:
               | You can get inured to just about anything with enough
               | exposure, barring exceptional circumstances where you
               | have difficulty learning to ignore things.
               | 
               | Visiting friends recently, they have well water which
               | smells like sulfur from their tap. Visiting them for a
               | few days, I do not get inured to it, but my friend cannot
               | tell it's there.
        
             | tomatotomato37 wrote:
             | Yes, water quality matters a lot in coffee enthusiast land.
             | They actually make little mineral packets that you add to a
             | gallon of distilled water to get a "perfect" brewing water
             | - I know since I actually use them for my espresso machine
             | to fight scale buildup from my +10 grain tap water.
             | 
             | Note this excessiveness is really needed for espresso
             | though; a regular Brita jug handles more tolerant methods
             | of brewing perfectly well (and to be honest most people
             | murder coffee enough that the water is the least of their
             | concerns)
        
               | laex wrote:
               | Do you have a brand name or amazon link for the mineral
               | packets ?
        
               | tomatotomato37 wrote:
               | I use "Third Wave Water" but there are other brands out
               | there
        
         | darth_avocado wrote:
         | One side effect of RO is vitamin B12 deficiency. And there is
         | some debate around whether that is true or not, but
         | anecdotally, I had developed a severe B12 deficiency to the
         | point that one day out of the blue, I couldn't move one of my
         | legs. I freaked out and went to the ER, and it turns out, 1 B12
         | shot later, I went back to normal within minutes. The doctor
         | hypothesized that I had developed a severe B12 deficiency
         | because of RO water and that I supplement my food with B12
         | supplements. The regular intake of meat/eggs wasn't sufficient
         | to compensate for the lack of B12 absorption.
        
           | cinntaile wrote:
           | What's the mechanism here? Because it's not like there is B12
           | supplements in the water.
        
             | micromacrofoot wrote:
             | reverse osmosis removes minerals like cobalt, which are
             | used for b12 production
             | 
             | if you only drink ro water it can creep up on you, but
             | takes some time
        
               | mometsi wrote:
               | It's not used for b12 production in human metabolism. It
               | is, after all, a vitamin. Is this about cobalt deficiency
               | in dairy and meat animals?
        
               | s0rce wrote:
               | How much Co is in your water compared to your food. EPA
               | says just 2 ppb in tap water. This means if you drink
               | about 40 fl.oz. per day you only get 2ug of Co from your
               | water. Per the EPA you get about 2-20x more from your
               | food. Pretty much in no cases is your water a source of
               | nutrients.
               | 
               | refs:
               | 
               | https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-09/documents
               | /co...
               | 
               | https://www.cdc.gov/nutrition/php/data-research/fast-
               | facts-w...
        
           | kadushka wrote:
           | I drank only distilled water for 16 years. No supplements all
           | that time, just regular food. No B12 deficiency or any other
           | health issues.
        
           | unyttigfjelltol wrote:
           | Similar risks regarding removal of sulfate from public water
           | supply, or via filtration.[1] Who knew! Some of us were
           | relying on actual nutrients from the water all along.
           | Pristine water was, and is, a challenge for this cohort.
           | 
           | [1] https://biomedres.us/fulltexts/BJSTR.MS.ID.006372.php
        
             | mometsi wrote:
             | In the linked article, rybett@aol.com uses the CORREL
             | function in an openoffice spreadsheet to determine a weak
             | correlation between autism diagnoses and sulfur content in
             | tap water in a few regions of New Jersey.
             | 
             | His other publications include a self-published amazon book
             | titled Autism, Enzymes and the Brimstone Demons. [1]
             | 
             | [1] https://www.amazon.com/Autism-Enzymes-Brimstone-Demons-
             | Trill...
        
             | bbarnett wrote:
             | Interesting.
             | 
             | I'm on a well, but with super hard water. So I have a water
             | cooler, which I empty into a Brita pitcher, but just for
             | drinking.
             | 
             | Just for the flavour.
             | 
             | I cook with my hard water though. Lots of stews and soups
             | too, make bread, etc. So I suspect I get sufficiently
             | mineralised as a result.
             | 
             | For context, I was boiling a large pot of water and got
             | distracted by a call. Most of the water boiled away, well
             | over a gallon. I was left with a solid white disk of
             | calcium at the bottom. Also, when I broke it to get it out,
             | it was super sharp, almost cut myself.
        
