8 August 2015
Whenever a corporate entity launches some form of disturbing act upon the populations, you can rest assured the event is some kind of test to get data. In many cases the test is to procure data as to how the public react to certain anomalies in the system they depend upon for some form of essential service. They are looking for the best ways to herd the people into some form of excited behaviour to see how they can best utilise that energy for their own ends.
United Utilities are rightfully coming under fire for allowing a parasite into the water system affecting a large area of East Lancashire. Cryptosporidium is a parasite that affects the epithelial cells of the human gastrointestinal tract and other tissue such as the respiratory tract.
Confusion is the name of the game in East Lancashire after United Utilities said those living in Blackpool, Chorley, Fylde, Preston, South Ribble and Fylde, all needed to boil their water before using it.
United Utilities say engineers are flushing out the pipe network surrounding Franklaw Water Treatment Works in Preston, where routine tests found parasites in the water.However, it later emerged five areas across Blackburn and Darwen were also covered by the warning.
They are Roman Road Industrial Estate, Stockclough Lane, Finnington Lane, and Finnington Trading Estate in Feniscowles, Knott Street, Skelton Street, Parkdale Gardens, and St Albans Road, all in Darwen, and Oakenhurst Farm in Lower Darwen.
Source
Earlier today on the local radio stations United Utilities claimed that such an outbreak was common before the changes made to the water systems during the 1990s that today such an event is a rare thing indeed as they can detect it before it goes out through the water mains. This had my attention because have never heard of such an outbreak at all before this weeks announcement.
I have had a long and laborious communication process with United Utilities over some 10 years, to say they are obstructive, patronising, have the local MP’s in their pocket, secretive and liars, would be selling them very short.
Should we take seriously the explanations of this military backed controller of our water supplies when they claim this entire disaster is some sort of mishap? Absolutely not.
Since the privatisation of the utility companies, the water supplies have shifted from fresh Lake District water through a man made tunnel, to a closed system. This means that all the waste from our homes, hospitals, industry, slaughter houses, chemical plants etc, is contained, chemically treated, and then sent back to our homes for us to use. I have requested on many an occasion the chemical data results for the water they supply they claim as safe and clean, but to no avail.
What are they really hiding, and what is really going on with our water?
On the Fylde coast, for many decades, the blame for the pollution found on the beaches was directed at United Utilities. After many millions of taxpayer pound notes and various large underground works on the sewer system in around Fylde, nothing changed the pollution, what was found by United Utilities was human excrement being used on the surrounding farmland as organic fertiliser, was in fact seeping onto the coastline and polluting the beaches. This remains a dark kept secret with United Utilities taking the blame, allowing more taxpayer cash to float through the company to remedy a situation caused entirely from the farming community using human poo, and calling the produce ‘organic’.
The following gives clear evidence that United Utilities are such a powerful private enterprise, and a member of the Stakeholder (corporate) Committee, that they can demand the elected MP’s ignore my information and requests for answers, they also have the power to have an elected Member of Parliament announce his resignation in order they did not have to answer the rebuff to their rather large file of pseudo-scientific argument against several English university studies, which presented the fact, the Utilities companies were actively allowing contamination of our natural streams and rivers.
Eugenics : UK River Sewage Pollution Including Androgens
The Eugenics movement has never been shy to discuss mass sterilisation of the populations through such facilitators as vaccinations, crop sprays, and the most dastardly, to use the water systems which pump the water into every home in every nation.
The 1980s and what was known as Thatcherism, began the privatisation of all the utility companies, opening the doors to those same eugenicist minds to purchase the controlling shares in these very important backbone requirements for any civilised nation to function, giving them access to every home within every region and the perfect method for the weaponisation of an essential ingredient to our lives.
Before privatisation the same minds controlled these national corporations via the secret networks, but to actually own the companies, which privatisation secures, gives the ability for absolute secrecy, because instead of normal folk working within these companies, who would perhaps blow the whistle at the thought of poisoning the populace, intelligence operatives would slowly move in their own people, and given we are talking of the weaponisation of this system, we are speaking of ex military minds.
If we look at the study first, then I will present my action against United Utilities continuing for some 8 years.
Here is the story of an Exeter university study :
River Sewage Pollution Found To Be Disrupting Fish Hormones
Researchers found evidence of endocrine disruption in fish including the roach, pictured below
New research has strengthened the case that polluted river water is harming fishes ability to reproduce by disrupting their hormonal, or endocrine, systems. Researchers found evidence of endocrine disruption in fish including the roach, left. Scientists found that sewage treatment works are releasing significant volumes of chemicals that inhibit the function of testosterone, the male hormone, into British rivers. They call these chemicals anti-androgens; such pollutants might include compounds used in pharmaceuticals, cleaning products, cancer treatments and pesticides.
