Check out the FAQ,Terms of Service & Disclaimers by clicking the
link. Please register
to be able to post. By viewing this site you are agreeing to our Terms of Service and Acknowledge our Disclaimers.
FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster.
The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website.
By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.
Larry, it is a very good thought. Welcome to FluTrackers. For ease of use, what kind of store do you buy your alum in?
Please do not ask me for medical advice, I am not a medical doctor.
Avatar is a painting by Alan Pollack, titled, "Plague". I'm sure it was an accident that the plague girl happened to look almost like my twin.
Thank you,
Shannon Bennett
Larry, it is a very good thought. Welcome to FluTrackers. For ease of use, what kind of store do you buy your alum in?
Thanks Shannon. I have located a couple of sources for aluminum sulfate, one being my local grocery store. One can find alum in the 'spices' section, labeled as Alum for pickling. This is sold in 3oz bottles, fairly expensive at roughly $1 per ounce. Or as I have done, purchased a 25 pound sealed bucket from here: http://www.cqconcepts.com/chem_aluminumsulfate.php
at about $1 per pound.
To use this chemical for pre-treatment, I took 1/8 level cup, completely mixed in 5 gallons of clean water to produce a dosing solution of approximately 22 ppm. From this solution, I added 4 cups to a 55 gallon drum of highly turbid raw lake water consisting of mostly algae, silt and suspended organic materials. This was mixed vigorously for 5 minutes, gently stirred for an additional 10 minutes and left to settle for 2 hours. The reduction of color and TSS was readily visible to the eye. The clarified water was then strained through a 5 gallon bucket packed with several layers of synthetic fibers (no mildew or compaction as would occur with cotton) to remove the remainder of the particles before filtering. My filter is a 2 micron 4 element ceramic pour through type.
So, following a municipal water treatment plant flow, screening, pre-treatment (coagulation & flocculation), filtering followed by disinfection with a chlorine solution at a residual level of .5 ppm, I have drinking water from a local lake.
Thanks, Larry. I use alum to make my home brined pickles crisp. It is fairly expensive in the grocery store and, not always available when cucumbers aren't in season.
Please do not ask me for medical advice, I am not a medical doctor.
Avatar is a painting by Alan Pollack, titled, "Plague". I'm sure it was an accident that the plague girl happened to look almost like my twin.
Thank you,
Shannon Bennett
a 55 gallon drum of highly turbid raw lake water consisting of mostly algae, silt and suspended organic materials.
Larry G et al.
Please be aware that there are potential contaminants other than microbial pathogens that may be of concern when using untreated surface water for drinking.
I am most familiar with cyanobacteria toxins. Cyanobacteria are sometimes referred to as blue green algae. A subset of this broad group of organisms may produce very potent toxins that are not necessarily removed by the treatment methods you describe. Algal blooms may also be inapparent from the surface, yet toxins may be dissolved in the water. Moving water (rivers vs. lakes or ponds), cold water and water that is nutrient poor (oligotropic) water is less likely to contain cyanobacteria and their toxins.
Farmer you missed part of the post. Larry was suggesting a pre-treatment to remove solids prior to filtration with a ceramic filter thus increasing the life of the filter.
Larky
AnneZ, I have conducted several bench-tests and have found that pre-treating raw lake or river water with aluminum sulfate (alum, at 10ppm dosage) is an effective way to reduce the suspended solids. After a settling period of 2 hours, some 90-95% of the TSS has been separated from the clarified water. This allows me to reduce the loading on a ceramic filter system. Just a thought.
Please do not ask me for medical advice, I am not a medical doctor.
Avatar is a painting by Alan Pollack, titled, "Plague". I'm sure it was an accident that the plague girl happened to look almost like my twin.
Thank you,
Shannon Bennett
Removal of solids does not remove cyanobacteria toxins or the other chemicals I mentioned. In fact, the vigorous mixing may break up the intact algae, actually releasing more toxin.
Nitrates may also be a problem in agricultural areas.
