Re: Confusing water issues

February 19, 2002

,

Lono wrote:

If you would like, I would be happy to forward you material on Ho'ala

Huna,

> the ancient way of wisdom of the earliest Polynesians. My introductory

piece

> provides a fascinating glimpse of a way of life that allowed these people

to

> live without wars, kings, or crime for nearly 2000 years. If you would

like

> a PDF copy, let me know.

I would LOVE to have this! If you accept his offer, can you share?

nancydancy@...

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

From: McInerney

Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 9:47 PM

Subject: Confusing water issues

and others,

The many water issues brought up in the last few days got too confusing for

me, so I simply wrote to Lono (author of " Don't drink the water " ) for his

opinion. His reply is below. (I sent him the entire notes but have cut all

but the relevant sections here). He has also given me permission to forward

material to anyone who might be interested. He emailed me a more technical

version of his book (all 120 pages) which addresses many of the more obscure

water issues raised here (like Grander water systems, high alkaline water,

high energy water) in more detail. It also does a good job of answering the

question " what do I look for in a water filter " , which someone asked here

recently. If anyone would like a copy of his book, please email me and I

will forward it to you.

It will not be surprising to anyone who has followed my posts to hear that I

have decided to buy a water filter from Lono himself. His web site is not up

and running yet - I will notify this group when it is. For anyone

interested, another place to see his filters is:

www.naturestapestry.com/watpur.html

I am sorry if I have (or will) cause any dissent or hard feelings with these

water posts (esp this one!). Certainly not something that I had intended to

do as a new member! I just feel that this is a very important issue and that

this discussion needs to be public, esp if there is disagreement.

> Aloha ,

>

> I'll be happy to reply to some of the comments below. Look for my reply

> after the text of each question below. You can forward on what you wish.

>

> God Bless,

>

> Lono

>

_

_____________________________________________________________________

> >> Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 19:08:58 -0000

> >> From: " radlife2002 " <radiantlife@...>

> >> Subject: Re: Water filters and fluoride removal

> >>

> >> Greetings ,

> >>

> >> Also, you've got to ask how any system that is supposed to leave

> >> the " good " minerals in the water manages to get out the bad

> >> minerals. You get your calcium and zinc but not the lead arsenic or

> >> copper? Maybe the author knows about a " smart filter " that takes out

> >> certain minerals but not others! I'd like to know about that but am

> >> very skeptical....

> >>

> >> I wish it were not the case but I have to say that with water

> >> filtration/purification, you get what you pay for. It may sound nice

> >> to pay just a little to get great water but unless you live in

> >> Hunzaland it doesn't work that way. I know that I speak as someone

> >> who sells a particular system, but we could have chosen anything out

> >> there, and still can. Anyone who tells you that you can have good

> >> water using carbon and KDF today is probably writing from an island

> >> in the south Pacific.

> >>

> >> All the best in your quest,

> >>

Lono's Reply:

> How Carbon and KDF work is well researched and documented. If one has an

> appropriate knowledge of chemistry and biochemistry, their actions are not

> mysterious.

>

> Carbon (of the type most widely used in water treatment systems) is still

> the best technology to remove volatile organic chemicals such as MTBE.

> Carbon blocks are the best because they do not permit channeling.

>

> KDF has a potent redox potential that works on certain kinds ions with

> certain types of electical charges. That is why it won't remove the

> so-called " alkaline " minerals like calcium, magnesium, phosphorus,

> potassium, or sodium for that matter. In the valence states these are

found

> in water they are not affected by the redox potential of the KDF media.

> Substances like lead, chromium 6, arsenic, and other heavy metals exist in

a

> valence state that does react with the KDF and that is why it works on

them.

>

> It just so happens that given the broad spectrum of toxins that can

> contaminate water, most fall into categories that either KDF or carbon

work

> well on. This is 90% of the water. The other 10% where that kind of system

> doesn't work are circumstances where water contains very rare contaminants

> or unusual combinations of contaminants that require reverse osmosis (to

> remove salt for example) or pyrolox (to remove excess iron) or special

media

> to insure that water is bacteriologically safe (like Ster-O-Tap

> ultrafiltration.