These anti-androgens are likely to contribute to fish feminisation a process whereby male fish develop some female reproductive characteristics, reducing the quality and number of sperm they produce and probably also their ability to compete to pass on their genes. In other studies exposure to anti-androgens has also been linked to damage to human reproductive health.
Scientists already suspected that the female hormone estrogen could cause feminising in fish, but it turns out that a whole cocktail of chemicals acting in combination is likely to be behind the problem.
Our research shows that a much wider range of chemicals than we previously thought is leading to hormone disruption in fish, says Professor Charles Tyler at the University of Exeter, one of the papers authors. This means that the pollutants causing these problems are likely to be coming from a wide variety of sources.
Tyler adds that the circle is getting tighter in establishing the hypothesis that similar pollution may also be causing male fertility problems in humans, though he notes that no such connection has yet been proved.
He explains that in the lab exposures to estrogenic chemicals at the concentrations found in the natural environment do not seem to cause problems of the severity seen in wild fish; when the oestrogen’s are combined with anti-androgens the mixture is likely to produce the effects seen in polluted rivers.
The study was carried out by the Universities of Brunel, Exeter and Reading with the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, with statistical modelling support from Beyond the Basics Ltd, and appears in Environmental Health Perspectives. It is based on more than 1000 fish sampled over three years from 30 rivers across England, and on samples of effluent from 43 sewage works.
We have been working intensively in this field for over ten years, says Dr Susan Jobling at Brunel’s Institute for the Environment, lead author on the paper. The new research findings illustrate the complexities in unraveling chemical causation of adverse health effects in wildlife populations and re-open the possibility of a human-wildlife connection in which effects seen in wild fish and in humans are caused by similar combinations of chemicals.
Something in the water
The University of Exeter is now working with chemists at the University of Sussex to establish exactly what the chemicals in question are, and hence to understand how they are being released into waste water. This will involve both chemical testing of effluent from sewage treatment works and experiments with fish at the works outlets. Fish accumulate these chemicals in their bile, so can be used to make identifying them easier. The scientists will also be working with regulators and the water industry to test the chemicals effects of these anti-androgens in combination with estrogen and related female hormones to get a realistic analysis on their combined effects in our river systems.
Earlier research from Brunel and Exeter scientists showed how female hormones like estrogen are leading to the feminising of male fish.
Found in the contraceptive pill as well as some industrial chemicals, estrogen and associated chemicals enter rivers via sewage treatment works, causing reproductive problems in fish by reducing fertility and in some cases even causing male fish to partially change sex. One common cause of fertility problems in male humans is called testicular dysgenesis syndrome. This syndrome is known to be caused by exposure to anti-androgens in lab mammals.
The fact the team has proven that anti-androgens as well as estrogen are being emitted in significant quantities into British rivers certainly provides indirect support for the hypothesis that pollution is behind at least some of the increase in human fertility problems. The researchers say more work is now needed to test this hypothesis.
In vertebrates the hormonal system is highly conserved; ours is comparatively close to that of fish, Tyler notes, though he also points out that the kinds of exposure to river pollution a human could face is very different from what a fish experiences swimming in a soup of 100,000 chemicals contained within effluent discharges, in some cases throughout the fish’s life.
Other researchers also call for caution in connecting the cases of fish and humans. Are anti-androgens part of the mix of chemicals that could be disrupting wildlife and humans? Yes, says Dr Andrew Johnson, an environmental scientist at the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology in Wallingford who has spent a decade working on endocrine disruption.
This paper shows that what we already knew was happening to humans is also happening in freshwater, Johnson adds. He explains that research on the hormone-disruption affecting humans has tended to focus on a group of chemicals called phthalates, to which humans are believed to be exposed primarily through cosmetics, and argues that it’s not clear that chemicals found in sewage effluent are likely to return to the water supply to affect humans.
Whether the chemicals can do so will depend on exactly which anti-androgens are discovered to be present. If those present are found to be particularly hydrophilic, or water-soluble, its possible they could get through filtration procedures and return to the drinking water supply, but these filters efficiently remove most pollutants.