Removal of solids does not remove cyanobacteria toxins or the other chemicals I mentioned. In fact, the vigorous mixing may break up the intact algae, actually releasing more toxin.
Nitrates may also be a problem in agricultural areas.
I somewhat agree with you, however once algae is entrapped in the aluminum sulfate floc and is settled out in the resulting sludge, other dissolved substances remaining (after filtration) are either oxidized or reduced by the addition of chlorine. The process & chemistry described is the same as used by the majority of municipal water treatment plants in the Unites States. Vigorous mixing promotes the formation of the alum floc during the process of coagulation, capturing floating particles such as algae, which then tend to settle.
In any case, I have actually used this method described and have tested it chemically and biologically with excellent results. My resulting turbidity was less than .1 NTU when using a 55 gallon drum in my home.
Nitrates are also oxidized by free residual chlorine.
Copyright ? 2005, American Society for Microbiology
Elimination of Botulinum Neurotoxin (BoNT) Type B from Drinking Water by Small-Scale (Personal-Use) Water Purification Devices and Detection of BoNT in Water Samples
Ari H?rman,<SUP>1,</SUP><SUP>2</SUP><SUP>*</SUP> Mari Nevas,<SUP>1</SUP> Miia Lindstr?m,<SUP>1</SUP> Marja-Liisa H?nninen,<SUP>1</SUP> and Hannu Korkeala<SUP>1</SUP> Department of Food and Environmental Hygiene, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki,<SUP>1</SUP> Medical School, The Finnish Defense Forces, Lahti, Finland<SUP>2</SUP>
<SUP>*</SUP>Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Food and Environmental Hygiene, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 57, 00014 Helsinki University, Finland. Phone: 358 40 5560851. Fax: 358 9 19149718. E-mail: ari.horman@milnet.fi<SCRIPT language=JavaScript type=text/javascript><!-- try{initUnObscureEmail ("e_id2683030", '' + reverseAndReplaceString('if.tenlim/ta/namroh.ira', '/at/','@') + '')}catch(e){} //--></SCRIPT> .
Received August 7, 2004; Accepted October 28, 2004. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.
</TD><TD class=content-cell>Abstract
Seven small-scale drinking water purification devices were evaluated for their capacity to eliminate botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) type B from drinking water. Influent water inoculated with toxic Clostridium botulinum cultures and effluent purified water samples were tested for the presence of BoNT by using a standard mouse bioassay and two commercial rapid enzyme immunoassays (EIAs). The water purification devices based on filtration through ceramic or membrane filters with a pore size of 0.2 to 0.4 μm or irradiation from a low-pressure UV-lamp (254 nm) failed to remove BoNT from raw water (reduction of <0.1 log<SUB>10</SUB> units). A single device based on reverse osmosis was capable of removing the BoNT to a level below the detection limit of the mouse bioassay (reduction of >2.3 log<SUB>10</SUB> units). The rapid EIAs intended for the detection of BoNT from various types of samples failed to detect BoNT from aqueous samples containing an estimated concentration of BoNT of 396,000 ng/liter.
</TD></TR><TR vAlign=top><TD class=sidebar-cell width=145>Top Abstract MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES
</TD><TD class=content-cell>
Data on the purification capacities of various water purification devices and techniques are essential for the assessment of drinking water safety. Water sources and drinking water supply systems can become fecally contaminated but may also be targets for bioterrorism or sabotage (8, 9, 20, 22). Botulinum neurotoxins (BoNT; types A to G) produced by Clostridium botulinum and by some other related clostridia are the most potent biotoxins known, and as tasteless and odorless lethal compounds they would generate great concern if weaponized (5, 13, 27). Several small-scale devices from different manufacturers are commercially available for drinking water purification. These devices, mostly based on filtration through ceramic or membrane filters, are needed especially by soldiers, hikers, or workers of aid organizations operating in primitive wilderness or under disaster conditions (6). Similar filters are also marketed for point-of-use in single households. To ensure consumer safety, it is essential to compare the microbial and chemical purification capacities of different devices through independent evaluation tests (12, 23). Data are available on the purification capacity of some filters, but usually these data are based on the capacity of the filters to remove microbial organisms, e.g., Escherichia coli, coliforms, or Cryptosporidium oocysts (15, 26, 28). There are some reports in which water purification devices or techniques were tested for elimination of microbial toxins, mainly cyanobacterial toxins (1-3, 17, 18, 25, 29, 33).