>

> By the way, I am not writing from an island in the South Pacific. For

> to understand why KDF redox potential is capable of doing what

> it does will require him to 1) take enough chemistry to understand ions

and

> the concept of reduction-oxidation reactions in the presence of catalytic

> media; 2) buy my book, or, 3) if he would care to apologize for his

> smart-alec attitude as reflected by his South Pacific comment I could be

> persuaded to send him the piece I sent you that will refresh his memory on

> basic chemistry (assuming he ever took the subject).

>

> 's skepticism reveals his ignorance. That is his issue. He can

> either be humble and learn, or he can keep his attitude and remain

ignorant.

> The choice is his. I honor either choice he makes.

>

> By the way, what is a triple purifying system?

________________________________________________________________________

> >> Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 23:00:26 -0000

> >> From: " radlife2002 " <radiantlife@...>

> >> Subject: Re: Water filters and fluoride removal

> >>

> >> Marcella,

> >>

> >> We get our water from a spring in a remote valley in northern

> >> California. When we moved here, we drank the sweet tasting water for

> >> 3 weeks before our skin got flaky and dry and our lips got really

> >> chapped. Changing to restructured RO water, our skin and lips went

> >> back to their soft normal state. We believe that it was the

> >> inorganic minerals in the water that led to our dry skin

> >> (dehydration). Many people believe that the inorganic minerals in

> >> water can lead to plaqueing of the arteries, gall stones/kidney

> >> stones, dehydration, calcification of the joints, etc. I know this

> >> is controversial with some, but we feel that we do much better with

> >> purified water with the minerals removed, then restructured and ionic

> >> organic minerals returned in trace amounts. Even though we live in

> >> the country with no industry nearby and good tasting spring water

> >> this is what we have chosen.

> >>

> >> Those who either don't believe or don't care that inorganic minerals

> >> are bad for you, could just drink spring water straight if there are

> >> no chemicals or chlorine in the water, or maybe just run it through a

> >> Doulton with an Ultra-Carb cartridge to get out trace chemicals and

> >> microorganisms....

> >>

> >> Hope this helps,

> >>

> >

Lono's Reply:

> Sounds like the same again. What is " restructured " RO water.

> This is a term no water chemist or engineer would use.

>

> Contrary to the above statements, there is NO EVIDENCE to suggest that

> water that contains natural minerals caused the health problems mentioned.

> The only people who circulate that story are people trying to sell RO

> systems or Distillers. Have you ever heard the comment: " A little

knowledge

> is a dangerous thing " . Sounds like that is what is going on here.

_________________________________________________________________________

> >> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 10:56:09 -0600

> >> From: " sharon wagner " <asejmlae@...>

> >> Subject: Re: Re: Water filters and fluoride removal

> >>

> >> We have used an RO system for the past 18 years, all our children's

lives.

> > Our dentist (who is health-centered in his thinking), believes this has

> > contributed to our children's tooth decay problems. We never knew about

> > replacing the lost minerals. It is all making sense now.

> >> Shari

Lono's Reply:

> Many dentists remain committed to the idea of fluoridation of drinking

water

> supplies. The truth is that fluoridation does make tooth enamel harder and

> more resistant to tooth decay. However, most water is fluoridated with

> Silica fluorides, not sodium fluorides that are used in things like

> toothpaste. Wide scale studies have conclusively demonstrated that silica

> fluorides increase gut permeability which leads to auto-immune problems

and

> increased uptake of heavy metals. In addition, any kind of fluoride

> depresses the immune system, the thyroid and parathyroid glands, and with

> long term use, can result in brittle-bone syndrome later in life. This is

a

> very high price to pay for less tooth decay.

>

> I prefer my patients use toothpastes with sodium fluoride or get fluoride

> treatments applied topically. Concerns about toxins in toothpastes that

> contain fluoride are understandable, but generally not of much concern

> compared to the alternatives.