           | eesmith wrote:
           | The only papers I could find in Google Scholar about this
           | connection all come from India, and does not seem strongly
           | connected. The study at https://journals.lww.com/jfmpc/fullte
           | xt/2025/04000/prevalenc... , for example, says:
           | 
           | > While some studies have hypothesized that the use of RO
           | water could contribute to vitamin B12 deficiency, no
           | significant differences were observed in this study.[20]
           | Symptoms of deficiency were not significantly associated with
           | serum vitamin deficiency status. Only VDD was significantly
           | associated with fatigue as a symptom. This discrepancy raises
           | questions about the current normative values for vitamin B12
           | and vitamin D3 in the Indian population and suggests the need
           | for further research.
           | 
           | A whole lot of people drink RO water. If it were a simple
           | correlation, I would expect to see cases and papers from all
           | across the world.
           | 
           | I also know there's a long history of false claims along the
           | lines "distilled water sucks the minerals from your body",
           | also called "hungry water". I first heard in the 1980s as a
           | supposed reason for not using distilled water in a radiator.
           | Or even commentary of it in the Carnivorous Plant FAQ at
           | https://www.sarracenia.com/faq/faq3385.html .
           | 
           | Because of that long history, and the lack of a good
           | mechanism for how it should work, I need a much higher level
           | of evidence for a direct, causal connection.
        
           | mousethatroared wrote:
           | If water is giving you any nutrient in a significant manner,
           | change your diet.
        
             | jandrewrogers wrote:
             | Some essential micronutrients such as arsenic are primarily
             | sourced from water. You don't need much so most natural
             | sources contain enough. There is actually a valid concern
             | that obsessive over-purification of drinking water can lead
             | to deficiencies of some trace minerals.
        
               | rsync wrote:
               | _Wow_ this has gone off the rails quickly.
               | 
               | To wit: Arsenic is not an essential micronutrient.
               | 
               | "Trace quantities of arsenic have been _proposed_ to be
               | an essential dietary element in rats, hamsters, goats,
               | and chickens. Research has not been conducted to
               | determine whether small amounts of arsenic may play a
               | role in human metabolism. " [1]
               | 
               | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arsenic
        
               | jandrewrogers wrote:
               | There is substantial evidence that arsenic is a required
               | micronutrient in all mammalian biology. This is not even
               | controversial, you can reliably induce deficiency
               | syndromes in a broad spectrum of animal models, and the
               | operative pathways exist in humans. The effect was first
               | observed in animal husbandry in parts of the world with
               | very low background arsenic levels.
               | 
               | It has the same toxicity and micronutrient profile as
               | selenium, another extremely toxic but nonetheless
               | essential micronutrient. Unfortunately, activists with an
               | unrelated agenda have been spreading unscientific
               | misinformation about arsenic to advance that agenda.
               | 
               | Same story as fluoride outrage actually. Being anti-
               | science is fashionable and most people are ignorant about
               | chemistry.
               | 
               | It is one thing that makes me glad I am no longer a
               | practicing chemist.
        
               | mousethatroared wrote:
               | Eat a serving of rice, preferably American, without
               | rinsing it.
               | 
               | Enjoy your 10000% recommended daily intake of Arsenic.
        
               | jandrewrogers wrote:
               | Background levels are _much_ higher than current
               | standards with no observable effects in many parts of the
               | world. This is well-studied. There is a threshold but it
               | is higher than people assume.
               | 
               | Plant-based arsenic often has poor bioavailability. Quite
               | a few plants people eat are natural accumulators but it
               | just passes through. Pesticides and geology are the
               | primary bioavailable sources.
        
           | an_aparallel wrote:
           | My RO system has a remineralisation cartridge. You def dont
           | want to drink ph neutral water, it feels hard, and doesnt
           | taste sweet.
        
         | hollerith wrote:
         | In your second paragraph you seem to be describing carbon-block
         | filtration. Particularly, the maintenance of an RO system
         | consists of a lot more than just replacing cartridges every
         | year or two.
        
           | margalabargala wrote:
           | Could you elaborate? I have an undersink RO filter.
           | Maintenance consists of changing filters every year or two.
        
             | tguvot wrote:
             | you need sterilize entire system periodically. and
             | completely empty/refill tank once in a while
        
               | margalabargala wrote:
               | I totally believe that the system you have requires this,
               | but plenty of others do not.
               | 
               | Here's the maintenance manual for the one I have. The
               | sterilization and emptying/refilling are done as part of
               | the filter replacement, and not otherwise:
               | 
               | https://www.whirlpoolwatersolutions.com/wp-
               | content/manuals/W...
        