Free chlorine at a concentration of 5 mg/liter of water (5 ppm) for 30 min (32) and heating water at 80?C for 30 min (19) were shown to be effective for inactivation of BoNT. Assumptions on the capacity of reverse osmosis to remove BoNT from drinking water have been made (32), but no research to test this capacity has been performed. Reverse osmosis is assumed to eliminate BoNT effectively based of the 150-kDa molecular size of the toxin.
Rapid and sensitive tests are needed for BoNT detection under field conditions as well as for rapid screening of suspect samples (7). At present, the few rapid tests available have not shown sufficient sensitivity or specificity to replace the standard mouse bioassay, which remains the only standard method available for BoNT detection (4, 34). Apart from being time-consuming, the mouse bioassay poses ethical, economic, and safety concerns. Some enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays and enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) are available that show sensitivity similar to sensitivity level of the mouse bioassay (10, 11, 16, 35).
The aim of the present study was to obtain data on the capacity of commercial water purification devices based on various methods to eliminate BoNT from intentionally contaminated drinking water. Furthermore, two commercially available rapid EIAs for BoNT detection were evaluated in comparison to the standard mouse bioassay.
Inoculated raw water. A total of 70 liters of tap water from the municipal drinking water supply system of Helsinki was stored in an open plastic container for 24 h to reduce the free chlorine concentration. Seven proteolytic C. botulinum strains producing BoNT type B (Table 1) were cultured separately in 100 ml of tryptone-peptone-glucose-yeast extract liquid broth medium (Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, Hampshire, United Kingdom) anaerobically at 37?C for 72 ? 2 h, followed by subculture at 37?C for 16 h. The broth cultures (seven cultures, 100 ml each) were added to the tap water (influent water). <TABLE style="CLEAR: both; WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=5 cellPadding=5 border=0><TBODY><TR vAlign=top align=left><TD align=middle width=100></TD><TD>TABLE 1. Proteolytic C. botulinum type B strains used in the study
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Water purification devices and testing. The water purification devices were selected from among commercially available products based partly on the suitability for field operation. Six devices, representing various types of filters and purification methods, were selected from four manufacturers (Table 2). In addition, an experimental sand filter was developed (Table 2). All devices were portable (weight, <10 kg) and functional without electricity or chemical supplementation. The devices were used manually according to the instructions of the manufacturer. Prior to use, each device was rinsed with 1 to 2 liters of sterile water. A total of 3 liters of purified effluent water was produced with each device from inoculated influent water. The purified effluent water samples were collected in sterile glass bottles for further investigation. <TABLE style="CLEAR: both; WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=5 cellPadding=5 border=0><TBODY><TR vAlign=top align=left><TD align=middle width=100></TD><TD>TABLE 2. Water purification devices tested for elimination of botulinum toxin type B from drinking water
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Sampling. From the inoculated influent water the following samples were taken prior to using the purification devices: a 100-ml sample for total aerobic bacterial count; a 200-ml sample for total and free chlorine, conductivity, and pH analyses; and two 200-ml samples for BoNT analyses. From the purified effluent water produced by each device, a 100-ml sample for total aerobic bacterial count, a 200-ml sample for conductivity and pH, and two 200-ml samples for BoNT analyses were taken.
Bacteriological and physicochemical analysis. As a process indicator, the total aerobic count was analyzed by using 3 M Petrifilm aerobic count plates (3M Corp., St. Paul, Minn.) of 1-ml influent and effluent water samples. The plates were incubated at 35?C for 24 ? 2 h. Free and total chlorine were analyzed by using the Spectroquant Colorimeter Picco Cl<SUB>2</SUB> spectrophotometer (Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany). Temperature (Delta Ohm HD8601P; Padua, Italy), pH (Eutech Cybernetics pHScanWP2; Singapore, Republic of Singapore), and conductivity (HACH Model C0150 conductivity meter; Loveland, Colo.) were measured with portable devices.