End of Report
Source
I sent this information to Lancashire MPs on Tuesday 14 July 2009 below, asking them to investigate the information on behalf of the people of Lancashire :
Greg Pope. Hyndburn Labour
Rosie Cooper. Lancashire West Labour
Jack Straw. Blackburn Labour
David Crausby. Bolton Labour
Brian Iddon. Bolton Labour
Ruth Kelly. Bolton labour
David Chaytor. Bury Labour
Ivan Lewis. Bury Labour
Lyndsay Hoyle. Chorley Labour
Ben Wallace Lancaster Conservative
Phil Woolas. Oldham Labour
Michael Meacher. Oldham Labour
Gordon Prentice. Pendle labour
Mark Hendrick. Preston Labour
David Barrow. Ribble Valley Labour
Nigel Evans. Ribble Valley Conservative
Paul Rowan. Rochdale Lib Dem
Janet Anderson. Rossendale-Darwen
John Pugh. Southport Lib Dem
Neil Turner. Wigan Labour
I received this response from MP Greg Pope :
Thanks for your email and I’ll raise this issue with United Utilities.
Please can I ask you not to write to other MPs in the area? You only have one MP, currently me, and MPs can only deal with people who live in their own constituency even if the issue affects a wider area. Best wishes Greg
What is required in this case is for taxpayers to send this page URL to your MP and ask they raise the issue in your area, because the care-less response from most MPs was that they cannot help me because I do not have residence in their area, of course they all live in Lancashire they are all using this water? Go Figure!
Thursday 16 July 2009
John Pugh MP for Southport replied thus :
Thanks Sean. Strictly speaking MPs are not supposed to take on issues raised from people in other constituencies so I suggest you raise this with your own MP. However it seems an important matter that concerns us all and I will raise it with UU when we have one of regular parliamentary meetings. The last meeting we had with them was lively to say the least.
Kind Regards, John
Side Effects : Chemotherapy Drugs And UK Rivers
Left : Computer model of a molecule of the chemotherapy drug fluorouracil (5FU). Fluorouracil is used to treat bowel, breast and stomach cancers. Could drugs used routinely in chemotherapy treatments find their way into the UK’s streams and rivers? Andrew Johnson investigates. Globally, we consume and excrete tens of thousands of tonnes of chemicals every day. We have little idea how some of these chemicals affect the environment after we discard them, or flush them down the drain. Some drugs are potentially more harmful to the environment than others.
Pharmaceuticals are by design biologically active at low doses, making them a particular cause for concern. A proportion, perhaps 20 per cent, of the pharmaceuticals consumed, including those administered to livestock and pets don’t get broken down by our bodies; they flow unchanged into sewage treatment plants and on to rivers.
In 2005, water quality scientists at the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology in Wallingford, Oxfordshire began reviewing the issue of pharmaceuticals in rivers and their potential threat to wildlife and human health. Our preliminary analysis into the most toxic class of pharmaceuticals cytotoxic chemotherapy drugs reveals that there is a theoretical risk these chemicals could reach UK drinking water.
Source
United Utilities UK Water Provider
In 2006, Is sent a letter to United Utilities requesting they send me their daily water testing results to ascertain as they promote, to be supplying my home with good clean water. They reacted in the first instance not to my good self, but to another resident on the Drive on which I live. Three days after my letter, they cold called to a neighbour and requested they carry out a routine water purity test, I of course was not supposed to hear about this reaction, but I did. So it is pretty obvious they panicked, and rushed to see what I could see as far as water content goes.
I sent another letter in response to yet another bill sent in May 2009 :
Dated 1 June 2009
Dear United Utilities.
On July 11th 2006 I wrote a letter to you requesting information before I pay you the considerable amounts of monies thus :
As you are aware you have billed me for quite a considerable amount of monies you claim I owe you, for, as you would state, providing a supply of good clean fresh uncontaminated harmless water. This must be verified before I would consider offering any payments to you and therefore request a full and detailed copy of all daily analysis for the water supply for Lancashire you have for the period April 2000 to July 2006
In your letter dated 14 May 2009, although I received it only five days ago! It states : When we recently looked at your account we saw you have not paid your water charges for some time. I am still waiting for a reply to the above letter, and would ask you supply the information from April 2000 to today which is 1 June 2009. I await your response
I received a response; Your case is being handled by our legal department. That’s strange, I still have not received the requested data, do you think they are doing it on purpose?
.
Further Study
Water is Memory
Why Boys Are Turning Into Girls : http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthcomment/geoffrey-lean/6418553/Why-boys-are-turning-into-girls.html
Phthalate Warning : Medications Contain Chemicals That Feminize Unborn Baby Boys : http://www.naturalnews.com/027514_phthalates_feminization.html
The Reply from United Utilities via my MP
Androgens in the Water : United Utilities Reply via MP Greg Pope Reply from United Utilities to MP Greg Pope after Greg Raised the Androgens issue on my behalf.
Dated 29 July 2009.
Thank you for your letter of 14 July 2009, on behalf of your above constituent, regarding Mr Young’s concerns about Androgens in the water supply.
