 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeArticlesDiving DestinationsLearning Scuba DivingMarine LifeMiscellaneousDiscussion GroupsGeneralScuba EquipmentScuba LocationsAustralian ScubaUK ScubaDirectoryScuba Clubs |
Scuba Forum / General / January 2008Rinse Tanks Harbor Many Microorganisms
This excerpt is from "Microbe" magazine, Volume 2, Number 12, 2007 and written by Michael R Miller and M.A. Motaleb of West Virginia University, Morgantown. The article states that "Over the years, we have heard some people complain of various illnesses after scuba diving trips. On such trips, gear (including wet suits, booties, BCD's, regulators, etc is typically rinsed in large, "communal" tanks." "During 4 days in June 2007, water samples were collected from 2 rinse tanks at a dive facility on Roatan, Honduras. The 2 tanks were emptied each morning about 8 AM and refilled with fresh (nonsalt) water. Most diving was done from boats, which returned about noon and 4:30 PM following morning and afternoon dives, respectively. Water samples were obtained daily at 8:30 AM, 12:30 PM and 4:30 PM." The article goes on to talk about how the collection was done using sterile containers and the process of storage of samples under refrigeration, then turned out on various growth plates for the colonies, examined, photograghed, etc. The article also describes a "control" set where the same equipment was used but using sterile water and tap water. They assumed that the 8:30 AM samples, taken before the equipment was rinsed would be relatively "clean" and that the samples taken later in the day would show more contamination. This was not the case. They found that all samples contained many colonies and that, at times, the 8:30 AM even produced more colonies than samples collected later in the day. The outcome states, "While we do not yet know the source of the microbes in the rinse tanks, it is clear that these communal rinse tanks do harbor many microbes that would come in contact with diver's mouthpieces, potentially spreading pathogens between divers. We recommend that divers rinse their regulators separately or consider spraying mouthpieces with a safe disinfectant, such as 70% ethanol." (snip)> The outcome states, "While we do not yet know the source of the > microbes in the rinse tanks, it is clear that these communal rinse > tanks do harbor many microbes that would come in contact with diver's > mouthpieces, potentially spreading pathogens between divers. We > recommend that divers rinse their regulators separately or consider > spraying mouthpieces with a safe disinfectant, such as 70% > ethanol." Interesting, but really . . despite my having almost died upon my return from Roatan in June 2005, from a mysterious lung illness, this seems a bit ridiculous to me. Sure, if everyone was returning from dive trips and being rushed to emergency I'd think differently. Frankly, I think we are in far more danger of contracting illness on the plane getting us to and fro, than from a rinse tank. >>microbes in the rinse tanks, it is clear that these communal rinse >>tanks do harbor many microbes that would come in contact with diver's [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Frankly, I think we are in far more danger of contracting illness on the > plane getting us to and fro, than from a rinse tank. Unfortunately no. This is one of the rare posts which is rigtht on top, true, and correct. German physicians have found out the same, so it must be right. Just splash your reg with 2 mouthfuls water from your water bottle, as well as the Valves in your BC, IP connector and HP Swivel, and rinse only your suit in the common rinsatory. Matthias > <hierophantf...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Frankly, I think we are in far more danger of contracting illness on the > plane getting us to and fro, than from a rinse tank. I never use a rinse tank. I'd rather piss in my wetsuit and then let it dry before I'd want to dunk it in a rinse tank full of everyone else's piss. And I most certainly would never put my regulator in a rinse tank. I thought I'd just throw the article out there for those who use rinse tanks, and to get away from the stupid OT stuff. I hope you are feeling better but I don't understand what the illness is that you are saying you had. I hope you have recovered. hierophantfish@hotmail.com pounded away at his keyboard resulting in: :I never use a rinse tank. I'd rather piss in my wetsuit and then let :it dry before I'd want to dunk it in a rinse tank full of everyone :else's piss. And I most certainly would never put my regulator in a :rinse tank. I do. All the time. And I survive well over half my dive trips. Dan Bracuk Never use a big word when a diminutive one will do. > hierophantfish@hotmail.com pounded away at his keyboard resulting in: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > I do. All the time. And I survive well over half my dive trips. Over half of them? So far I've survived all of mine . . though there was that one time it was nip and tuck for a bit. "chilly" <slarson@shaw.canada> pounded away at his keyboard resulting in: :So far I've survived all of mine . . though there was that one time it was :nip and tuck for a bit. Think it was rinse tank related? Dan Bracuk Never use a big word when a diminutive one will do. > "chilly" <slarson@shaw.canada> pounded away at his keyboard resulting > in: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Think it was rinse tank related? No, though it is somewhat possible. This was a mysterious sinus/respiratory illness (ARDS/diffuse pnuemonia) and even the specialists couldn't agree on their "theories". One or more believed it was bad air. I don't because no one else got sick. One believed it was a reaction to the Chloraquine. That one gets my vote. I'm reasonably confident that I was having symptoms before I left home and I got worse every Wednesday . .which was the day after pill day. By the time I was admitted on a Wednesday, I was nearly dead and so wasn't taking anymore Chloriquine. Perhaps it is telling that I was recovered enough a week later to go home . .though I was still quite ill for months afterwards. Now I have some annoying residual complications that come when a person has managed to suffer enough damage to their lungs enough over the years. At this point in time, those complications are minor though if I live long enough, I suspect it will become much more than minor. > This was a mysterious sinus/respiratory > illness (ARDS/diffuse pnuemonia) and even the specialists couldn't agree [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > though > if I live long enough, I suspect it will become much more than minor. In a quick web search, it was found that Chloriquine is safe to take long-term. While that may be true for the majority of people, it could be that an adverse reaction is normal for you. That being said, the link between the drug and lung damage is befuddling. Some years ago, after returning from the DR, my sister almost died because of flesh eating bacteria. The doctors speculated, and speculated, and then they speculated some more about where the contact with the bacteria originated. Doctors don't really know about such things and there isn't a way to determine the point of the beginning with certainty. Since there were three dozen of us in the DR at the same time, at the same place, and doing the same things, it seems odd that this would have been the point of contact for just one in our large group. The DR is the point the doctors concluded contact was most likely. (Just blame the third world country for all the problems, after all, nobody goes there anyway.) But one never really knows - so that was the most logical speculation. > In a quick web search, it was found that Chloriquine is safe to take > long-term. While that may be true for the majority of people, it could be > that an adverse reaction is normal for you. That being said, the link > between the drug and lung damage is befuddling. Yes, and that is why the one specialist was standing out in the field by himself with his theory. Even though the other specialists have pooh-poohed the idea, I've still been advised never to take Chloraquine again. For what it is worth, I have a mild reaction to tonic water and I haven't deliberately drank any for years. > Some years ago, after returning from the DR, my sister almost died because > of flesh eating bacteria. The doctors speculated, and speculated, and then [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > all the problems, after all, nobody goes there anyway.) But one never > really knows - so that was the most logical speculation. Indeed. As it was, the first thing they tested me for was tuberculosis. Not only was I in ICU for a few days, I was in quarantine/isolation even after I was moved out of ICU. There were no positive results to any of their tests. Even the bronchoscopy failed to reveal the mystery. Frankly, I don't know what all they tested me for or how. I was far more concerned about bigger things, like getting my next breath. > > In a quick web search, it was found that Chloriquine is safe to take > > long-term. While that may be true for the majority of people, it could be > > that an adverse reaction is normal for you. That being said, the link > > between the drug and lung damage is befuddling. But when you read the product inserts, none of the side effects and potential adverse reactions involve the respiratory system. If you had gone blind or had liver failure, that would be understandable. Did you have the actual pills tested to see if they might have been contaminated? > Yes, and that is why the one specialist was standing out in the