BoNT analysis. BoNT was analyzed by using a mouse bioassay (24, 31) with the permission of the State Provincial Office of Southern Finland. Samples from influent water inoculated with toxic C. botulinum cultures and purified effluent waters were sterile filtered through 0.45-μm-pore-size bacteriological membrane filters and diluted 10-fold (10<SUP>−1</SUP>, 10<SUP>−2</SUP>, 10<SUP>−3</SUP>, 10<SUP>−4</SUP>, and 10<SUP>−5</SUP>). One undiluted sample from inoculated influent water was heated at 100?C for 10 min to destroy the toxin prior to testing for possible nonspecific reactions in the mouse bioassay. A 0.8-ml volume of each undiluted and diluted sample and of heated sample was injected intraperitoneally into two 20-g laboratory mice. The mice were observed for typical symptoms of botulism for 4 days. The test results were used to estimate the BoNT concentration in the water samples and a 50% lethal dose of 1.2 ng of BoNT type B per kg of body weight was used in this estimation (13). Two commercial rapid EIAs (Bot Tox BioThreat Alert Test Strip, Tetracore, Inc., Gaithersburg, Md., and BADD BoNT Rapid Detection Kit, Osborn Scientific Group, Lakeside, Ariz.) were used to further analyze the undiluted and diluted samples of inoculated influent water and undiluted samples of purified effluent water. The tests were qualitative and based on the use of dye-labeled anti-botulinum toxin antibodies, which in the presence of BoNT were intended to appear as visible colored lines. Both tests were performed according to the manufacturers' instructions. A 0.5-ml volume of sample was diluted with 0.5 ml of the buffer solution provided with the test kits, and a 0.15-ml volume of this dilution was dispensed onto the sample port of the test strips. The tests were interpreted as positive if two colored lines appeared in the test strip within 15 min: one in the test or sample location and one in the control location. The tests were interpreted as negative if only the control line appeared and as invalid if no line appeared at the control location.
Determination of purification capacities. The purification capacities of the devices were calculated as logarithmic (log<SUB>10</SUB>) reductions in concentrations of analyzed parameters (total aerobic count, conductivity, and estimated concentration of BoNT) between undiluted inoculated influent water and undiluted purified effluent water samples. The reduction in log<SUB>10</SUB> units was calculated by using the following formula: log<SUB>10</SUB> reduction = log<SUB>10</SUB> (N<SUB>i</SUB>/N<SUB>e</SUB>), where N<SUB>i</SUB> is the concentration in influent water before purification and N<SUB>e</SUB> is the concentration in purified effluent water after purification. If no aerobic bacteria were detected in the undiluted purified effluent water sample, the log<SUB>10</SUB> reduction was estimated by using an aerobic bacteria count of 1 CFU/ml of sample. If the mouse bioassay was negative for BoNT in the undiluted purified effluent water sample, the maximum concentration of BoNT in the sample was estimated by using the detection limit of the mouse bioassay and the log<SUB>10</SUB> reduction calculated as above.
</TD><TD class=content-cell>RESULTS
Two of the water purification devices tested were able to eliminate some or all of the BoNT type B from the inoculated influent water (Tables 3 and 4). The device based on reverse osmosis removed >2.3 log<SUB>10</SUB> units of BoNT to the level below the detection limit of the mouse bioassay, and the experimental sand filter reduced the level of toxin by 0.3 to 1.3 log<SUB>10</SUB> units. The devices based merely on physical filtration through ceramic or membrane filters through 0.2- to 0.4-μm pores were not able to remove BoNT from the inoculated influent water (reduction, <0.1 log<SUB>10</SUB> units), nor was UV irradiation from the low-pressure lamp able to destroy the toxin. All purification devices except for the sand filter reduced the level of total aerobic count from the inoculated water by >3.3 log<SUB>10</SUB> units (sand filter, reduction by 0.8 log<SUB>10</SUB> units). The device based on reverse osmosis was the only device able to reduce conductivity during the purification process (reduction by 1.6 log<SUB>10</SUB> units). The total aerobic count in the inoculated influent water was 2,000 CFU/ml of water, conductivity was 322.2 μS/cm, and the concentration of free and total chlorine was <0.01 mg/liter.
