Image and video hosting by TinyPic

GET SPECIAL FROM AMAZON

Image and video hosting by TinyPic
Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Friday, July 30, 2010

Water for Injection Description

Sterile Water for Injection, USP, is sterile, nonpyrogenic, distilled water in a single dose container for intravenous administration after addition of a suitable solute. It may also be used as a dispensing container for diluent use. No antimicrobial or other substance has been added. The pH is 5.5 (5.0 to 7.0). The osmolarity is 0.



The VIAFLEX plastic container is fabricated from a specially formulated polyvinyl chloride (PL 146 Plastic). The amount of water that can permeate from inside the container into the overwrap is insufficient to affect the solution significantly. Solutions in contact with the plastic container may leach out certain chemical components from the plastic in very small amounts; however, biological testing was supportive of the safety of the plastic container materials.



 
Water for Injection - Clinical Pharmacology


Sterile Water for Injection, USP is used for fluid replacement only after suitable additives are introduced to approximate isotonicity and to serve as a vehicle for suitable medications.










Read more: http://www.drugs.com/pro/water-for-injection.html#ixzz0vBs1Tvnu








Sunday, July 25, 2010

Drinking Water Crisis in Pakistan


In 1998 Nestlé choose Pakistan as country to roadmap its global water strategy in the bottled water market. It produced and introduced "Pure Life" as "a source of clean water. Bottled water is often the consumers' choice for a healthy beverage that gives them a source of minerals, helps to prevent obesity, and in so doing, reduces the risk of associated healthcare problems."

Nestlé' bottled water is not affordable for the people in need of safe and clean drinking water, nor is it only sold in Pakistan. Nestlé contributes to the decrease of the ground water level, that dries local water provisions for the sake of profit. Finally, Nestlé's use of groundwater obviously exceeding the renewable volume.

Nestlé's engagement in Pakistan and business policies are in contradiction to its own self commitments with regard to human rights and the principle of sustainable use of resources as well as to its membership in the United Nations Global Compact.

The global water shortage of affordable and safe drinking water is manifested in Pakistan with an estimated 44 percent of the population without access to safe drinking water. In rural areas, up to 90 percent of the population may lack such access. As one indication of the magnitude of the problem, it is estimated that 200,000 children in Pakistan die every year due to diarrhoeal diseases alone. Groundwater extraction is one of the few possibilities to satisfy peoples need for drinking water. But groundwater extraction in Pakistan is unregulated and different users, such as public water providers, agriculture and industrial exploitation compete about the use of this scare source.

Tuesday, July 20, 2010

DRINKING WATER FOR INFANTS & BABIES



Newborn babies do just fine with formula or breast milk; drinking water is not recommended until about six-12 months (too much water can cause jaundice or intoxication). However, when making bottles it is imperative to use pure water.
While most of the medical world pushes breast feeding, many moms opt for formula. Or in fact, must use the substitute for health reasons. Whatever the reason behind not using breast milk, attention must be focused on one crucial ingredient to formula: water. The World Health Organization states, "...concentrations of nutrient minerals in drinking water may contribute significantly to the total trace element and mineral intake of infants and young children...especially applicable to formula-fed infants during the first months of life, who may be the most vulnerable group affected by excessive concentrations of nutrients or contaminants in drinking water."

Formula can come ready to drink which parents can be assured is safe. Formula also comes in powder mixture, which water is mixed with. Because the latter infants will be in taking so much water through formula, safety of that water should be the parents' focus. In an astonishing statistic, infants receive 40-60% of the lead they are exposed to through drinking water- which can cause damages including mental retardation. Nitrate, chlorine, aluminum and fluoride are other worries for babies drinking formula. For this reason, most formula companies recommend bottled water or boiled tap water. Also, homes with water purification systems will be on the safe side. Contamination of water needs to limited.


Pure drinking water can also aid in healthy teeth and gums. Many toddlers need a bottle to go to sleep with or they get antsy. But, giving a bottle of juice or ice tea can cause decay. A bottle of water is suggested instead.

According to TodaysParent.com, until babies begin to eat food, they will get all of the nutrition they need from breast milk and formula. But, the site also says once a baby is older and drinking from a cup, water is preferred over juice as it satisfies thirst. (Plus, it will start a healthy water habit early!)

According to recent news and reports, most tap and well water in the U.S. are not safe for drinking due to heavy industrial and environmental pollution. Toxic bacteria, chemicals and heavy metals routinely penetrate and pollute our natural water sources making people sick while exposing them to long term health consequences such as liver damage, cancer and other serious conditions. We have reached the point where all sources of our drinking water, including municipal water systems, wells, lakes, rivers, and even glaciers, contain some level of contamination. Even some brands of bottled water have been found to contain high levels of contaminants in addition to plastics chemical leaching from the bottle.
A good water filtration system installed in your home is the only way to proactively monitor and ensure the quality and safety of your drinking water. Reverse osmosis water purification systems can remove 90-99% of all contaminants from city and well water to deliver healthy drinking water for you and your family.



