Drinking water filters cost way less than a television or a personal computer. Nonetheless, for some people those articles are considered "necessities". It is very unusual these days to visit a home that doesn't have a TV set and a computer, but it's also unusual to see a drinking water filter in the home or in the kitchen sink.

Groups of scientists and environmentalist warn governments about the dangers of chlorination, but there are as well dangers associated with no chlorination. During the Peruvian cholera outbreak in 1991, the local facilities were advised by the experts to use chlorine to kill the cholera pathogen. Nonetheless, local officials in Peru and other countries were reluctant to use it, because chlorination by-products or THMs increase the risk of cancer.

A total of 703 cancer cases per year, estimated by Researchers in Canada, have been caused by exposure to THMs. On the other hand, between the months of January and February in Peru in 1991, 10,000 people died from cholera.

THMs do increase the risk of cancer and everyone should consider having a showerhead and drinking water filters to reduce the risk. But, we can't petition the government agencies to stop chlorinating the water, because it isn't practical or objective.

Chorine is used almost everywhere by government agencies, but they try to control the amount of exposure as much as possible. No other disinfectant is as effective. To solve this problem and protect yourself you should buy a drinking water filter that removes chlorine and THMs, that's the wisest solution.

Water treatment facilities use chlorine to block the growth of algae in the pipes. Algae will affect the taste of water, and the microorganisms that cause cholera and other waterborne illnesses would begin to multiply within the algae. This is the reason behind the water treatment facilities decision to not use carbon filtration to remove the chlorine, as the water leaves the facility.

A recent study warns that the risk for those who swim in chlorinated pools coupled with exposure at home from drinking and showering, is not acceptable" and "something should be done". There is no reason why they didn't give the minimal suggestion that swimmers should get showerheads and drinking water filters.

In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency now demands that facilities publish a quality report every year. On them, they need to include chlorine and chloramines, along with THMs.

They began to require facilities to do this report after a California study showed that women who drink five or more glasses a day of regular tap water have a higher rate of miscarriage, possibly due to chlorine. Why don't they just suggest that pregnant women get a drinking water filter? A filter is less expensive than prenatal vitamins and it's a reasonable solution that could achieve healthy results right away.

Scientists want to warn you of the risks and government officials leave it up to you to make the decision. You can find the best drinking water filters on the market for less than $125 and showerhead units for even less. I believe your family's health is worth the investment, don't you?

Drinking water filters are far less expensive than a television or a personal computer. Yet many people feel that those are "necessities". It is rare to see a household these days without a TV and a computer, but it's just as rare to see a house with a drinking water filter on their tap.

Scientists and environmental groups warn governments about the dangers of chlorination, but the danger of not chlorinating is just as real. During the Peruvian cholera outbreak in 1991, health experts advised local facilities to use chlorine to kill the cholera pathogen. Local officials in Peru and other countries were resistant, because chlorination by-products or THMs increase the risk of cancer.

Researchers in Canada recently estimated that a total of 703 cancer cases per year were caused by exposure to THMs. But, 10,000 people died from cholera between the months of January and February, 1991 in Peru.

Yes, THMs increase the risk of cancer and everyone should have showerhead and drinking water filters to reduce the risk. But, don't petition government agencies to stop chlorinating the water. It just isn't practical.

Of course, chlorine is used nearly everywhere and government agencies try to control the amount of exposure as much as possible, but other disinfection methods are simply not as effective. Buying a point-of-use drinking water filter that removes chlorine and THMs is the only answer.

If treatment facilities do not add chlorine, algae will begin to grow in the pipes. Algae itself will affect the taste of water, but microorganisms that cause cholera and other waterborne illnesses would begin to flourish among the algae. I mention this in case you were wondering why treatment facilities couldn't use carbon filtration to remove the chlorine as the water leaves the facility.

Another recent study warns that the risk to those who swim in chlorinated pools, combined with exposure at home from drinking and showering, is "unacceptable" and "something should be done". Why don't they just advise swimmers to get showerhead and drinking water filters?

In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency now requires that facilities publish a quality report on an annual basis. On them, they list chlorine and chloramines, along with THMs.

They began to require facilities to do this the day after a California study showed that women who drink five or more glasses a day of ordinary tap water have a higher rate of miscarriage, possibly due to chlorine. Why don't they just suggest that pregnant women should use a drinking water filter? It's such a simple solution. It's less expensive than neo-natal vitamins.

Scientists want you to be aware of the risks and government officials want you to make the decision. It just seems logical to me. You can get the best drinking water filters on the market for less than $125 and showerhead units cost even less. Isn't your family's health worth the investment?