<TABLE style="CLEAR: both; WIDTH: 100%" cellSpacing=5 cellPadding=5 border=0><TBODY><TR vAlign=top align=left><TD align=middle width=100></TD><TD>TABLE 3. Detection of botulinum toxin type B in C. botulinum culture broth, inoculated influent water, and purified effluent waters
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
The results for detection of BoNT with the standard mouse bioassay and commercial rapid tests are presented in Table 3. The BoNT concentrations were extrapolated from the mouse bioassay results to be in the range of 3,960 to 5,985 ng/liter in undiluted inoculated influent water and 100-fold higher in the tryptone-peptone-glucose-yeast extract broth used for inoculating the influent water. Both commercial rapid EIA kits determined that all the samples that were positive in the mouse bioassay were negative for BoNT. All samples negative in the mouse bioassay were also negative in the rapid EIAs.
</TD><TD class=content-cell>DISCUSSION
The testing of the water purification devices produced information crucial to the assessment of drinking water safety and security. Based on the present study and some suggestive results from earlier studies (18), the only technique available for portable devices capable of eliminating BoNT from drinking water is reverse osmosis. To some extent sand filtration could be effective in reducing BoNT concentration, as suggested here as well as in studies on microcystin removal, but this most probably is strongly dependent on the thickness of the sand bed and properties of the sand used (21, 25).
In the present study, the 254-nm UV irradiation produced by the low-pressure lamp was not able to degrade BoNT in the water. Some studies indicated that direct sunlight can degrade BoNT by 90% in 1 h and 100% in 3 h (30). The degradation process probably required broad-spectrum UV irradiation coupled with oxidative spectrum produced by high-pressure UV lamps. Activated carbon combined with filtration through ceramic filters did not affect toxin removal in this study. A single previous study showed activated carbon to be effective against BoNT type A in water samples (14), but the removal was apparently due to the amount and type of activated carbon used as well as to the flow rate of the water and contact time with the carbon. In the present study, the activated carbon was either in the form of a thin layer or in a relatively small cartridge. Taking into account the purification techniques of individual filters, the results of aerobic bacteria removal and reduction in conductivity coincided with their theoretical purification capacities and with the results of earlier studies on some other drinking water purification filters (18, 28).
The rapid EIAs for detection of BoNT showed poor performance compared with the results of the standard mouse bioassay. Even the broth with toxic C. botulinum cultures at estimated BoNT concentrations of 396,000 to 598,500 ng/liter appeared to be negative for BoNT when evaluated with the rapid tests. It can be estimated from the toxicological data that only 1.2 to 1.8 ml of this broth constitutes the oral lethal dose for a 70-kg human being (4, 13, 27). The failure to detect BoNT is unexpected, since the estimated concentration of BoNT in this test was similar to or higher than the detection limits of the tests reported by the manufacturers. The intentional contamination of drinking water and water supply systems will apparently result in concentrations remarkably lower in distributed drinking water than in pure bacterial culture (8). However, the total intake of the toxin can still cause symptoms or death due to the total amount of water ingested. Therefore, the usefulness of these rapid tests is very limited due to their high detection limit and failure to detect lethal concentrations of toxin in drinking water. The negative test results will be misleading and may result in casualties if BoNT is intentionally released into drinking water supplies.
</TD></TR><TR vAlign=top><TD class=sidebar-cell width=145> </TD><TD class=content-cell>Acknowledgments
This work was supported by study grant Mdd587 from the Finnish Scientific Advisory Board for Defense, Ministry of Defense, Finland.