field by > himself with his theory. Even though the other specialists have pooh-poohed > the idea, I've still been advised never to take Chloraquine again. For what > it is worth, I have a mild reaction to tonic water and I haven't > deliberately drank any for years. Maybe it's the gin that gives you the reaction. It sure does with me. > Indeed. As it was, the first thing they tested me for was tuberculosis. > Not only was I in ICU for a few days, I was in quarantine/isolation even > after I was moved out of ICU. There were no positive results to any of > their tests. Even the bronchoscopy failed to reveal the mystery. Frankly, > I don't know what all they tested me for or how. I was far more concerned > about bigger things, like getting my next breath. I think it was SARS. On Jan 14, 12:29 am, "chilly" <slar...@shaw.canada> wrote: > > In a quick web search, it was found that Chloriquine is safe to take > > long-term. While that may be true for the majority of people, it could > > be > > that an adverse reaction is normal for you. That being said, the link > > between the drug and lung damage is befuddling. But when you read the product inserts, none of the side effects and potential adverse reactions involve the respiratory system. If you had gone blind or had liver failure, that would be understandable. Did you have the actual pills tested to see if they might have been contaminated? > Yes, and that is why the one specialist was standing out in the field by > himself with his theory. Even though the other specialists have [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > it is worth, I have a mild reaction to tonic water and I haven't > deliberately drank any for years. Maybe it's the gin that gives you the reaction. It sure does with me. > Indeed. As it was, the first thing they tested me for was tuberculosis. > Not only was I in ICU for a few days, I was in quarantine/isolation even > after I was moved out of ICU. There were no positive results to any of > their tests. Even the bronchoscopy failed to reveal the mystery. Frankly, > I don't know what all they tested me for or how. I was far more concerned > about bigger things, like getting my next breath. I think it was SARS. I think it was Karma.  SignatureDoes anybody here really think that taking away the guns will stop killing? Or knives, or icepicks, or chains, or ropes, or baseball bats, or poisons, or cars & trucks. People are gonna kill people, and they'll always think of a new weapon if you take away the old ones. And just because I carry a potential weapon doesn't mean I intend to commit murder, or that I may be tempted to commit murder. I often carry a big ugly knife. Lots of my friends do too. I have never heard of anyone being tempted to use the knife on anyone just because they have it with them. You gotta be in the mood to do the killing and you use what's at hand. -Jeff Cooper Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com http://picasaweb.google.com/Popeye8762 On Jan 14, 12:29 am, "chilly" <slar...@shaw.canada> wrote: > > In a quick web search, it was found that Chloriquine is safe to take > > long-term. While that may be true for the majority of people, it could be > > that an adverse reaction is normal for you. That being said, the link > > between the drug and lung damage is befuddling. But when you read the product inserts, none of the side effects and potential adverse reactions involve the respiratory system. If you had gone blind or had liver failure, that would be understandable. Did you have the actual pills tested to see if they might have been contaminated? *For clarity, you were responding to Ben above. In any event, maybe they should add a notation about the respiratory system. ;^) > Yes, and that is why the one specialist was standing out in the field by > himself with his theory. Even though the other specialists have pooh-poohed > the idea, I've still been advised never to take Chloraquine again. For what > it is worth, I have a mild reaction to tonic water and I haven't > deliberately drank any for years. Maybe it's the gin that gives you the reaction. It sure does with me. *Never touch the stuff. > Indeed. As it was, the first thing they tested me for was tuberculosis. > Not only was I in ICU for a few days, I was in quarantine/isolation even > after I was moved out of ICU. There were no positive results to any of > their tests. Even the bronchoscopy failed to reveal the mystery. Frankly, > I don't know what all they tested me for or how. I was far more concerned > about bigger things, like getting my next breath. I think it was SARS. *So did they once they ruled out tuberculosis. > On Jan 14, 12:29 am, "chilly" <slar...