Does anyone have opinions (or even knowledge of actually reliable data) about whether drinking water filtered with reverse osmosis is worse for you than drinking tap water with PFAS, etc? I've seen the argument made that RO water is worse because of mineral loss and that the little remineralizer cartridges and such don't do enough to replace the loss.
I struggle with concerns about mineral depletion when you have 50%+ of your diet which is solid that probably contain a similar proportion of minerals to the water you consume.
Was about to comment the same thing. Constantly consuming solids and liquids from other places that contain all sorts of minerals, I highly doubt I'll be depleted because of my RO system.
More of a concern to me is that it's almost certain that PFAs etc are contaminating those other sources of food.
This is for sure a concern. Also when my RO system was first installed, the filter instruction said to run it to fully empty twice to run out the detergents (?) that the filters came with? I have to wonder what's in that, or lubricants used in construction.
I would not be surprised to find PFAs used somewhere in the construction of the system. Under regulation of this stuff means it's everywhere.
But then again, lots of the pipes, fixtures, etc. in the house ... plastic etc. as well.
Yeah the rubber bladder always concerned me as well. They say it is made of butyl so leaching is not to be expected but what if the production biproducts left on the inner surface are leaching out over time.
Same goes for a random o-ring or the PTFA tubing.
I have a TDS measurement device but these are questions beyond total dissolved solids.
The anecdote I have is that one of my grand daughter's teeth are worse than my other grand children and grand nieces and nephews. She used RO water more than the others when she was younger, and her dentist reinforced the idea that RO water was unfriendly to early tooth health, apparently due to reduced fluoridation. I'm not suggesting that is worse than forever chemicals.
The things I've read about fluoridation make it sound like fluoride applied to the surfaces of the teeth (eg via brushing) has the most benefit. I have to wonder if your grand daughter was also using a non-fluoride toothpaste.
I’m dubious. Millions of people in the country are on wells and don’t use any fluoride, also fluoride isn’t present in every municipal drinking water supply.
If I want to take stock of my available goods, do I count how much cargo vans going in and out of the warehouse are carrying, or do I have to go inside and take a look at what’s actually in store?
Last I looked into this, it seems there's products out there now that offer "nanofiltration" which has more permeable membranes than RO filters so the minerals can pass through but the more complicated molecules like PFAS cannot.
> I see lots of people drinking RO water and not dying
This also holds true for water with dangerously high levels of lead, and even the PFAS which are driving people to RO in the first place. It's really a terrible measure of how safe something is.
We have proven science around what lead can do. We don’t have that with RO water. It’s very fuzzy and like “if you drink only RO water and no minerals this is how it’s maybe bad”… but leaving out stuff like the coffee you make with RO adds back junk.
I wonder how much of the plastic in the RO machine leaches stuff into the supposedly pure water. The same for one's household plumbing --- does it leach into the water?