               | tguvot wrote:
               | " Maintenance consists of changing filters every year or
               | two." it's not same as "disconnecting lines and pouring
               | bleach inside when i change filter" or using
               | "Manufacturer recommends using the Model 7301203
               | Sanitizing Kit"
        
             | an_aparallel wrote:
             | You need to change filters as recommended, change o-rings,
             | and bleach the fittings. Algae will develop on those. Thats
             | pretty much it.
             | 
             | I wouldnt run bleach through the filters. The filter medium
             | saturates, and any further use will just recontaminate
             | water
        
         | zahlman wrote:
         | > ... bottled water ... contains an ungodly amount of
         | microplastics from manufacturing and storage.
         | 
         | Is it worse than the other groceries we can't readily get
         | without them being wrapped in plastic? Or storing leftovers in
         | plastic bags at home?
        
           | s0rce wrote:
           | My guess is yes, because they can more easily get into the
           | liquid. Unless you are talking about other liquids like
           | juices or canned foods, those I would expect are similar or
           | vary depending on the type of plastic.
        
         | jandrewrogers wrote:
         | The water in some parts of the US has natural chemistry that
         | makes it unpleasant to drink even though it is safe. California
         | urban areas are notorious for this, as an example. In principle
         | you could remediate the water to make it taste good and remove
         | any discoloration (also a thing in a few regions) with enough
         | industrial processing but that would greatly increase the cost
         | of already expensive tap water.
         | 
         | People who grew up in one of these areas are habituated into
         | never drinking the tap water even if they move to a city with
         | excellent tasting and very high quality tap water. I've lived
         | in extreme examples of both.
         | 
         | You also see the opposite case, where someone who grew up with
         | amazing tap water naively grabs a glass from the tap in north
         | San Diego and has a "wtf is this" moment.
        
           | PlattypusRex wrote:
           | San Diego's tap water tastes truly awful. The first time I
           | ever traveled to another city (Denver), I was forced to drink
           | the tap water and could not believe how good it tasted.
        
             | jandrewrogers wrote:
             | San Diego has the worst tap water for drinking I have ever
             | experienced in the US. When I lived there, pretty much
             | everyone had a reverse osmosis system installed to make it
             | drinkable.
             | 
             | Fortunately, I live in the Pacific Northwest currently,
             | which generally has some of the best tasting water you'll
             | find anywhere. No one would dream of not drinking the tap
             | water.
        
         | mousethatroared wrote:
         | A surprising amount of Americans live in cities that cheaped
         | out on the water infrastructure and found out their water had
         | lead.
         | 
         | Like me.
         | 
         | Luckily, I am very unreasonably distrusting of government and
         | never drank the stuff.
        
       | atoav wrote:
       | I also don't filter my water, but I live in central Europe and
       | our tap watrr adheres to stricter standards than bottled water,
       | so there's that.
        
       | m3kw9 wrote:
       | Yep use it if it makes you feel better. I know water treatment
       | people in my area have talked about the no need to use filters.
        
       | doug-moen wrote:
       | The quality of your water varies with the district you live in.
       | My municipal water provider puts chloramine in the water to kill
       | bacteria. Occasionally we get high levels of chloramine, which is
       | disgusting (smell and taste), but the water filter removes it.
       | Occasionally they flush the pipes, which turns the water red,
       | which is mentally disturbing, but the water filter removes the
       | rust.
       | 
       | So while it's important to me that my municipal water is
       | technically safe to drink, I still have a better experience with
       | my drinking water when I use a filter. While it's amusing that
       | this technical expert considers rust-red water to be "delicious",
       | do they have family members, or friends that visit and consume
       | beverages, and do these other people get to have an opinion?
        
         | 9x39 wrote:
         | To be fair, he does say he isn't anti-filter, and I think his
         | article was to calm the horses and hysteria out there. I filter
         | water too, but it is things like testing maps
         | (https://www.ewg.org/interactive-maps/pfas_contamination/map/)
         | that really help eradicate the brainworms that I'm slowly
         | poisoning myself from the tap.
         | 
         | I think the whole article was a pretty solid attempt at helping
         | people like myself who tend to overreact when it comes to
         | exposure figure out that the fear and the danger are often not
         | the same.
         | 
         | BTW, unless you were just being sarcastic, the rusty water was
         | him talking about the filtered water from a LifeStraw -
         | something that's miraculous as far as I'm concerned, seeing as
         | I've drank mucky water out hiking through them just fine. Well,
         | probably, anyway.
        