@shaw.canada> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > *For clarity, you were responding to Ben above. In any event, maybe they > should add a notation about the respiratory system. ;^) Greg's point related to the quality of the pills you received assuming you received the correct medicine. Was it the correct prescription? That is another situation that could have significant adverse consequences to your health. A test will tell in either situation. > > *For clarity, you were responding to Ben above. In any event, maybe they > > should add a notation about the respiratory system. ;^) > > Greg's point related to the quality of the pills you received assuming you > received the correct medicine. Was it the correct prescription? LOL. Of course it was. And I'm quite sure the quality was all that too. >That is another situation that could have significant adverse consequences to your > health. A test will tell in either situation. I've been tested up the yingyang, while in the hospital, after the hospital and again last year by a immunologist/allergist specialist. Results have all been negative or non-conclusive. In any event, my illness was over two years ago now. I'm recovered. I've made it home from 3 or 4 trips now without even a headcold, so I don't worry overly much anymore either. If I end up with malaria somewhere along the way . . well, that could be a problem. But hey, no one lives forever and I've already been given some extra time. >> > *For clarity, you were responding to Ben above. In any event, maybe > they [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > problem. But hey, no one lives forever and I've already been given some > extra time. >> > *For clarity, you were responding to Ben above. In any event, maybe > they [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > problem. But hey, no one lives forever and I've already been given some > extra time. Have you considered doxycycline >>> > *For clarity, you were responding to Ben above. In any event, maybe >> they [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Have you considered doxycycline Chloroquine is a good standby medicine to treat Malaria, I try not go anywhere without it. It has a long shelf life and for US$2 you can get enough to treat 5 people. It is old tec, there are better but as it is the one that has been always been used and there are resistant strains. There are newer Asian treatments becoming available so do your own research and advise your doctor of your findings. Most first world doctors don't see malaria much so have little experience with the newer medications or the side effects which is why a specialised travel doctor can be useful. Most useful piece of information I can give is to try and get elevation from the ground at dawn and dusk (along with other precautions) If you can be on the second story at these times bites and therefore the risk is reduced. Since moving into a 3rd story apartment I haven't had any problems, it could have been luck but I have read somewhere about it (Perhaps it was good old discovery channel). While you're taking your newfangled meds you should spare a thought for Bill who has been spending millions through his charity on research into treatment and prevention of the disease. I'll have to not use his name in vain next time I have a BSOD,,,, but then again with this WGA who could forgive him? Just to spark Lee's interest in this place, there really are $2.00 hookers, $4 if you want a room and not just use the long grass near the old airstrip. Bring those brown paper bags along. Now we need some gun bits, a handgun costs about US$15,000 used. You can't buy them you need to buy a licence with the gun as there are no more licences being issued. A 30 minute ride from the airport in a buss with the guard sometimes carrying an AK and if not at least a pumpie costs US$30. SignatureBrad Leyden 6° 43.5816' S 146° 59.3097' E WGS84 To mail spam is really hot but please reply to thread so all may benefit (or laugh at my mistakes) >>>> > *For clarity, you were responding to Ben above. In any event, maybe >>> they [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] > A 30 minute ride from the airport in a buss with the guard sometimes > carrying an AK and if not at least a pumpie costs US$30. good advice, I was only suggesting doxycycline as a short-term alternative.It is being used by Aus troops in E Timor with good results so I unserstand. One problem is that some people get a photosensitivity reaction, not a good thing to have on a dive holiday (snip)> >>> If I end up with malaria somewhere along the way . . well, that could be > >>> a > >>> problem. But hey, no one lives forever and I've already been given [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > > > Chloroquine is a good standby medicine to treat Malaria, And there's the rub. I'm not to take it as it could be what darn near killed me. So if I contract malaria and the treatment is Chloraquine . .well, you do the math. >I try not go anywhere without it. It