Thursday, July 15, 2010

Health and Water Pallution

Virtually all types of water pollution are harmful to the health of humans and animals. Water pollution may not damage our health immediately but can be harmful after long term exposure. Different forms of pollutants affect the health of animals in different ways:
\

 
•Heavy metals from industrial processes can accumulate in nearby lakes and rivers. These are toxic to marine life such as fish and shellfish, and subsequently to the humans who eat them. Heavy metals can slow development; result in birth defects and some are carcinogenic.


 
•Industrial waste often contains many toxic compounds that damage the health of aquatic animals and those who eat them. Some of the toxins in industrial waste may only have a mild effect whereas other can be fatal. They can cause immune suppression, reproductive failure or acute poisoning.

•Microbial pollutants from sewage often result in infectious diseases that infect aquatic life and terrestrial life through drinking water. Microbial water pollution is a major problem in the developing world, with diseases such as cholera and typhoid fever being the primary cause of infant mortality.



 
•Organic matter and nutrients causes an increase in aerobic algae and depletes oxygen from the water column. This causes the suffocation of fish and other aquatic organisms.

•Sulfate particles from acid rain can cause harm the health of marine life in the rivers and lakes it contaminates, and can result in mortality.


 
•Suspended particles in freshwater reduces the quality of drinking water for humans and the aquatic environment for marine life. Suspended particles can often reduce the amount of sunlight penetrating the water, disrupting the growth of photosynthetic plants and micro-organisms.

Sunday, July 11, 2010

You are not just what you eat; you are what you drink.


Our life, our planet. Over 70% of the earth's surface is water. However, most of it—98%--is salt water. Only 2% of the earth's H20 is fresh water that we can drink, and of this, almost all is trapped in frozen glaciers.

You are not just what you eat; you are what you drink.

This is why water is so important to your health.


 
The Water Cure (TWC) does not sell water or purification systems or any related products. We offer insights and information; both free and in books that give you easy-to-understand scientific explanations on why water is vital to your well-being.

TWC believes promoting "water for health, for healing, for life" is an invaluable public health message. We can all change the way we drink – by drinking pure, natural water that is good for our health, our pocket book, and our environment.

No miracles. Just common sense backed by Dr. F. Batmaghelidj’s years of research and investigation into why water works so well in keeping us healthy and pain free. It can even cure illness in some people who get sick.


Water is the basis of all life and that includes your body. Your muscles that move your body are 75% water; your blood that transport nutrients is 82% water; your lungs that provide your oxygen are 90% water; your brain that is the control center of your body is 76% water; even your bones are 25% water.

Our health is truly dependent on the quality and quantity of the water we drink.

Dr. B's pioneering work shows that Unintentional Chronic Dehydration (UCD) contributes to and even produces pain and many degenerative diseases that can be prevented and treated by increasing water intake on a regular basis.

If you are co
mmitted to a healthy lifestyle, make drinking enough natural water a habit in your life. It won't take long for you to feel the benefit.

It is a free investment for your long-term health.

Saturday, July 3, 2010

Drinking Water Treatment

Ancient civilizations established themselves around water sources. While the importance of ample water quantity for drinking and other purposes was apparent to our ancestors, an understanding of drinking water quality was not well known or documented. Although historical records have long mentioned aesthetic problems (an unpleasant appearance, taste or smell) with regard to drinking water, it took thousands of years for people to recognize that their senses alone were not accurate judges of water quality.



Water treatment originally focused on improving the aesthetic qualities of drinking water. Methods to improve the taste and odor of drinking water were recorded as early as 4000 B.C. Ancient Sanskrit and Greek writings recommended water treatment methods such as filtering through charcoal, exposing to sunlight, boiling, and straining. Visible cloudiness (later termed turbidity) was the driving force behind the earliest water treatments, as many source waters contained particles that had an objectionable taste and appearance. To clarify water, the Egyptians reportedly used the chemical alum as early as 1500 B.C. to cause suspended particles to settle out of water. During the 1700s, filtration was established as an effective means of removing particles from water, although the degree of clarity achieved was not measurable at that time. By the early 1800s, slow sand filtration was beginning to be used regularly in Europe.



During the mid to late 1800s, scientists gained a greater understanding of the sources and effects of drinking water contaminants, especially those that were not visible to the naked eye. In 1855, epidemiologist Dr. John Snow proved that cholera was a waterborne disease by linking an outbreak of illness in London to a public well that was contaminated by sewage. In the late 1880s, Louis Pasteur demonstrated the “germ theory” of disease, which explained how microscopic organisms (microbes) could transmit disease through media like water.



During the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, concerns regarding drinking water quality continued to focus mostly on disease-causing microbes (pathogens) in public water supplies. Scientists discovered that turbidity was not only an aesthetic problem; particles in source water, such as fecal matter, could harbor pathogens. As a result, the design of most drinking water treatment systems built in the U.S. during the early 1900s was driven by the need to reduce turbidity, thereby removing microbial contaminants that were causing typhoid, dysentery, and cholera epidemics. To reduce turbidity, some water systems in U.S. cities (such as Philadelphia) began to use slow sand filtration.



