This was posted 4 years 4 months 3 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

Acebio+ 1.0 Litre Alkaline Mineral Water Filter Jug $169 Shipped (Fluoride Removal) @ Waters Co Australia

91
Acebio+ 1.0 Litre Alkaline Mineral Water Filter Jug $169 Shipped (Fluoride Removal) @ Waters Co Australia
Go to Deal
frugalftw on 23/12/2019 - 21:01 waterscoaustralia.com.au (217 clicks)
Last edited 24/12/2019 - 13:42 by 1 other user

Waters Co Australia is having a 20% sale on their 1L jug, among other things. It's the best portable water filter for those interested in Fluoride removal. Highly recommend at this price. (I just pulled the trigger myself)

Free shipping for orders over $99.

Product details here

Update: it seems that a lot of people are uncomfortable with fluoride filtering. Please bear in mind this has nothing to do with the product itself. To filter or not is a personal choice, some like to filter their water through coffee beans, some prefer fermentation, each to their own.

For those who are truly curious about water, there are a lot of simple experiments you can do at home to test if a drop of water is a drop of water. But if your research is purely based on other people's opinions, you don't need to bother with it, and you'll always be right.

Update 2: thank you all for your comments. Unfortunately I'd rather spend my holiday with humans, not on a thread about a product from which I don't receive any kickback. Hope it helped you in your decision making and enjoy the well-deserved break :)

Health & Beauty Fluoride Filter Water Filter Water Filter Jug

Related Stores

waterscoaustralia.com.au
waterscoaustralia.com.au

closed Comments

  • teacherer on 23/12/2019 - 21:02
    +28

    Why would you remove the fluoride?

    • frugalftw on 23/12/2019 - 21:05
      -7

      Why is there an industry of water filters that removes fluoride? It must be valuable to some people :)

      • SlappersOnly on 23/12/2019 - 21:08
        +6

        Is the industry funded by dentists?

        • frugalftw on 23/12/2019 - 21:13

          Well, you kinda need to ask the dentists. I'm not one of them :o

    • SlappersOnly on 23/12/2019 - 21:05
      +1

      Perfect username

      • 0jay on 23/12/2019 - 21:19
        +11

        The Fluoride Action Network is a project of the American Environmental Health Studies Project, Inc., a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization

        Clearly a reliable source.

    • MasterScythe on 23/12/2019 - 21:37
      -2

      Long story short;

      There is inconclusive evidience that fluoride is good ON teeth, not in the digestive system.

      In addition, there is a possible link between bone density loss, and consumption.

      Really hard to get facts without being swept up in propaganda

      • terrys on 23/12/2019 - 21:41
        +9

        "inconclusive evidience that fluoride is good ON teeth"

        That's the most bizzare description of > 50 years of consistent epidemiological data I've seen in a while.

        • MasterScythe on 23/12/2019 - 21:43
          -5

          Its just interesting.

          Most countries with fluoride in the water see massive tooth benefits; but there are a few who saw the opposite.

          Theres likely a link between other things in certain countries diets that are assisted by fluoride.

          Its an interesting subject for sure; just watch that closed minded people on both sides!

          • terrys on 24/12/2019 - 08:51
            +1

            @MasterScythe: There is a case against the addition to the water supply and in toothpaste for some, as sensitivity in the population can be assumed to fall on the standard curve, however the original observation of it's effects were based on comparison of decay between regions with and without flouride naturally in the water supply, with the testing of topical application following on from that.

            As for bone density loss, one confounding variable there may be ingestion of a known caustive agent, phosphoric acid. My suggestions of an inital comparison of the rate of uptake of a popular caffienated beverage by female adolescents and a later [40 years] development of osteoporosis have never gained much traction. :-/

            I didn't neg you - it is an interesting subject.

        • Diji1 on 23/12/2019 - 22:10
          -1

          epidemiological data

          I'm not arguing that flouride is ineffective or used to pacify the population but epidemiological data is unreliable to the point of being pointless to use.

    • Duece1995 on 23/12/2019 - 21:46
      -7

      Do some research and you'll find out.

      • terrys on 24/12/2019 - 08:55
        +2

        I hate to break it to you, but reading a page regarding a " poison" written by the company selling the "cure" doesn't constitue " research", however a belief that it does is a neccessary and sufficicient condition to disregard anything the proponent has to say on the matter.

