Download WHO – World Health Organization

WHO – World Health Organization
For the attention of Mr Robert Bos
11211 Geneva 27
Switzerland
PLAATS - DATUM
Concerning: hardness in drinking water.
Dear Mr Bos,
Hereby I want to express our support for the response from Aqua Belgica, the leading Trade
Association in Belgium, regarding the background document for development of the WHO Guidelines
for Drinking-water Quality recently posted on the WHO website. I take over the objections of Aqua
Belgica, as follows:
We consider the document to be discriminatory in its representation of the different sources of
drinking water supply and believe it fails to adequately reflect the established benefits of
softened water against the unproven benefit of hard water minerals.
Section 5 of the document suggests that sales people or installers of water softeners or reverse
osmosis units should make users aware of the ‘consequences for nutrient intake and human health’.
Installers will be aware of total hardness levels but they will not normally be aware of the calcium and
magnesium composition.
The Document is contradictory in that makes it clear that from robust data there is no evidence
of a beneficial association with hardness or calcium – Although some studies indicate a link
between magnesium and cardiovascular mortality, causality has NOT been established. It would
seem ridiculous to expect a softener sales person or installer to explain this dubious link upon health
consequences to a customer/user.
We question why household water treatment has been singled out for specific attention. If
there were genuine benefit from minerals in drinking water, then surely, to maximise impact upon
health, the advice should be applicable to all drinking water sources, including bottled water and
naturally soft water, which constitutes in Belgium a non-negligible part of water supplies. In addition to
that, several leading Belgian water supply companies have instigated a program of partial centralised
softening.
In Belgium, concentration of magnesium in drinking water supplies is generally low, even in hard
water areas. Published historic data shows that the percentage of populace supplied with hard water
containing the suggested threshold level of 10mg/l magnesium is relatively low. Indeed, current data
is not even available as magnesium levels are no longer monitored.
We iterate our support for the response from the EWTA on the point that none of the epidemiological
data associated with the alleged benefit relates to softened or processed water as all conclusions
have been complied from studies comparing data on naturally soft and hard water supplies.
We feel that the Document belittles the well-established benefits of artificially softened water,
referring to them as “aesthetic”. Tests by authoritative bodies around the world have shown the
dramatic and rapid deterioration of water heating efficiency due to limescale deposition typically
results in a general wastage of 10% in fuel consumption, as well as the premature failure of water
heating appliances. In Belgium, most of the boiler suppliers equire provision for water treatment
equipment to prevent limescale precipitation in all hard water heating applications.
Also, as evidenced by epidemiological studies and substantial anecdotal records, hard water has
been associated with childhood eczema and a UK- government funded trial is nearing completion in
the UK. This must be categorised as a health rather than aesthetic benefit.
The Background Document contrasts sharply with the ‘Summary Statement’, also recently published
on the WHO website, in its biased attention towards household water treatment. We consider that
the document overstates controversial evidence for the association of drinking-water minerals
with cardiovascular disease.
I would appreciate your urgent consideration of the above and look forward to your response.
Yours sincerely,