       | calmbonsai wrote:
       | Wirecutter was bad before the NYT acquisition and now it's lot
       | any/all remaining credibility.
       | 
       | Much like CNBC, it's completely "turned the corner" for me and I
       | take their editorial as a negative signal.
       | 
       | In other words, definitely filter your water.
        
         | bobxmax wrote:
         | > Wirecutter was bad before the NYT acquisition
         | 
         | How so?
        
       | timerol wrote:
       | > I hated my pitcher filter long before I knew I didn't need it.
       | It would clog up any time a bit of rusty water came through the
       | pipes, which, in a 70-year-old building with cast-iron service
       | lines, was often.
       | 
       | I'm a little confused that this is used as an argument against
       | filtering water. I get that iron is not a particularly worrisome
       | contaminant, but I still don't want the occasional "bit of rusty
       | water" showing up in my glass
        
       | bradlys wrote:
       | So, his suggestion isn't to buy a water filter system and filters
       | that could last you 10+ years but instead to pay $300 for a test.
       | Retarded. The NYTimes is such a joke and so is this guy. If
       | you're living in newer construction in a place like NYC then
       | you're likely going to be fine. I am in this group currently but
       | I will be moving back to the bay soon and I will have to use my
       | RO system.
       | 
       | If you live in the bay area, you know you have to filter your
       | water because it tastes like metal. We hadn't even had an
       | electric kettle for more than six months in our startup with less
       | than 5 employees using it, the entire bottom of the kettle was
       | covered in 1/4" thick plates of various minerals. Obviously,
       | water differs per city but this was a common occurrence
       | throughout the bay area. The water, of course, always tasted
       | poorly. I'm not even getting into how the housing stock in the
       | bay area is decrepit and full of homes and apartments that are
       | nowhere near up to modern construction standards. You have copper
       | pipes? That's cool but you probably still have lead solder in
       | those pipes. Who knows what kind of supply pipes are coming off
       | the street. Yeah, your local supply probably replaced the ones
       | that run in the street but the ones on your property? Unlikely.
       | Your fittings? Still could have up to 8% lead until 2014. The
       | amount of homes I'd see that still have knob and tube wiring was
       | astounding. You can bet your ass that place still has an
       | abundance of lead all over it.
       | 
       | The poor tasting water in the bay area is reason enough to filter
       | it - even if it wasn't for all these other issues like most homes
       | not being up to modern standards. A lot of these water tests are
       | done at the county's office. It does not reflect _what your home
       | will add to your water supply_. So, yeah, getting at home test
       | could be nice... for $300... or you could just install a nice RO
       | system that will last many years and give you better water
       | anyway.
        
       | dbcooper wrote:
       | >Why you should trust me
       | 
       | Absolutely zero mention of qualifications. If you do not have a
       | chemistry/chemical engineering degree, or something closely
       | related then why would anyone want to bother with your verbose
       | writing?
        
         | sitzkrieg wrote:
         | ah yes, degrees. i only absorb information from qualified
         | individuals with degrees.
        
           | brookst wrote:
           | What qualifications do you look for, or do you just assume
           | everyone who says they're an expert is actually an expert?
        
             | bobxmax wrote:
             | Wirecutters is a long-running very trusted publication.
             | It's not a random rag.
        
         | mihaaly wrote:
         | Knowing something well is not dependent on formal education.
         | Helps quite some, but not being a must. And more importantly:
         | not a guarantee!
        
       | recursivedoubts wrote:
       | I'm a dude who doesn't care to run a chemical analysis of my
       | municipal water every couple days. I filter my water.
        
         | mihaaly wrote:
         | Have you tested your filtered water - in various conditions -
         | or you just trust it based on the words of others?
        
           | recursivedoubts wrote:
           | I just trust the carbon filters. Sorry.
        
             | mihaaly wrote:
             | Who told you to? : )
        
             | rufus_foreman wrote:
             | You just trust corporations.
             | 
             | I mean I trust corporations more than I trust the
             | government, but 0.002 is more than 0.001.
             | 
             | You seem like a very trusting person.
        
         | s0rce wrote:
         | If you don't test it how do you know what filters are needed to
         | remove the contaminants. You may be filtering out things that
         | aren't there and not filtering the actually hazardous things in
         | your water. Although you probably guess things like PFAS and
         | microplastics which appear to be ubiquitous now.
        
       | tonymet wrote:
       | if you are someone who regularly cleans and replaces your water
       | filter, it's probably not hurting.
       | 
       | For most people their water filters are probably contributing
       | more mold and contaminants than removing.
        