        You're on Ozbargain.

  • Bellpop on 23/12/2019 - 21:04
    +26

    Can u get discount if I buy a tin foil hat in the same transaction? Also I’m concerned about 5G

    • frugalftw on 23/12/2019 - 21:10

      Chuck McGill, is that you?

      • Bellpop on 23/12/2019 - 22:12

        <3 better call Saul. Hanging for the next season.

        • frugalftw on 23/12/2019 - 22:34

          Haha ikr ;)

      • TheFatCat on 24/12/2019 - 08:06

        Nah its IEIATEF :)

    • bemybubble on 23/12/2019 - 21:12
      +1

      I’ve seen signs. Im convinced

  • djmm on 23/12/2019 - 21:18
    +2

    Why you wanna remove fluoride? How about vaccine?

    • 0jay on 23/12/2019 - 21:21

      Cult of consumer choice, yo

    • frugalftw on 23/12/2019 - 21:21
      +2

      Don't know how to remove vaccines… Sorry can't help.

    • SlappersOnly on 23/12/2019 - 21:24

      Fluoride seems like personal choice really. Vaccine affects everyone around you.

      • [Deactivated] on 23/12/2019 - 21:57
        +2

        Completely agree. If someone removes fluoride from their water it doesn’t screw up my teeth.

    • MasterScythe on 23/12/2019 - 21:39
      -5

      Basically, the pros and cons have arguments on both sides.

      There is undeniable proof that fluoride is good on teeth.

      There is little evidience that its good in the digestive system.

      Both sides have nutters.

      • Raynes on 23/12/2019 - 21:50
        +7

        Please stop with the both-sides-ism. There are only nutters on one side, and conclusive scientific evidence on the other.

        • 0jay on 23/12/2019 - 21:53
          -3

          Dude’s pretending to be a critical thinker, let him have his fantasy.

        • MasterScythe on 23/12/2019 - 22:04
          +2

          Why? There is a possible link between several things and consumption; at least in what ive researched; you'll argue i can tell by the attitude, so i wont bother with detail.

          But there is a certain link between tooth health and topical fluoride.

          The tooth benefits dont need swallowing.

          But does it hurt to swallow? Probably not; but we're not an all knowing super race yet; we have research to do.

          There's nothing wrong with actually assessing a chemical.

          Im not anti fluoride at all, but 10 years ago they wouldnt have linked my eye disease to chlorine in swimming pools; but now it seems almost certain.

          Can't claim there arent closed minded people on both sides.

          Science and research should never stop.

  • Oteta on 23/12/2019 - 21:24
    +2

    Filter replacement $149 - YIKES !
    https://www.waterscoaustralia.com.au/collections/replacement…

    • frugalftw on 23/12/2019 - 21:40

      Yeah, I plan to just get a new jug after 2 years.

      • 0jay on 23/12/2019 - 21:44

        Real frugal

        • frugalftw on 23/12/2019 - 21:44

          Thank you

          • 0jay on 23/12/2019 - 21:49
            -2

            @frugalftw: Tap water’s free, I beat your faux frugal ass

  • jong on 23/12/2019 - 21:24
    +18

    Have you got anything for filtering the dihydrogen monoxide out of tapwater?

  • mbck on 23/12/2019 - 21:25

    Just leaving this here

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/four-my…

  • JepunK on 23/12/2019 - 21:38

    goddamn…whatever happened to the brita kettle lol? $169 a bit steep imo, i hope it can auto pour

    • TEER3X on 23/12/2019 - 21:40
      +1

      Brita barely does anything to the water, in Melbourne anyway. I tested it and total dissolved solids did not change.

  • TEER3X on 23/12/2019 - 21:39
    +1

    Jokes aside, I was under the impression fluoride was very difficult to remove because of the small particle size. No idea how this filter accomplishes that, and it would most likely remove lots of other impurities.

    Would love to test one of these, but a bit out of my price range.

    • frugalftw on 23/12/2019 - 21:43

      Yes, it is, 'traditionally' you do it via reverse-osmosis, which disturbs the water too much afaik. This is a far better way to do it and it really works.