________________________________________________________________________

> >> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 19:25:06 -0000

> >> From: " radlife2002 " <radiantlife@...>

> >> Subject: Re: Water filters and fluoride removal

> >>

> >> Hi ,

> >>

> >> And don't forget Dr. , who was commissioned in the 20th

> >> century to discover why people from some towns in France got cancer

> >> and other diseases at much higher rates than those in other towns.

> >> His findings were that the waters of some towns had low electron

> >> contents (were oxidized) and that correlated with sickness and

> >> disease. Other towns enjoyed water with high electron contents and

> >> had much better health. (Electron-enrichment by the way is one of

> >> the objectives of our water system and of the " Q " which is an

> >> incredible new device that essentially bathes the body in

> >> regenerating electrons to use however our innate intelligence sees

> >> fit.)

> >>

> >> My point in mentioning the Hunzas and Dr. 's research is that

> >> clearly the best waters are not equally distributed around the

> >> planet. Some waters may have a nice low but organic mineral content,

> >> and also a low electron content. Other waters may have a high

> >> electron content but a high surface tension and high inorg.

> >> minerals. To understand the health-promoting potentials of specific

> >> waters, observed in various (and often separate) places in nature,

> >> and then to bring these all together for the benefit of us modern

> >> folk in a home unit has been the goal of our research.

> >>

> >> Sure we can survive drinking whatever water happens to be around.

> >> What is the health-promoting potential of the water we drink? is the

> >> real question.

> >>

> >> Hope this helps,

> >>

Lono's Reply:

>Sorry. All this crap about high electron content water is complete baloney.

> Perhaps I'm wrong but I'd bet that is involved with another of

> those multi-level marketing schemes that promote overpriced products

> comprised of dubious technology with a bunch of pseudo-science bullshit.

> When it comes to water treatment products there appears to be a continuous

> supply of these deals. That is because there are always a lot of people

who

> want to get rich while promoting the illusion that they are more educated

> than they are.

________________________________________________________________________

> >> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 13:42:31 -0600

> >> From: Kroyer <skroyer@...>

> >> Subject: RE: Re: Water filters and fluoride removal

> >>

> >> I would really like to hear some explanations of what is being referred

to

> >> when people talk water's energy. The same goes for the effects of

> > microwave

> >> ovens on food (I'm still not really clear on what those effects are

> > either).

> >> When we talk about these things are we talking about reproducible

> > laboratory

> >> findings that have at least some kind of scientific backing (even if

> >> controversial)?

> >>

> >> Any and all clarifications and references are appreciated! Anyone with

> >> unpopular clarifications or references is invited to email me offlist

if

> >> they'd prefer. Thanks!

> >>

Lono's Reply:

> is definitely on the right track when it comes to water. It sounds

> like his bullshit detector is on and working.

>

> When it comes to microwave foods, the problem is that microwaves can cause

> molecules of substances to break apart resulting in substances that the

body

> does not recognize as " nutrients " . Some of these are toxic. The jury is

> still out as to how dangerous eating microwave food might be. Some studies

> suggest that those who consume large amounts of food prepared in microwave

> ovens, and do it for long periods of time, might be increasing their risks

> for certain types of cancer.

___________________________________________________________________

> >> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 22:02:05 -0000

> >> From: " radlife2002 " <radiantlife@...>

> >> Subject: Re: Water filters and fluoride removal

> >>

> >> ,

> >>

> >> With respect to water there are a number of ways to measure " energy "

> >> content and other related properties. The most obvious is to look at

> >> oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) which measures the electron

> >> content (including H-). ORP is kind of the opposite of pH which

> >> measures hydrion ions (H+).

Lono's Reply:

> Where did you get your chemistry lessons ?

> >> I have used an ORP meter to measure

> >> fresh wheatgrass juice (-100mV) which is about the best reading we

> >> have found from food or juice sources. You can also test your

> >> favorite antioxidants which if good will often be in that same (-

> >> 100mV) range, give or take 75. The two best ORP readings we have seen

> >> have been from Microhydrin (@-750mV) and the Q, which measures in at -

> >> 1000mV without one's body in the same water.

