Chemical content of your product

Dear Bristol Water Plc,
By product I consider water to be h²o and anything else to be a
"solution or Product"
http://www.bristolwater.co.uk/pdf/enviro...

http://www.dwi.gov.uk/about/annual-repor...

As it appears low level poisons are part of the "product" also
other compounds are formed in processing the Product and I find it
deeply worrying.

For instance chloramine

For constituents known to be toxic can you tell me what process you
have to contact for a rebate on bottled water or ion exchange
filters to remove such constituents.

Yours faithfully,

Mr Young

Dear Patric Bulmer,

"The Water Supply (Fluoridation Indemnities) (England) Regulations
2005
Made 24th March 2005
Coming into force 1st April 2005

Indemnity
2. - (1) Pursuant to section 90 of the Act and subject to clauses 3
to 5 below, the Secretary of State for Health hereby indemnifies
the water undertaker-

(a) against all claims, proceedings, actions, damages, legal costs,
expenses and any other liabilities;

(b) in respect of any death or personal injury, or loss of or
damage to property;]
*******************

In essence, all that people who live in fluoridated areas have to
do is write a letter to their water company stating that they are
deducting money from their water bill to pay for water filters or
bottled water, and the Department of Health will pick up the tab.

All the water company has to do is say that they made a "reasonable
effort" to recover the debt, which means that you will get a few
reminder notices in the mail and perhaps, a phone call, but that
will probably be the extent of it. (Water companies want to
minimise costs.) The water company will then bill the DoH. At that
point it is up to the DoH to send the water company a cheque, and
then attempt to recover the "third party debt" - at huge cost to
the taxpayer.

The DoH has taken on the responsibility of being a debt collection
agency for the water industry. Presumably they believe their own
propaganda, and assume that only a few 'kooks and crackpots' will
refuse to pay their water bills. Imagine if it was the 90% of
people who actually oppose fluoridation! 6 million people are
already being fluoridated. Is the DoH going to take 5.4 million
people to court now, and millions more later?

However, NPWA sees a problem with the term "reasonable": it was not
defined in the Act. What is "a reasonable effort" to one party
might not seem reasonable to another party - in this case, neither
party has any idea of what definition of "reasonable" the other
party is assuming.

In reality, while the DoH appears to be indemnifying the water
industry for everything, they have actually indemnified them for
nothing, because of the vagueness of the document's language -
everything is open to interpretation, e.g. "reasonable". We foresee
the water industry having to take the Government to court in order
to recover its losses.

However, before the vague wording of the Act is clarified in court,
fluoridation objectors living in fluoridated areas might want to
help the UK water industry test the goodwill of the Government.
Write a letter to your water company and tell them that you are
starting to deduct the cost of your water filter, or bottled water,
from your monthly bill, and see what happens."

My intention is not to avoid payment but to use reverse osmosis/ion
exchange to remove chlorium etc
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorination

Yours sincerely,

Mr Young