While filtration was a fairly effective treatment method for reducing turbidity, it was disinfectants like chlorine that played the largest role in reducing the number of waterborne disease outbreaks in the early 1900s. In 1908, chlorine was used for the first time as a primary disinfectant of drinking water in Jersey City, New Jersey. The use of other disinfectants such as ozone also began in Europe around this time, but were not employed in the U.S. until several decades later.



Federal regulation of drinking water quality began in 1914, when the U.S. Public Health Service set standards for the bacteriological quality of drinking water. The standards applied only to water systems which provided drinking water to interstate carriers like ships and trains, and only applied to contaminants capable of causing contagious disease. The Public Health Service revised and expanded these standards in 1925, 1946, and 1962. The 1962 standards, regulating 28 substances, were the most comprehensive federal drinking water standards in existence before the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974. With minor modifications, all 50 states adopted the Public Health Service standards either as regulations or as guidelines for all of the public water systems in their jurisdiction.



By the late 1960s it became apparent that the aesthetic problems, pathogens, and chemicals identified by the Public Health Service were not the only drinking water quality concerns. Industrial and agricultural advances and the creation of new man-made chemicals also had negative impacts on the environment and public health. Many of these new chemicals were finding their way into water supplies through factory discharges, street and farm field runoff, and leaking underground storage and disposal tanks. Although treatment techniques such as aeration, flocculation, and granular activated carbon adsorption (for removal of organic contaminants) existed at the time, they were either underutilized by water systems or ineffective at removing some new contaminants.



Health concerns spurred the federal government to conduct several studies on the nation’s drinking water supply. One of the most telling was a water system survey conducted by the Public Health Service in 1969 which showed that only 60 percent of the systems surveyed delivered water that met all the Public Health Service standards. Over half of the treatment facilities surveyed had major deficiencies involving disinfection, clarification, or pressure in the distribution system (the pipes that carry water from the treatment plant to buildings), or combinations of these deficiencies. Small systems, especially those with fewer than 500 customers, had the most deficiencies. A study in 1972 found 36 chemicals in treated water taken from treatment plants that drew water from the Mississippi River in Louisiana. As a result of these and other studies, new legislative proposals for a federal safe drinking water law were introduced and debated in Congress in 1973.



Chemical contamination of water supplies was only one of many environmental and health issues that gained the attention of Congress and the public in the early 1970s. This increased awareness eventually led to the passage of several federal environmental and health laws, one of which was the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974. That law, with significant amendments in 1986 and 1996, is administered today by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water (EPA) and its partners.



Since the passage of the original Safe Drinking Water Act, the number of water systems applying some type of treatment to their water has increased. According to several EPA surveys, from 1976 to 1995, the percentage of small and medium community water systems (systems serving people year-round) that treat their water has steadily increased. For example, in 1976 only 33 percent of systems serving fewer than 100 people provided treatment. By 1995, that number had risen to 69 percent.



Since their establishment in the early 1900s, most large urban systems have always provided some treatment, as they draw their water from surface sources (rivers, lakes, and reservoirs) which are more susceptible to pollution. Larger systems also have the customer base to provide the funds needed to install and improve treatment equipment. Because distribution systems have extended to serve a growing population (as people have moved from concentrated urban areas to more suburban areas), additional disinfection has been required to keep water safe until it is delivered to all customers.



Today, filtration and chlorination remain effective treatment techniques for protecting U.S. water supplies from harmful microbes, although additional advances in disinfection have been made over the years. In the 1970s and 1980s, improvements were made in membrane development for reverse osmosis filtration and other treatment techniques such as ozonation. Some treatment advancements have been driven by the discovery of chlorine-resistant pathogens in drinking water that can cause illnesses like hepatitis, gastroenteritis, Legionnaire’s Disease, and cryptosporidiosis. Other advancements resulted from the need to remove more and more chemicals found in sources of drinking water.



According to a 1995 EPA survey, approximately 64 percent of community ground water and surface water systems disinfect their water with chlorine. Almost all of the remaining surface water systems, and some of the remaining ground water systems, use another type of disinfectant, such as ozone or chloramine.



Many of the treatment techniques used today by drinking water plants include methods that have been used for hundreds and even thousands of years (see the diagram below). However, newer treatment techniques (e.g., reverse osmosis and granular activated carbon) are also being employed by some modern drinking water plants.



Recently, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Academy of Engineering named water treatment as one of the most significant public health advancements of the 20th Century. Moreover, the number of treatment techniques, and combinations of techniques, developed is expected to increase with time as more complex contaminants are discovered and regulated. It is also expected that the number of systems employing these techniques will increase due to the recent creation of a multi-billion dollar state revolving loan fund that will help water systems, especially those serving small and disadvantaged communities, upgrade or install new treatment facilities.



Image and video hosting by TinyPic
Image and video hosting by TinyPic