has a long shelf life and for US$2 you can get > > enough to treat 5 people. It is old tec, there are better but as it is the > > one that has been always been used and there are resistant strains. There > > are newer Asian treatments becoming available so do your own research and > > advise your doctor of your findings. Most first world doctors don't see > > malaria much so have little experience with the newer medications or the > > side effects which is why a specialised travel doctor can be useful. I can take Malarone . well, maybe I can. But you are right, I liked the Chloraquine for its cost and ease of application. Malarone is expensive and has to be taken every day. I also didn't want to be the one that was making the disease drug resistant to a newer treatment. > > Most useful piece of information I can give is to try and get elevation > > from the ground at dawn and dusk (along with other precautions) If you can > > be on the second story at these times bites and therefore the risk is > > reduced. Since moving into a 3rd story apartment I haven't had any > > problems, it could have been luck but I have read somewhere about it > > (Perhaps it was good old discovery channel). It's unlikely that I'm going to do that. I will make my decision regarding Malarone based upon where I plan on going and the risk of contraction. As I understand it, Caribbean malaria isn't as serious as some of the places in the world I visit. (snip) > good advice, I was only suggesting doxycycline as a short-term > alternative. Well, thank heavens. I thought perhaps you making a low blow. :^) >It is being used by Aus troops in E Timor with good results so I > unserstand. One problem is that some people get a photosensitivity reaction, > not a good thing to have on a dive holiday No, wouldn't want a photosensitivity, but then wouldn't want malaria either. Thanks guys. > No, wouldn't want a photosensitivity, Why not? Ain't you pretty? Matthias > > No, wouldn't want a photosensitivity, > > Why not? > Ain't you pretty? Oh yes, I am and reasonably photogenic too. However, if I had a photosensitivity reaction, that might change things for the time I was on my vacation. ;^) > Just to spark Lee's interest in this place, there really are $2.00 hookers, > $4 if you want a room and not just use the long grass near the old airstrip. > Bring those brown paper bags along. You have no idea how far off base you are pointing it at Lee. > Now we need some gun bits, a handgun costs about US$15,000 used. You can't > buy them you need to buy a licence with the gun as there are no more > licences being issued. Guess you're f.cked. Unless you can buy/own the local police. > A 30 minute ride from the airport in a buss with the guard sometimes > carrying an AK and if not at least a pumpie costs US$30. Thirty miserable bucks. Is that what your life is worth? >> > *For clarity, you were responding to Ben above. In any event, maybe > they [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > LOL. Of course it was. And I'm quite sure the quality was all that too. I asked a friend how she determined that the pills she received from the pharmacist were incorrect. She said the pills were a different shape than the ones she had been taking. The first four or five letters of the drug were the same but the pills were not correct. In addition to the consequences of not taking the correct medication she was exposed to the potential adverse consequences of the incorrect prescription and drug interactions with other current medications. It happens that you get incorrect pills in a properly marked container. These days you can look a pill up on the Internet and find out what it is. However, if you don't suspect a problem, you may not check. > One or more believed it was bad air. I don't because no > one else got sick. Probably not a good reason to rule it out. While instances of contaminated air are not common, among those that do occur, it's not all that unusual for only one tank to be contaminated. Lee > > One or more believed it was bad air. I don't because no > > one else got sick. > > Probably not a good reason to rule it out. While instances of contaminated > air are not common, among those that do occur, it's not all that unusual for > only one tank to be contaminated. OK. However, I had symptoms before I left home. I just didn't feel sick. As the dive week progressed things got worse, but it really wasn't until towards the end of the week and on the trip home, that I realized that I was quite ill. I was put on antibiotics Monday morning. Started to feel better on Tuesday . . took my chloraquine pill, became quite ill again that night and was rushed to emergency Wednesday morning. >> hierophantfish@hotmail.com pounded away at his keyboard resulting in: >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > So far I've survived all of mine . . though there was that one time it was > nip and tuck for a bit. Was that the one you dived IN the rinse tank? hierophantfish@hotmail.com pounded away at his keyboard resulting in: :The outcome states, "While we do not yet know the source of the :microbes in the rinse tanks, it is clear that these communal rinse [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] :spraying mouthpieces with a safe disinfectant, such as 70% :ethanol." Nothing wrong with a microbe or two. What doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Dan Bracuk Never use a big word when a diminutive one will do. > hierophantfish@hotmail.com pounded away at his keyboard resulting in: > :The outcome states, "While we do not yet know the source of the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Nothing wrong with a microbe or two. What doesn't kill you makes you > stronger. What is that illness, where after one embraces outlandish conspiracy theories, one starts to fear germs, microbes and little people? Oh, and guns. > > hierophantf...@hotmail.com pounded away at his keyboard resulting in: > > :The outcome states, "While we do not yet know the source of the [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > What is that illness, where after one embraces outlandish conspiracy > theories, one starts to fear germs, microbes and little people? You mean the conspiracy theory that Lee Bell, grumman and Mathias Voss have about there being an abundant amount of Jews in the WTC and in NYC during 9-11 ? I think you would have to ask them. On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 09:37:21 -0800, hierophantfish wrote: > You mean the conspiracy theory that Lee Bell, grumman and Mathias Voss > have about there being an abundant amount of Jews in the WTC and in NYC > during 9-11 ? I think you would have to ask them. Nowhere did I say "abundant"... I just was curious from a statistical standpoint if perhaps there was a higher percentage of Jews who worked in the WTC than were in the general population... The previous posts that you made (as far as I noticed) concerned those who died, not those who worked there... If you assume that the Jews had just as likely a chance of dying as any other group, then that would probably be a valid assumption... For this to be a truly valid assumption though, it would have to be shown that the probability of surviving was equal independent of the floor that a person worked on in addition to the distribution of Jews being equal for each floor... Has anyone done such a distribution analysis? Even if there is an equal distribution and the Jews in the WTC towers are exactly representative of the general population, it is still *possible* that they might have been targeted because of a *perceived* higher concentration of Jew there due to the stereotypes of Jews being more likely to be in the financial sector... As you've probably noticed from my other posts, if I have a particular belief on a subject, I'm more than willing to make it known where even the most obtuse individual could see what my view was... In this case though, I'm just curious from a statistical standpoint... SignatureSee NNTP header field "X-Real-Email-Address" to reply by email. On Jan 13, 2:03 pm, Grumman-581 <grumman581-usenet-2...@spambob.net> wrote: > On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 09:37:21 -0800, hierophantfish wrote: > > You mean the conspiracy theory that Lee Bell, grumman and Mathias Voss [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > -- > See NNTP header field "X-Real-Email-Address" to reply by email. Oh my god. Are you always this thick ? On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 11:18:52 -0800, hierophantfish wrote: > Oh my god. Are you always this thick ? And yet another topic on rec.scuba morphs into a sex topic... Tsk, tsk, tsk... SignatureSee NNTP header field "X-Real-Email-Address" to reply by email. On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 09:37:21 -0800, hierophantfish wrote: >> You mean the conspiracy theory that Lee Bell, grumman and Mathias Voss >> have about there being an abundant amount of Jews in the WTC and in NYC >> during 9-11 ? I think you would have to ask them. Grumman wrote: > Nowhere did I say "abundant"... And I said nothing about a conspiracy that relates to the number of Jewish people in NYC or the WTC. My only comment was that there is a concentration of Jewish people in Manhattan and here in south Florida. There was a conspiracy. That's a well established fact. As far as I know, the attacks were on the US, not specifically against, or by Jews. You're confused again. . . or rather, still. To a group I went by chance, two thousand posters I saw in a glance, cried out Lee Bell, awakened from a trance, whither... > And I said nothing about a conspiracy that relates to the > number of Jewish people in