I note Mr Young’s comments that he has previously contacted us to obtain the relevant information in relation to chemical contact in they’re drinking water. Our records show that Mr. Young wrote to us on 1 June 2009 with regard to his water charges. Mr Young did also request a full and detailed copy of all daily analysis for the water supply for Lancashire for the period of April 2000 to July 2006. We replied to Mr. Young on 18 June 2009 and advised that we are unable to provide him with this information; however we also advised that this information is a matter of public record and is available via our website or his local library.
Please allow me to address in detail the issues Mr. young has raised in this matter :-
Neither oestrogen nor oestrogenic substances are specifically regulated in the UK water supply (water quality) Regulations; and, as a result this data is not routinely collected as part of water monitoring. However, we are committed to research of endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs). Understanding EDCs through the water and wastewater treatment process is an area of investigation for the company and the UK water industry. Below is the companies position on EDCs.
In recent years the UK water industry as a whole has invested heavily in the treatment of domestic wastewater and this has brought about a dramatic improvement in the river quality in the UK. Fish have returned to once heavily polluted rivers and are now found in more waters than at any time over the last century. However researchers are now able to observe more subtle symptoms of pollution in some wild fish, including the feminising condition termed ‘Intersex,’ which may be brought about through the action of certain EDCs.
To gain further understanding of how wastewater treatment works (WwTW) might be built and operated to reduce the concentrations of EDCs in UK rivers, the Environment Agency promoted the requirements for a national demonstration programme (NDP). The NDP is being undertaken collaboratively by all 10 UK water companies in England and Wales and is being coordinated through the UK Water Industry Research (UKWIR).
The NDP consists of two phases :-
The investigation of EDC removal by a wide range of conventional sewage treatment processes; and
The investigation of advanced treatment processes aimed at achieving very high standards of EDC removal.
The first monitoring phase has resulted in the production of an extensive and valuable body of robust data regarding the occurrence, treatment and release of various EDCs from conventional WwTW.
The second phase of work, which is designed to provide information on the costs and benefits of reducing EDCs in effluents, will continue through 2009.
The concern over health effects in humans has centred on male reproductive function. In particular, there are claims of worldwide decreases in human semen quality. Some studies have claimed significant decreases in human semen quality over a period of several decades, however, this is disputed, as some studies have found no such decreases.
In 2002 the World health Organisation (WHO) published an assessment report on EDCs.
This reported that although there is evidence that certain types of environmental pollution can interfere with hormonal processes in some species, there is weak evidence that human health has been adversely effected by exposure to endocrine-active chemicals. Generally studies examining EDC-induced effects in humans have yielded inconsistent and inconclusive results and it must also be considered that other environmental factors (such as diet, obesity, stress smoking) may be involved in any effects seen.
Oestrogenic substances are generally highly lipophilic (fat soluble) which suggests that their concentrations in drinking water will be low. A recent report by the institute for Environment and Health concluded that on the current evidence drinking water is unlikely to be a significant contributing factor in reported effects on the human reproductive system. This is supported by their findings of a collaborative MAFF/DoE (now Department of Food, Environment and Rural Affairs [DEFRA]) study. It concluded that there was no evidence of a risk to drinking water supplies.
A recent study by the American later Works Association (AWWA) Research Foundation backs these findings further. It concluded that EDCs occur only at minute concentrations in drinking water, and it is highly unlikely that most of these chemicals will pose any credible threat to human health via drinking water exposure. The report goes on to say that advanced treatment processes as well as some conventional processes will remove or destroy the majority of these compounds.
The majority of drinking water in the North west region is drawn from first time sources, such as upland reservoirs, which have minimal opportunities which have minimal opportunities for contact with sewage or wastewater. Even the lowland river sources contain relatively small proportions of effluent from wastewater treatment plants.
I trust that I have addressed the issues Mr. young has raised in great detail, however, if you would like any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Philip N. Green their Chief Executive
My reply sent to Greg Pope to the above letter broken down for ease of understanding :
In reply to first section :
Point 1 Quote :
I note Mr Young’s comments that he has previously contacted us to obtain the relevant information in relation to chemical contact in they’re drinking water. Our records show that Mr. Young wrote to us on 1 June 2009 with regard to his water charges. Mr Young did also request a full and detailed copy of all daily analysis for the water supply for Lancashire for the period of April 2000 to July 2006. We replied to Mr. Young on 18 June 2009 and advised that we are unable to provide him with this information; however we also advised that this information is a matter of public record and is available via our website or his local library.
End of Quote
The idea that as a company providing one of the essentials for living in this nation, in this case water, that you cannot provide the data requested is to say the least, pathetic. I will present the second letter I sent to United Utilities on 22 July 2009, because this clarifies why your web site is totally inadequate :
Dear United Utilities.