      • 0jay on 23/12/2019 - 21:48
        +7

        it really works

        And you know this because you have a half-cell ion selective electrode in a Laboratory Research Grade Two Channel Benchtop pH/mV/ISE Meter at home?

        • Diji1 on 23/12/2019 - 22:13
          +7

          You're talking to someone who thinks reverse osmosis disturbs the water too much.

          • 0jay on 23/12/2019 - 22:16
            +1

            @Diji1: An acolyte of Dr Emoto perhaps

          • terrys on 24/12/2019 - 08:58
            +1

            @Diji1: But think of the water memory and all those dipoles facing the wrong way…

        • frugalftw on 23/12/2019 - 22:18
          +1

          What I know is none of your comments are about the deal itself. There's a better place to voice your opinions and unleash your attacks, and it's called reddit. If you don't trust the product, be a good consumer and take it up to the ACCC.

          • 0jay on 23/12/2019 - 22:22
            +1

            @frugalftw: So far as it goes, you can conclude that my view is that $169 is a very poor bargain when tap water is good and free. If you’d like to argue that removal (allegedly) of flouride is worth an outlay of $169 then you are in ideological territory, hence the thread content.

            • frugalftw on 23/12/2019 - 22:48
              +1

              @0jay: It's a product that removes stuff from water, including fluoride. Tap water isn't free btw. To make it a bad deal, there has to be a bad price:value ratio. So you don't have a demand for it, it's fine. That's why it says for those interested in Fluoride removal.

              To illustrate, [QLD] BMW 530i Touring M Sport Package - $79,888 (SAVE $44,603) @ Motorline BMW Daisy Hill is not something meaningful for me, but doesn't mean it isn't for someone else, hence the upvotes. And I can appreciate the upvotes and the deal itself.

              • cwongtech on 23/12/2019 - 22:58

                @frugalftw:

                https://www.ada.org.au/oralhealth/fln/fluoridation.aspx

                Toothpaste has fluoride in it.
                Are you using non-fluoride toothpaste?

                • frugalftw on 23/12/2019 - 23:26
                  +1

                  @cwongtech: I'm trying different things :)
                  There are a couple from Woolies if you want to give them a go:
                  All Smiles Herbal Toothpaste 110g @ $2.10
                  Grants Of Australia Toothpaste Propolis 110g @ $3.00

                  • cwongtech on 23/12/2019 - 23:45
                    +1

                    @frugalftw: Well, at least you are consistent with your beliefs, though I do encourage you to try and check where those beliefs are founded.

                    I personally trust dentists and their knowledge.

                    I am against buying products purely because they are "natural". Otherwise, by that logic, we should live the Amish way, and throw water filtration out the door, and drink purely from untreated captured rainfall.

              • 0jay on 23/12/2019 - 23:04
                +1

                @frugalftw: You’ll notice I haven’t negged the deal so I’m not sure why the lecture.

                As for the mechanism of removal (skirting the issue of benefit), there’s little chance that a unit like this could be effective to filter anything but suspended impurities, and not very well after 2 years of presumably daily use.

                As to tap water’s cost you’ve got me there, though I’m willing to bet the cost of the water you’re putting into your magic filter jug is then an added expense for your faux-frugal ‘flouride-free’ water consumption.

      • cwongtech on 23/12/2019 - 22:52
        +3

        Yes, it is, 'traditionally' you do it via reverse-osmosis, which disturbs the water too much afaik.

        Can you provide a source on that?

        If you want pure water, you should be buying pure hydrogen and oxygen tanks in a 2 to 1 stoichiometric ratio, and using a controlled combustion method to produce pure water. Like in the Martian - www.youtube.com/watch?v=cN0-xJ59gKI

        If you don't trust the product, be a good consumer and take it up to the ACCC.

        I don't trust a lot of products, doesn't mean I'm going to bring every single product to the ACCC.
        But as we are OzBargainers, we need to watch out for other non-professionals who may have questions regarding this.

        Reasons why to filter your water, even filtering your shower water
        It seems to imply there's a ludicrous amount of chlorine.
        "Showering in filtered water results in greater respiratory health by reducing the risk of asthma and bronchitis from chlorine inhalation."
        - Chlorine in an aqueous state can be inhaled?