</TD><TD class=content-cell>REFERENCES
1. Alam, Z. B., M. Otaki, H. Furumai, and S. Ohgaki. 2001. Direct and indirect inactivation of Microcystis aeruginosa by UV-radiation. Water Res. 35:1008-1014. [PubMed].
2. Anderson, W. B., P. M. Huck, D. G. Dixon, and C. I. Mayfield. 2003. Endotoxin inactivation in water by using medium-pressure UV lamps. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 69:3002-3004. [PubMed].
3. Anderson, W. B., C. I. Mayfield, D. G. Dixon, and P. M. Huck. 2003. Endotoxin inactivation by selected drinking water treatment oxidants. Water Res. 37:4553-4560. [PubMed].
4. Arnon, S. S., R. Schechter, T. V. Inglesby, D. A. Henderson, J. G. Bartlett, M. S. Ascher, E. Eitzen, A. D. Fine, J. Hauer, M. Layton, S. Lillibridge, M. T. Osterholm, T. O'Toole, G. Parker, T. M. Perl, P. K. Russell, D. L. Swerdlow, and K. Tonat. 2001. BoNT as a biological weapon: medical and public health management. JAMA 285:1059-1070. [PubMed].
5. Atlas, R. M. 1998. The medical threat of biological weapons. Crit. Rev. Microbiol. 24:157-168. [PubMed].
6. Backer, H. 2002. Water disinfection for international and wilderness travelers. Clin. Infect. Dis. 34:355-364. [PubMed].
7. Blazes, D. L., J. V. Lawler, and A. A. Lazarus. 2002. When biotoxins are tools of terror. Early recognition of intentional poisoning can attenuate effects. Postgrad. Med. 112:89-92, 95-96, 98. [PubMed].
8. Burrows, W. D., and S. E. Renner. 1999. Biological warfare agents as threats to potable water. Environ. Health Perspect. 107:975-984. [PubMed].
9. Christopher, G. W., T. J. Cieslak, J. A. Pavlin, and E. M. Eitzen, Jr. 1997. Biological warfare. A historical perspective. JAMA 278:412-417. [PubMed].
10. Doellgast, G. J., G. A. Beard, J. D. Bottoms, T. Cheng, B. H. Roh, M. G. Roman, P. A. Hall, and M. X. Triscott. 1994. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and enzyme-linked coagulation assay for detection of Clostridium botulinum neurotoxins A, B, and E and solution-phase complexes with dual-label antibodies. J. Clin. Microbiol. 32:105-111. [PubMed].
11. Doellgast, G. J., M. X. Triscott, G. A. Beard, J. D. Bottoms, T. Cheng, B. H. Roh, M. G. Roman, P. A. Hall, and J. E. Brown. 1993. Sensitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for detection of Clostridium botulinum neurotoxins A, B, and E using signal amplification via enzyme-linked coagulation assay. J. Clin. Microbiol. 31:2402-2409. [PubMed].
12. Eisenberg, D., J. Soller, R. Sakaji, and A. Olivieri. 2001. A methodology to evaluate water and wastewater treatment plant reliability. Water Sci. Technol. 43:91-99.
13. Gill, D. M. 1982. Bacterial toxins: a table of lethal amounts. Microbiol. Rev. 46:86-94. [PubMed].
14. Gomez, H. F., R. Johnson, H. Guven, P. McKinney, S. Phillips, F. Judson, and J. Brent. 1995. Adsorption of BoNT to activated charcoal with a mouse bioassay. Ann. Emerg. Med. 25:818-822. [PubMed].
15. Grabow, W. O., C. G. Clay, W. Dhaliwal, M. A. Vrey, and E. E. Muller. 1999. Elimination of viruses, phages, bacteria and Cryptosporidium by a new generation Aquaguard point-of-use water treatment unit. Zentbl. Hyg. Umweltmed. 202:399-410.