Thank you for your letter dated 18 June 2009. I am afraid you have me mixed up with some kind of idiot, to suggest the invoice you have sent me is valid and to be paid by my good self regardless of the fact you are doing all you cannot to produce the requested information, is to say the least obtuse.
Allow me to simplify the issue; you pump water into my home and declare the water is clean and free of harmful contaminants to the point I can cook, drink, and use for bathing, without any harmful affects to my person and those I am responsible for. Should this prove to be correct you are then able to ask for a payment for services rendered?
Before we get into the guts of the situation, allow me to point this serious breech of contract on your behalf.
1) If I water my lawns, with the water you provide, it turns yellow.2) If I water my plants with the water you provide they cease to flower.3) If I do not add the correct amount of aquatic balancing chemicals to your water, my fish die.4) When I fill a bath my water smells of Chlorine, a chemical which you use to clean the water but forget to mention the fact it is a poison to living cells.
Without the presentation of our detailed water testing results, the above points clearly show for the layman that the water you supply is not as you promote it is contaminated.
Your website is beneath the criteria I need to verify the above points, I therefore request your water testing results for Lancashire, my area as priority, in relation to your data as it relates to the following :
Phosphates, Florin, Illuminum, H2S1S6, Hydroflouride Acid, Chromium, Uranium, Thorium, Barium, Lead, Mercury, Uranium Hexafluoride, Cadmium, Mercury, Androgens (In the piped water and also the rivers streams and lodges)
I also request in writing details of any connections your company has to Cargill and IMC Global, either direct with each individual company, or via a subsidiary, such as Mosaic (which is a mix of the two).
Until you prove that the water you pump through my pipes is fresh, clean and free of contaminants, which means the removal of Chlorine in the first instance, until such a move is made I, and all others who you supply are under no obligation to pay the monies you have requested. Under Common Law it is called Lawful Rebellion
May I point out that you yourself and your family are using the water in whichever area you live within, it is in everybody’s interest we ensure our water is clean and suitable for drinking, as it presently is not, we need to change this reality?
Regards sean young
Point 2 Quote :
Please allow me to address in detail the issues Mr. young has raised in this matter :-
Neither oestrogen nor oestrogenic substances are specifically regulated in the UK water supply (water quality) Regulations; and, as a result this data is not routinely collected as part of water monitoring. However, we are committed to research of endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs). Understanding EDCs through the water and wastewater treatment process is an area of investigation for the company and the UK water industry.
End of Quote
May I refer you back to the Exeter University report as it relates to their findings involving 30 rivers and 43 sewage treatment plants :
Scientists found that sewage treatment works are releasing significant volumes of chemicals that inhibit the function of testosterone, the male hormone, into British rivers. They call these chemicals anti-androgens; such pollutants might include compounds used in pharmaceuticals, cleaning products, cancer treatments and pesticides.
These anti-androgens are likely to contribute to fish feminising a process whereby male fish develop some female reproductive characteristics, reducing the quality and number of sperm they produce and probably also their ability to compete to pass on their genes. In other studies exposure to anti-androgens has also been linked to damage to human reproductive health.
The study was carried out by the Universities of Brunel, Exeter and Reading with the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, with statistical modelling support from Beyond the Basics Ltd, and appears in Environmental Health Perspectives. It is based on more than 1000 fish sampled over three years from 30 rivers across England, and on samples of effluent from 43 sewage works.
What you have admitted to here, is gross negligence just because you can get away with it out of the eye of UK water supply (water quality) Regulations. It is quite obvious here that you are releasing these Androgens Oestrogen’s into the natural water veins because you can. We know you have the filters in place to do just that, yet you are not using the filters, can you explain why?
It is very clear that you are releasing sewage into the fresh water as presented in the Exeter joint study, the question is why in 2009, you are polluting the natural lifeblood of the country which is what we did before we could claim civility as a society, this is a backward step in waste cleansing. Tell me Mr Green, are you educationally inept, or are you carrying out an agenda
Point 3 Quote :
In recent years the UK water industry as a whole has invested heavily in the treatment of domestic wastewater and this has brought about a dramatic improvement in the river quality in the UK. Fish have returned to once heavily polluted rivers and are now found in more waters than at any time over the last century. However researchers are now able to observe more subtle symptoms of pollution in some wild fish, including the feminising condition termed Intersex, which may be brought about through the action of certain EDCs.
End of Quote
Your information is very deceptive indeed Mr Green, the reason the water became cleaner was because the many factories closed, and hence they no longer polluted the waters.