        If you don't trust the product, be a good consumer and take it up to the ACCC.

        Why don't you ask your doctor (who has nothing to do with teeth) what they use?
        Why don't you ask dentists what they drink?

        If you're in melbourne, why don't you check the water quality reports?
        If you don't trust the water authority, you could get it independently tested.
        And why would you trust a random product on the internet, but not what a government organisation provides?

        Because we live in a democratic country, we do have towns in queensland that had fluoride removed, and coincidentally higher rates of tooth decay

        You are free to post random crap on OzBargain, and we, the community, are free to express our concerns and share what we call information, as you are free to do so as well.

        • 0jay on 23/12/2019 - 23:12
          +1

          Can you provide a source on that?

          Dr Emoto can tell you all about disturbed water - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masaru_Emoto

        • frugalftw on 24/12/2019 - 00:07
          -3

          All I can say is try them out yourself. Science is about exploring, is it not? If you don't taste the difference, put your money elsewhere.

          I don't know why I would want pure water.

          It's up to you what you do with your belief. Other non-professionals who may have questions regarding the products, they should consult professionals they trust irl, not coming to a bargain site. I thought this had been addressed over and over again in various investment advice threads.

          It confuses me why you brought doctors, dentists and the government into this, because like I said, it's a product that filters water, what you do with the water is up to you. If you are happy with tap water, great, I'm happy for you.

          I don't call personal attack sharing.

          • cwongtech on 24/12/2019 - 00:13
            +5

            @frugalftw:

            I don't call personal attack sharing.

            I didn't personally attack anyone.
            I'm just asking why anyone would chase fluoride free water?

            Science is about exploring, is it not?

            Science is about observing phenomenon in a controlled environment, which yields reproduce-able results if performed with the same methodology by a different person.

            If you don't taste the difference, put your money elsewhere.

            Can you taste the fluoride in tap water?
            Yes or no?

            Given the link below which is milligrams per litre, a.k.a. mg/L or PPM, parts per million, 0.94 Fluoride PPM (I'm using the highest reported number reported here](https://www.melbournewater.com.au/water/health-and-monitorin…)

            I can certainly taste the difference between boiled water from a kettle and tap water, but I assume that is due to the heating element and scale forming in kettles.

            Though since I've changed the kettle, I can no longer taste the difference.

            Other non-professionals who may have questions regarding the products, they should consult professionals they trust irl, not coming to a bargain site. I thought this had been addressed over and over again in various investment advice threads.

            This is an in-joke to OzBargainers being Gerry Harvey certified professionals.. but okay.

            In case you want to know, I do hold a Bachelor of Engineering (Chemical) from UNSW and have several friends at Sydney Water, so that does make me a University-qualified professional in regards to water treatment, and potential conflicts of interest (?), though I really.. don't have anything to gain from other people drinking more tap water ($2.11 per 1000L paid to Sydney Water)

            It confuses me why you brought doctors, dentists and the government into this, because like I said, it's a product that filters water, what you do with the water is up to you.

            We're concerned that you're wasting your money on things that don't have any benefit to you at all and this is a site that discusses the benefits of a product submitted, over the cost of it.

            This is a bargain site after all. $169 for a jug that doesn't do anything, is $169 burnt, regardless of whether it's 20%, 50% off

            Why is there an industry of water filters that removes fluoride? It must be valuable to some people :)

            The same could be said for anti-vaxxers, flat earthers, fortune telling.

            • frugalftw on 24/12/2019 - 08:54

              @cwongtech: You responded to my response to someone who did.

              To me, science is about exploring and experimenting with different ideas. If we all just sit there and accepted any theories given by some authorities, I'm pretty sure I'd be in hell right now for all my sins. Because who am I to argue with dudes with huge hats? But I don't have to, I just need to experiment with what big hat tells me, check the results and decide on what to do with it.

              Can you taste the difference between filtered and tap water? Once you worked your way there, try different filtered water, spring water, etc. And taste shouldn't be the defining factor, because I would be on a desert diet… You then go on to test what your body feels like in a couple weeks on different water, while keeping everything else the same the best you can.