NYC or the WTC. "Maybe you should be suspicious of all the Jews that worked there that were on leave that day." - "Lee Bell" <pleebell@bellsouth.net> Sat, 12 Jan 2008 12:01:39 EST SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com "Grumman-581" <grumman581-usenet-2008@spambob.net> wrote in message <snip the crap> Feel free to join the other me toos and turn this scuba related thread into useless crap. > Feel free to join the other me toos and turn this scuba related thread > into useless crap. I was replying to a comment by hierophantfish in which I was addressed... It is not unreasonable to reply in such a case regardless of the fact that hierophantfish posted in a different topic... If you don't like it, fell free to killfile me -- I promise that I won't be too heartbroken over it... <pppphhhhhllllttttt> SignatureSee NNTP header field "X-Real-Email-Address" to reply by email. To a group I went by chance, two thousand posters I saw in a glance, cried out Dan Bracuk, awakened from a trance, whither... > What doesn't kill you makes you stronger. So, according to your assertion, a Marine who survives a blast from an IED but looses two legs and sustains serious brain damage is "stronger." SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > This excerpt is from "Microbe" magazine, Volume 2, Number 12, > 2007 and written by Michael R Miller and M.A. Motaleb of West [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > spraying mouthpieces with a safe disinfectant, such as 70% > ethanol." A rinse tank should not be considered to hold potable water even if the water is new to the tank. The tank itself can harbor microbes and impurities so it would be foolish to think that the water flowing into the tank, even if pure at the entrance point, would remain potable. A rinse tank holds water with less salt than the ocean. When you rinse your gear you should be done using it for the day and that rinse should be an intermediate step to cleaning the gear in a shower or other location. The microbe results described for the outcome of the experiment are not surprising but should have been anticipated given the environment. I think different results might be obtained if the rinse tank had been drained and cleaned the evening before and left to dry. > <hierophantf...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > > - Show quoted text - I don't know if they left the tank to dry but they did drain it. Fresh water was put it in the morning. This was not a test to see if it would be potable because they were not wanting to drink it. They assumed the water was not potatble. They were looking for microbes and trying to pinpoint their concentrations. On Jan 13, 9:11 am, "ben bradlee" <No...@Way.Bite.Me> wrote: > <hierophantf...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > different results might be obtained if the rinse tank had been drained and > cleaned the evening before and left to dry.- Hide quoted text - :I don't know if they left the tank to dry but they did drain it. :Fresh water was put it in the morning. This was not a test to see if :it would be potable because they were not wanting to drink it. They :assumed the water was not potatble. They were looking for microbes :and trying to pinpoint their concentrations. It says the tanks were emptied about 8 AM and filled with fresh water. The sample was taken at 8:30 AM so that would leave very little time for the tank to dry. This leaves anything on the sides or bottom of the tank in pretty good shape to recover from the shock, if any, of changing the water. The microbes either came in with the fresh water or were held over on the sides and bottom of the tank. If the microbes are in the water supply, the test proves nothing. If the water supply is clean of microbes, the tank is to blame and it is likely that cleaning the tank and letting it dry will go a long way toward preventing the problem. Tanks of water exposed to the elements are a common breeding ground for all sorts of undesirable stuff including but not limited to microbes. "ben bradlee" <NoWay@Way.Bite.Me> pounded away at his keyboard resulting in: : When you rinse your gear :you should be done using it for the day and that rinse should be an :intermediate step to cleaning the gear in a shower or other location. Or just let it dry. That'll kill the little microbes. As chilly pointed out, it's not as if we are all getting sick when we rinse our gear in community tanks and use it again. Dan Bracuk Never use a big word when a diminutive one will do. > "ben bradlee" <NoWay@Way.Bite.Me> pounded away at his keyboard > resulting in: [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Or just let it dry. That'll kill the little microbes. Plenty of sun and no moisture should put little RIP markers all over the microbe cemetary. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.