Comments on: Water service to be restored to 8,000 residents affected by intentional contamination

By: mhogan

mhogan — Sat, 26 Jul 2014 13:39:00 +0000

You telling us this is a hoax? No agrochemicals in the water? If residents had gastrointestinal distress, could it be our “price-y” water is a case of neglecting to maintain sanitary standards? So, instead of doing their jobs, the water company (AyA) flitted away their budget and the only way to get funds to clean up their neglect was to proclaim malicious toxins were added by an unnamed or unfound culprit? Why would I not be surprised?

By: turbooperator

turbooperator — Fri, 25 Jul 2014 23:16:00 +0000

I find it of interest to note that, while 8 (or 10-15) empty containers of pesticides (or fungicides, or herbicides, one of the liter bottles appeared to be generic roundup to me) were found at the site, not a trace of agrochemicals were found in any of the water samples taken. Health officials later discounted the poisonings reported by police as a response to fear after learning of the chemical findings rather than any clinical symptoms.

By: expatin paradise

expatin paradise — Fri, 25 Jul 2014 19:15:00 +0000

It was actually rhetorical.

By: disgusted

disgusted — Fri, 25 Jul 2014 16:46:00 +0000

Will the water company/municipality reimburse consumers for the extra water used to flush the toxins from the tubes? Easy question NO!

By: expatin paradise

expatin paradise — Fri, 25 Jul 2014 14:16:00 +0000

The poisons may be removed from the water supply, but it invariably remains in the pipes/tubes. Communities will need to run a lot of water through the pipes to flush out the toxins. Individual users will have to do likewise in their homes to get remaining toxins out of the system. Users should use extreme caution for a while. Flushing the system will waste a lot of water. Will the water company/municipality reimburse consumers for the extra water used to flush the toxins from the tubes?