> >>

> >> It is also possible to ascertain a sort of total energetic frequency

> >> measurement of a person or thing using an incredible computer program

> >> called the Quantum Xeroid from a Hungarian genius. Believe it or

> >> not, it can measure total frequency with astounding accuracy whether

> >> or not it is in proximity or at a distance. May sound woo-woo but it

> >> is just an scientific instrument that is beyond the range of

> >> traditional paradigms....

> >>

Lono's Reply:

> Dear . It is woo-woo.

> >> There is also a digital Kirlian photography technique which I just

> >> ran into, and it looks like it may be a promising way to measure the

> >> subtle energies/properties in a given sample of water. (I hope to be

> >> able to try it out this month!)

> >>

> >> Surface tension can be measured with a tensiometer very accurately

> >> and I believe that this is in relationship with the zeta potential,

> >> which is another energetic measurement of water.

Lono's Reply:

> Belief is necessary only for that which is not real. That which is real is

> available at the level of Recognition, and it works - reliably and

> flawlessly. !st principle of Ho'ala Huna.

_______________________________________________________________________

> >> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 04:57:40 -0000

> >> From: " radlife2002 " <radiantlife@...>

> >> Subject: Re: Water filters and fluoride removal

> >>

> >> Hi Barb,

> >>

> >> The Q is one of our most exciting new products and we have been

> >> getting the best response lately from practitioners, who have

> >> reported that their effectiveness as practitioners is increasing by

> >> 200-500%! I could go on but will just suggest that anyone who wants

> >> more info can email me privately and I can email or send a packet of

> >> info. I can also share actual scientifically verifiable studies that

> >> I know of relating to this instrument.

> >>

> >> The Q costs $2000, and there is a 30-day money back trial. One can

> >> also become a dealer if you like it (not MLM).

> >>

> >> Cheers,

> >>

Lono's final reply:

> Dear ,

>

> It looks like is one of your group's most vocal influences on

water

> issues. I would be happy to review 's so-called scientific

> evidence for his machine. I always like to look at products and expose

what

> appears to be the hype used to sell such products. I did that with the

> " Alkalizer " , the " microwater machine " , and other products. The FDA is now

> removing some of these from the market and prosecuting their promoters for

> fraud. I'm glad. These kinds of products and the people who promote them

do

> great damage to the whole cause of natural, nutritional, and other forms

of

> alternative medicine in our country.

>

> Otherwise, I don't want to take any more time responding to what appears

to

> me to be 's penchant for promoting misinformation about water.

I

> don't mean that in a harsh way. I'm sure he is well-meaning, but it is

> apparent to me he is seriously misinformed.

>

> The world is full of such people. Most are passionate younger people who

> want to make a difference. I encounter them frequently. While I admire

that

> trait, I have found that most have yet to learn the value of humility, and

> the value of staying grounded in reality.

>

> My experience teaches me that humility (the way the Hawaiians defined it)

is

> the key to growth in awareness. Passion must be tempered with humility

> before anyone can be considered mature enough to merit serious attention.

> Discussing things with opinionated and misinformed people is normally a

> useless endeavor because they are more interested in proving their point

> than in learning anything new or different from what they already believe.

>

> Good luck and God Bless on your discussion group. If you would like me to

contribute

> to it from time to time I would be happy to do so.

>

> If you would like, I would be happy to forward you material on Ho'ala

Huna,

> the ancient way of wisdom of the earliest Polynesians. My introductory

piece

> provides a fascinating glimpse of a way of life that allowed these people

to

> live without wars, kings, or crime for nearly 2000 years. If you would

like

> a PDF copy, let me know.

>

> God Bless,

>

> Lono

>

February 19, 2002

,

The combination of Lono's outrageous claims and his dismissals of my

statements without any supporting evidence make his responses rather

irritating to say the least. Thanks for forwarding though, as I

think that we all can learn from this exchange. I certainly am

willing, and would love it if you could forward any substantial

information you have about his research. Just got in late and will

respond in detail as soon as I can.

Best,

February 19, 2002

,

I would love a copy of Lono's book!! I couldn't get your email address from

your post so I'm replying to the list (sorry).

Thanks,

Barb Carr

bdcarr@...