16. Hallis, B., B. A. James, and C. C. Shone. 1996. Development of novel assays for botulinum type A and B neurotoxins based on their endopeptidase activities. J. Clin. Microbiol. 34:1934-1938. [PubMed].
17. Hoeger, S. J., D. R. Dietrich, and B. C. Hitzfeld. 2002. Effect of ozonation on the removal of cyanobacterial toxins during drinking water treatment. Environ. Health Perspect. 110:1127-1132. [PubMed].
18. H?rman, A., R. Rimhanen-Finne, L. Maunula, C.-H. von Bonsdorff, J. Rapala, K. Lahti, and M.-L. H?nninen. 2004. Evaluation of the purification capacity of nine portable, small-scale water purification devices. Water Sci. Technol. 50:179-183.
19. Josko, D. 2004. Botulin toxin: a weapon in terrorism. Clin. Lab. Sci. 17:30-34. [PubMed].
20. Khan, A. S., D. L. Swerdlow, and D. D. Juranek. 2001. Precautions against biological and chemical terrorism directed at food and water supplies. Public Health Rep. 116:3-14.
21. Lahti, K., J. Rapala, A. L. Kivim?ki, J. Kukkonen, M. Niemel?, and K. Sivonen. 2001. Occurrence of microcystins in raw water sources and treated drinking water of Finnish waterworks. Water Sci. Technol. 43:225-228.
22. Mobley, J. A. 1995. Biological warfare in the twentieth century: lessons from the past, challenges for the future. Mil. Med. 160:547-553. [PubMed].
23. Monjour, L., C. Volta, N. Uwechue, and G. de Lorenzi. 1990. Evaluation of traditional filters for water purification in Burkina Faso. Ann. Soc. Belg. Med. Trop. 70:311-315. [PubMed].
24. Nordic Committee on Food Analysis. 1991. Botulinum toxin. Determination in foods, blood, and other test materials. NMKL method no. 79, 2nd ed. Nordic Committee on Food Analysis, Oslo, Norway.
25. Rapala, J., K. Lahti, L. A. R?s?nen, A. L. Esala, S. I. Niemel?, and K. Sivonen. 2002. Endotoxins associated with cyanobacteria and their removal during drinking water treatment. Water Res. 36:2627-2635. [PubMed].
26. Raynor, T. H., E. L. White, J. M. Cheplen, J. M. Sherrill, and T. E. Hamm, Jr. 1984. An evaluation of a water purification system for use in animal facilities. Lab. Anim. 18:45-51. [PubMed].
27. Schechter, R., and S. S. Arnon. 2000. Extreme potency of BoNT. Lancet 355:237-238.
28. Schlosser, O., C. Robert, C. Bourderioux, M. Rey, and M. R. de Roubin. 2001. Bacterial removal from inexpensive portable water treatment systems for travelers. J. Travel Med. 8:12-18. [PubMed].
29. Schmidt, W., H. Willmitzer, K. Bornmann, and J. Pietsch. 2002. Production of drinking water from raw water containing cyanobacteria?pilot plant studies for assessing the risk of microcystin breakthrough. Environ. Toxicol. 17:375-385. [PubMed].
30. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases. 2001. Botulinum. In AMRIID?s medical management of biological casualties handbook. [Online.] U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, Fort Detrick, Md. http://www.vnh.org/BIOCASU/17.html.
31. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 2001. Bacteriological analytical manual online. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Food and Safety and Applied Nutrition, College Park, Md. [Online.] http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~ebam/bam-toc.html.
32. Wannemacher, R. W., R. E. Dinterman, W. L. Thompson, M. O. Schimdt, and W. D. Burrows. 1993. Treatment for removal of biotoxins from drinking water. Technical report 9120. U.S. Army Biomedical Research and Development Laboratory, Fort Detrick, Frederick, Md.
33. Warhurst, A. M., S. L. Raggett, G. L. McConnachie, S. J. Pollard, V. Chipofya, and G. A. Codd. 1997. Adsorption of the cyanobacterial hepatotoxin microcystin-LR by a low-cost activated carbon from the seed husks of the pan-tropical tree, Moringa oleifera. Sci. Total Environ. 207:207-211. [PubMed].