       | internet_points wrote:
       | How much PFAS does the average water filter add to your water?
       | 
       | (How much PFAS do you get from plastic-bottled water / soft
       | drinks instead of the stuff coming out of metal pipes?)
        
         | torqueehmada wrote:
         | Go find out and tell us. That would be really helpful
         | information.
        
           | s0rce wrote:
           | You can probably review the wetted materials but
           | fluoropolymers are more expensive and not required in
           | consumer water filters so I would assume not much PFAS. If
           | its some activated carbon and IEX resins then its likely not
           | making things worse.
        
       | knappe wrote:
       | I go back and forth on the issue. I read our local municipal
       | water reports but then things like this happen
       | https://www.vaildaily.com/news/climax-mine-can-now-release-h...
       | 
       | Denver water couldn't force the mine to continue cleanup of the
       | molybdenum (because they're bankrupt) and instead raised the
       | tolerable levels of molybdenum in Denver water. The same thing
       | happened in 2017, 2010 and I'm certain before that. And then we
       | have things like this https://www.cpr.org/2025/06/04/free-
       | private-well-testing-ote...
       | 
       | Colorado has some serious issues with mine runoff and water
       | contamination.
       | 
       | https://www.pagosasun.com/stories/the-day-the-river-turned-o...
        
       | Arch-TK wrote:
       | That's nice. In the UK, tap water tastes like chlorine. If you
       | are unfortunate enough to have chloraminated water, just letting
       | it sit is insufficient. You need a filter which can remove the
       | chloramine. After this, the water is actually too hard to make
       | good coffee with, so I either zerowater it or distill it and then
       | mix it with the filtered water using a TDS meter to hit a rough
       | reference point (EC meters are not accurate gauges of TDS, but
       | that's fine, you just want a consistent TDS not a precise TDS).
       | 
       | So sure, if you live in a civilised country and your water
       | doesn't taste like shit and doesn't make your coffee taste awful
       | and you trust your government to not give you poison or have
       | tested your water to ensure it won't hurt you, go right ahead, be
       | my guest.
       | 
       | But I will continue filtering my water because I hate the taste
       | of chlorine and want to make the best out of the expensive coffee
       | I buy.
        
       | storus wrote:
       | After covid I noticed that drinking tap water was making me
       | noticeably worse but buying packaged mineral water didn't (this
       | was done over a few months). I later bought reverse osmosis and
       | never hit that problem since. However, this year I learned that I
       | live in a high-PFAS area (up to 300ng/L) so I am wondering if I
       | was hitting PFAS overload somehow. Most of my flowers died
       | quickly after watering them with the same tap water as well (when
       | I still tried to have some house flowers).
        
       | bilsbie wrote:
       | Any concern about pharmaceuticals making it into tap water?
       | Microplastics?
        
       | constantcrying wrote:
       | Where I live there are area local water reports, so you can enter
       | your street and see where your water is coming from and a report,
       | with quite a lot of measurements and including legal limitations
       | for these measurements.
       | 
       | Water filtration should be an informed decision, based on what
       | water you are actually getting.
        
       | foresto wrote:
       | > It is also certified for Particulate Class 1, which is a
       | surrogate for microplastics.
       | 
       | Based on a web search, it looks like Particulate Class 1 means
       | particles in the 0.5 to 1 micron range. Several carbon block
       | filters are rated at 0.5 um, so I guess they're meant to handle
       | those microplastics, but it leaves me wondering:
       | 
       | Do any smaller microplastics exist? Are they likely to be present
       | in municipal water supplies?
       | 
       | All the filter cartridges that I've seen, and almost all the
       | housings and tubes that hold them and the water, are made at
       | least partly of plastic. Given that water typically sits in these
       | filtration systems for hours or days at a time when the tap is
       | closed, could it be that microplastics are leaching into the
       | water from them?
        
       | deepsun wrote:
       | Well, the current US administration is all against the
       | environmental protection, so I expect the article advice might
       | change in the nearest hears.
        
       | kdlskall wrote:
       | The whole topic seems to be infused with a lot of loss-of-control
       | issues...
       | 
       | In the end, there's just so many more vague risks affected by the
       | society you live in.
       | 
       | Driving a bit slower will probably offset a great deal of those.
        
       | dbg31415 wrote:
       | Filtered water tastes better.
        
       | t0bia_s wrote:
       | Our tap water has strong chlorine smell. Since we add a filter,
       | chlorine smell is gone and water taste better. When I drink
       | unfiltered water from my parents house, I immediately recognise
       | it.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-06-07 23:01 UTC)