Could you please provide a full and detailed audit of all monies spent since North West Water was stolen by your shareholders from the British economy, with full details of each individual project, to show every client of your company ( the paying public) that what you have just presented is indeed fact?
Point 4 Quote :
To gain further understanding of how wastewater treatment works (WwTW) might be built and operated to reduce the concentrations of EDCs in UK rivers, the Environment Agency promoted the requirements for a national demonstration programme (NDP). The NDP is being undertaken collaboratively by all 10 UK water companies in England and Wales and is being coordinated through the UK Water Industry Research (UKWIR).
The NDP consists of two phases : the investigation of EDC removal by a wide range of conventional sewage treatment processes; and the investigation of advanced treatment processes aimed at achieving very high standards of EDC removal.
The first monitoring phase has resulted in the production of an extensive and valuable body of robust data regarding the occurrence, treatment and release of various EDCs from conventional WwTW.
The second phase of work, which is designed to provide information on the costs and benefits of reducing EDCs in effluents, will continue through 2009.
End of Quote
Please supply the phase 1 data which as you say, is an extensive and valuable body of robust data regarding the occurrence, treatment and release of various EDCs from conventional WwTW?
It is essential that we have this data for comparative studies into the real workings of United Utilities and the remaining utility companies operating in Britain. You are certainly presenting a caring and responsible company ethic Mr Green, but as is always the case in situations such as this the proof is in the pudding. So I look forward to you’re caring sharing ethic continuing in your eagerness to hand over this vital data, after all your family is using this water too.
Point 5 Quote :
The concern over health effects in humans has centred on male reproductive function. In particular, there are claims of worldwide decreases in human semen quality. Some studies have claimed significant decreases in human semen quality over a period of several decades, however, this is disputed, as some studies have found no such decreases.
End of Quote
You raise a very important point here, yes we have witnessed a decrease in human semen quality, (the correct term is sperm count), but when one studies Estrogens and Oestrogen’s found in the milk of cattle and indeed the baby formula milk substitute, we find this decline in sperm count has a direct link to the rise in chemical usage in both farming feed given to the animals, the vet vaccinations, and because they are drinking the water in the rivers and streams that your company is admitting releasing into the natural waterways.
Could you please supply the exact studies to which you refer in the above rather vague conclusion?
Point 6 Quote :
In 2002 the World health Organisation (WHO) published an assessment report on EDCs. This reported that although there is evidence that certain types of environmental pollution can interfere with hormonal processes in some species, there is weak evidence that human health has been adversely effected by exposure to endocrine-active chemicals. Generally studies examining EDC-induced effects in humans have yielded inconsistent and inconclusive results and it must also be considered that other environmental factors (such as diet, obesity, stress smoking) may be involved in any effects seen.
End of Quote
Are we speaking of the very same World Health Organisation that is working in collusion with the Nazi IG Farben corporation Baxter Pharmaceuticals, trying to force vaccinate all 194 IHR signatory nations? Baxter was caught and is now being sued for placing 72 Kilos of Live Attenuated Flu Virus in vaccinations, which it sold to France and many other EU countries, and is the very company providing most of the chosen three shot vaccination the WHO are going to force, are you suggesting I take anything that comes out of the WHO seriously.
We have a second count of gross negligence on your part in promoting the wrong data, then on the back of that data poisoning not only our rivers and streams, but the water you pump into our homes, which you expect us to drink, cook and bathe, and pay you for the contamination.
In relation to the idea that obesity and smoking as cause, I find rather tedious in the extreme. I base this fact on the known criteria that far less people smoke today as did before we had this Hormone Endocrine problem, that this problem goes hand in hand with the privatisation of the water companies, so I refute in the strongest possible terms your analogy, but you are welcome to provide the exact data on which you base your conclusion.
When it comes to diet and indeed stress, we are still operating within the same theatre, the very chemicals of which we speak have been placed into the food chain and the water, so your company is yet again at the tip of this insanity, because you are polluting the water the animals drink and in many cases from which the vegetation takes its water. This I can assure you is contributing to the stress..
Point 7 Quote
Oestrogenic substances are generally highly lipophilic (fat soluble) which suggests that their concentrations in drinking water will be low. A recent report by the institute for Environment and Health concluded that on the current evidence drinking water is unlikely to be a significant contributing factor in reported effects on the human reproductive system. This is supported by their findings of a collaborative MAFF/DoE (now Department of Food, Environment and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) study. It concluded that there was no evidence of a risk to drinking water supplies.
End of Quote
In relation to Oestrogens being Lipophilic, I am fully aware of this fact, which only adds to my concern here. This very fact alone proves that the filters in place will in fact prevent any androgens from entering the natural water systems. To be frank Mr Green, you are inept in your chemical knowledge, deceptive in your supposed explanation, and not fit for the position of chief executive in my eyes. You are however the perfect choice of those minds who actually do have the control at United Utilities.
