From the article
"I agree that a toxicological investigation of this anion would be useful now that we know its identity, but I am not overly worried about my tap water,” says Oliver Jones, Professor of Chemistry at RMIT. “The compound in question is not newly discovered, just newly defined. Its presence in some (not all) drinking waters has been known for over 30 years."
Chloramine has been in broad use for over a hundred years and this breakdown byproduct was well documented over 50 years ago and detectable in water over 30 years ago. What the article is claiming as new, or a "Phantom" is that someone imaged its particular molecular structure and is now requesting funding to run toxicology studies on it. There is no current reason to believe that it is harmful since tens of millions of exposures have not indicated any reactions to it over the past hundred years.
>> There is no current reason to believe that it is harmful since tens of millions of exposures have not indicated any reactions to it over the past hundred years.
When you look at the state of health in the world nowadays I'd have to disagree: at least one of these "no harmful" substances that we ingest is killing us.
From the article "I agree that a toxicological investigation of this anion would be useful now that we know its identity, but I am not overly worried about my tap water,” says Oliver Jones, Professor of Chemistry at RMIT. “The compound in question is not newly discovered, just newly defined. Its presence in some (not all) drinking waters has been known for over 30 years."
Chloramine has been in broad use for over a hundred years and this breakdown byproduct was well documented over 50 years ago and detectable in water over 30 years ago. What the article is claiming as new, or a "Phantom" is that someone imaged its particular molecular structure and is now requesting funding to run toxicology studies on it. There is no current reason to believe that it is harmful since tens of millions of exposures have not indicated any reactions to it over the past hundred years.
It seems like NewAtlas articles are always sciency clickbait of questionable accuracy.
>> There is no current reason to believe that it is harmful since tens of millions of exposures have not indicated any reactions to it over the past hundred years.
When you look at the state of health in the world nowadays I'd have to disagree: at least one of these "no harmful" substances that we ingest is killing us.
>> state of health in the world nowadays
You mean with people having longer lifespans than ever before?