34. Whitby, M., A. C. Street, T. A. Ruff, and F. Fenner. 2002. Biological agents as weapons 1: smallpox and botulism. Med. J. Aust. 176:431-433. [PubMed].
35. Wictome, M., K. Newton, K. Jameson, B. Hallis, P. Dunnigan, E. Mackay, S. Clarke, R. Taylor, J. Gaze, K. Foster, and C. Shone. 1999. Development of an in vitro bioassay for Clostridium botulinum type B neurotoxin in foods that is more sensitive than the mouse bioassay. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 65:3787-3792. [PubMed].
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Please do not ask me for medical advice, I am not a medical doctor.
Avatar is a painting by Alan Pollack, titled, "Plague". I'm sure it was an accident that the plague girl happened to look almost like my twin.
Thank you,
Shannon Bennett
While oxidization may reduce concentrations of microcystins (one of the algal toxins) it appears to be less effective at reducing concentrations of cylindrospermopsin and anatoxins. These are potent toxins- the dose of anatoxin-a or cylindrospermopsin required to kill 1/2 of those exposed (LD50) is 200 micrograms per kilogram bodyweight (based on rodent exposure studies).
You will not find these dissolved toxins in your water unless you are using methods specifically to detect them.
I won't pursue the point. I just encourage those who plan to use surface water as their water source be aware of the issue. Toxic cyanobacteria is commonly detected in surface waters worldwide.
I recently came across this website which contains well over 800 publications (free) dealing with a mind-boggling set of 'how to's' mostly directed towards 3rd world development. It seems to me that it would take months of reading, and the full down load is 680 megabytes! Hit the 'Home' link in the upper left corner for the complete index of topics.
Wow - that is an unbelievable list of 'how-to' information.
Thank you for the link!
"There's a chance peace will come in your life - please buy one" - Melanie Safka "The greatest way to live with honor in this world is to be what we pretend to be" - Socrates
Goju, I would suggest you look on reverse osmosis purification system, they are not that expensive and very reliable.
French use it in many countries in Africa.
Just a thought - the manufacturers information for my Pur Powersurvivor reverse osmosis unit on our boat advises that the membrane would be destroyed by chlorine or by oil of any kind. I would be very careful before assuming that a reverse osmosis unit will handle heavily chlorinated water.
Use of chorine producing pool purifiers to purify drinking water?
In past posts it has been noted the relatively short shelf life of store bought bleach (for disinfecting and water purification purposes) 3 to 5 months from time of purchase not from the time the container is opened. Other forms of chlorine have a somewhat longer shelf life but can be dangerous to store as chlorine is by its nature corrosive and highly toxic.
What I have here is a challenge for our DIY's Do-It-Your-Selfers. I'm not entirely sure this is possible so I'd like to bounce the idea off more knowledgeable members. Recently I learned that there are pool purifications systems for home use that use salt to produce chlorine through electrolysis. Salt is cheap, plentiful and a lot safer to store than chlorine. Now here's the challenge: Could this existing technology with the available pool purification equipment be used as is or adapted to purify water to the point it is safe to drink? If it is could covered pools then be used as cisterns and community water distribution points during an emergency if needed?
We were put on this earth to help and take care of one another.
The following video is posted for information and discussion purposes only. I am not suggesting anyone do this. Chlorine is very, very dangerous and toxic! It is dangerous, to inhale, ingest or get on exposed skip or in eyes or any other part of the body. Hypothetically; I would want to use the chlorine test kit before betting my life and health on homemade bleach. Also due to the dangers of the toxic gas produced by this process I would think it preferable they do this out side or in very well ventilated area. Doing it in what looks like a small unventilated or poorly ventilated room may not have been the best idea.
This video shows how to convert salt water to Chlorine bleach by running an electric current thru it using what they are calling a converter made up of inexpensive parts that can be found at most hardware, plumbing and electrical supply stores.
Tweet
This article has been 
Comment