Point 8 Quote :
A recent study by the American later Works Association (AWWA) Research Foundation backs these findings further. It concluded that EDCs occur only at minute concentrations in drinking water, and it is highly unlikely that most of these chemicals will pose any credible threat to human health via drinking water exposure. The report goes on to say that advanced treatment processes as well as some conventional processes will remove or destroy the majority of these compounds.
The majority of drinking water in the North west region is drawn from first time sources, such as upland reservoirs, which have minimal opportunities which have minimal opportunities for contact with sewage or wastewater. Even the lowland river sources contain relatively small proportions of effluent from wastewater treatment plants.
End of Quote
If as you say the majority of the North West’s drinking supply is drawn from first time sources, such as upland reservoirs, which have minimal opportunities which have minimal opportunities for contact with sewage or wastewater. Even the lowland river sources contain relatively small proportions of effluent from wastewater treatment plants,
Why the need for Chlorine which kills cells?
Regards
Greg Pope did not send the second letter, he was satisfied with the response from United Utilities, he announced his resignation some time later intending to step down at the next election, he carried this through.
Further Study
VIDEO: The Disappearing Male CBC Newsworld
A Population-Level Decline in Serum Testosterone Levels in American Men
Secular Decline in Male Testosterone and Sex Hormone Binding Globulin Serum Levels in Danish Population Surveys
A Mixture of Five Phthalate Esters Inhibits Fetal Testicular Testosterone Production in the Sprague-Dawley Rat in a Cumulative, Dose-Additive Manner
Environmental anti-androgens and male reproductive health: focus on phthalates and testicular dysgenesis syndrome
Report on Public Health Concerns Phthalates and Bisphenol A To Public Health Subcommittee, Health and Government Operations Committee of the Maryland General Assembly
The sperm count has been decreasing steadily for many years in Western industrialised countries: Is there an endocrine basis for this decrease? . The Internet Journal of Urology. 2004 Volume 2 Number 1
And for some revealing information as it relates to global eugenics programmes, In China we find the exact opposite, many of the girls are killed, either in abortion or outright murder, leaving China with an overbalance of males, concluding with the ability to call out a standing army of 4 million males.
Control of Water is no Joke
Since the 1980s and the Thatcher released privatisation insanity, all things domestic utilities have transformed into all things British Intelligence, albeit via the American NSA, operating to the same intelligence script; the Contingency Act. All things utilities has held my attention as a glimpse into the stratagems of all things domestic intelligence; aka, MI5, and living in Lancashire I have been perplexed at the feigning of water shortage with the first notable event during the 1976 heatwave. Knowing we have the Lake District to the north west, and that before privatisation more reservoirs and lodges per mile than necessary, how is it we are now in a worse position than the time before the corporate world took full control of all things water?
Supply and demand is clearly not the priority in the corporate business plan of all things utilities.
The script of drought and more control to the water boards, would remain constant through the late 70s and 80s, and for the irony, the reservoirs began disappearing too, certainly not the reasoned response to a projected future of mass drought, especially so after the Royal Society tweaked all the then current climate data around 1985, giving birth to the IPPC and the script of deception now unravelling over man made climate change.
So why such manipulation of our water supply since at least the mid seventies? Expanding beyond comprehension after the eighties privatisation? There has to be very obvious reasons for such which would appear as negative as it goes.
Lancashire Telegraph report :
A HOSEPIPE ban has been imposed in the north west for the first time in 16 years and it could last until well into 2011.
The restriction came into force today and those who ignore it has been warned that they risk being fined up to £1,000.
United Utilities said the ban, which prevents people using hosepipes to water gardens and cars, was necessary after the driest start to the year since records began.
Residents are being urged to report any neighbours flouting the ban, while staff from the water firm will also be out on the look-out.
End of Quote
See Original Report
Basically we have had a great start to the year weather wise, and as such a private corporation has now declared full and complete control of the very stuff which falls out of the sky; water, and will now position itself as supreme master in all things water, and if you see your neighbour within two feet of a plastic pipe you must ring up the same private corporation and tell yes and I think we expressed just such behaviour during our time at nursery.
So what has happened that in this country we now need a corporation to apportion water?
And how did our rights to clean fresh and uncontaminated water shift to the position it can be used to mass effect those who by the nature of our social communities, have no choice but to use the water which comes from the pipes?
We seem to have missed something, and we are all now drinking, cooking and bathing in water which is potentially contaminated, and not a word is murmured. We can take on someone and a half litres of water from our bath or shower into our bodies, we simply cannot continue to allow such hap-dash behaviour from a vital essential to life.
Such an announcement then placed United Utilities under the spotlight of the Lancashire Telegraph from which we find a couple of expected, and one not expected, at least a new one on me :
However an MP criticised the firm which, despite a major programme of work on pipes in recent years, still loses an average of 460 million litres of water a day in leaks, the equivalent of 184 Olympic-sized swimming pools.
That’s a lot of water, but the power grab I was not expecting came with the announcement that again because the Sun is shinning, we now have to take control of the movement of boats on Lancashire canals :
Quote
DROUGHT conditions are set to close the Leeds and Liverpool Canal throughout East Lancashire to travelling boats from the start of next month, says the Lancashire Telegraph, only this time we are speaking of British Waterways and they are operating in sync with United Utilities in taking full and complete control of our water and our use of the same.
The article goes on to say :
Canal boats will not be allowed to use locks through Blackburn, Hyndburn, Burnley, and Pendle after August 2.
British Waterways experts are predicting that water levels in its six local reservoirs will be running at just 10 per cent by early August.
Restrictions have been in place since the end of May and were tightened again in June, with boats currently only allowed to move freely from 10am to noon, and 2pm to 4pm.
Several marinas and coarse and trout fisheries in the area rely upon the canal and reservoirs for their survival.
Note they use the emotional cannon; survival mixed in with a bit of environment garb just to heighten the tension, but onward goes the shut down of our waterways by yet another corporate controlled division of all things Contingency, British Waterways.
See Original Report
As is always the case when these corporations let rip with orders they have no mandate to issue, mother nature has other ideas and almost from the point they announce the drought measures :
Storms and flash flooding hit Lancashire
Today is July 20 and still it continues to rain.
We then begin to see the real length of these corporate arms as they project out into the world of the Englishman and his boat, and they are not happy :
WATERSIDE businesses have reacted with dismay to drought restrictions which are set to close the Leeds and Liverpool canal through Lancashire to boats, says the Lancashire Telegraph.
We then learn control of the water level of the canals is held by those in control of the reservoirs, as waterway companies shout :
If the flow from reservoirs is cut off, then the canal will be drained within weeks.
See Original Report
So there we have it, the private corporate Utility companies dictate to our entire domestic waterway departments due to the fact, the same utility companies have ensured they have shifted all surface water collection and distribution in and around cities and towns, into their control, like the wild west John Wayne films whereby the biggest wad, was so. because they controlled the water rights up River I think they call this Stakeholder Communities.
As bad as this story is so far, I still have questions relating to the underground drainage systems under Accrington, so placed during the 70s and 80s, to a depth of some 100 feet, because I feel the manipulation of our surface water collection and distribution is a big part of the whole scam that is man made climate change, man made it may be, but as a deception played out by all things military intelligence to deceive the surface populations they do indeed require a nappy change and heated bottle from the corporate state.
Are they draining off the major water collection points, out of sight?
Of course to cap off this deliberate attempt to control all things water, we find the clues come in the small print.
8 East Lancs reservoirs left untapped during hosepipe ban. link
Insight : The Environment Agency
The Environment Agency is responsible for 2000 reservoirs in England and Wales and enforces the Reservoirs Act 1975.
The key roles of the Environment Agency in regard to reservoirs are : surveillance maintaining a register of reservoirs for England and Wales enforcement achieving compliance and provisionally from spring 2009 we will ensure flood plans are produced for specified reservoirs.
Managing large, raised reservoirs to reduce flood risk is very important. Ultimately this responsibility for safe management remains with the reservoir owners but the Environment Agency have to enforce that responsibility.
The Environment Agency also maintain a register of all large, raised reservoirs and the information it contains is available to the public. You can find a link to more information on their website in the Related Links section.
If you have a general enquiry on reservoir safety you can call the Environment Agency on 08708 506 506. You can also email them with reservoir enquiries. In an emergency you can call their hotline on 0800 80 70 60.
Taken from here
Further Study
United Utilities Microbiologists
United Utilities to sell non-regulated European water businesses to Veolia
Water firm fined over Nelson sewage spill
Water giant to foot Blackburn family’s leak bill
In Profile : Sir Paul Gordon Fildes, expert in biological warfare
Tags: Androgens in the Water, AWWA, Chlorine, DEFRA, Department of Food, Environment Agency, Environment and Rural Affairs, IG Farben, Sewage Treatment Plants, UK Water Industry Research (UKWIR), United Utilities, Anti-androgens, Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, fluorouracil (5FU), Hyndburn Lancashire MP Greg Pope, Phthalates, Testicular Dysgenesis Syndrome, United Utilities, University of Exeter, University of Sussex