              Yes, you have a big hat, I get that, same reason you pulled doctors and other authorities into this. If someone asked me how safe is our drinking water, I'd refer them to you; but if someone asked me what is the best water for them, I'd say go experiment and find one that works for you. I believe everyone is different and has different needs. Unless you are in chronic pain and have tried different ways to make your life just that tiny bit better, it's cheap to talk.

              Like I said, if it doesn't work, neg the deal and report to ACCC. It looks like you are confusing functionality with purpose. Does it not filter what it says it would? Or does it not filter what you want it to filter/keep?

              The same could be said for everything. What's interesting is you immediately take one side without looking into the other. How is that any different than those telling me the world is ending and only a dude in sandals can save us all? I'm not saying I support any of those, what I'm saying is, due diligence is important, and how far you go is up to you when it comes to things you put into your one and only body.

              • cwongtech on 24/12/2019 - 09:44

                @frugalftw:

                To me, science is about exploring and experimenting with different ideas.

                I don't call anyone big hats.. nor myself for that matter, but buying different consumer products and testing them in a non-scientific method based on word of mouth or questionable sources isn't science, it's called being a consumer and drinking the kool-aid..

                If we all just sit there and accepted any theories given by some authorities, I'm pretty sure I'd be in hell right now for all my sins. Because who am I to argue with dudes with huge hats? But I don't have to, I just need to experiment with what big hat tells me, check the results and decide on what to do with it.

                Maybe read some experiments that others have carried out, there are places with poor drinking water quality that have excessive fluoride concentration, the need to address the high concentrations and the methods employed to carry this out

                Like I said, if it doesn't work, neg the deal and report to ACCC. It looks like you are confusing functionality with purpose. Does it not filter what it says it would? Or does it not filter what you want it to filter/keep?

                Can you taste the difference between filtered and tap water? Once you worked your way there, try different filtered water, spring water, etc.

                I actually can taste the difference.
                Filtered water (Brita Maxtra filters) is tasteless for me.
                Brita filters and most filtration systems will have activated carbon or some type of zeolites.
                Tap, boiled, and filtered I can taste the difference, and when a filter is starting to get old I can tell.
                For the boiled taste, I attribute it to the kettle's heating element reacting with whatever differentiated tap and boiling water (prior to Brita filter jug), though to be honest I would need to run lab tests to ascertain this theory of mine.

                I would also need a controlled experiment with different ions removed from the water to ascertain the significance of an ion an the effects of "taste" of the water.

                What's interesting is you immediately take one side without looking into the other. How is that any different than those telling me the world is ending and only a dude in sandals can save us all

                You haven't answered the below

                Can you taste the fluoride in tap water?
                Yes or no?
                And if you can, how do you know it's because of specifically fluoride and not other ions (or potential contaminants)?

                In my household, we use brita filters to filter the water first and then boil it after.
                Since this process has been implemented, I can't tell the difference between non-boiled filtered water and boiled filtered water.

                On a molecular level, boiling a substance then cooling it in a controlled environment should not have changed the substance, it merely changes from a purely gaseous phase back into a liquid phase.
                Water vapour is not steam by the way, steam is invisible and can reach what's called superheated steam.

                In some drinking water supplies there can be "hard" or "soft" water, due too the mineral content from the water source.
                "Spring water" is all the same to me, a waste of plastic and lots of convenience for drinking water.
                Luckily in Sydney, we have clean drinking water from the tap.

                You responded to my response to someone who did.

                I respond to your logic and question it.
                That's part of science, accept nothing and question everything.
                I dare you to question me because accepting everything (including consumer brochures) blindly is not what science is about.

                If someone asked me how safe is our drinking water, I'd refer them to you; but if someone asked me what is the best water for them, I'd say go experiment and find one that works for you.

                I would not refer them to me, I'd refer them to labs that have the equipment to test water quality, go to any water engineering department in any respectable university if you're really lost. Regarding the best water for them, I would be asking someone who knows the human body the best who doesn't have conflicts of interest with sales of any product.

                It's like you're asking the De Beers cartel regarding non-diamond gems and quoting them as the source of all gemstone knowledge. I'm sure they have knowledge but you need to be able to ascertain what is biased information and what is not

                Like I said, if it doesn't work, neg the deal and report to ACCC. It looks like you are confusing functionality with purpose. Does it not filter what it says it would? Or does it not filter what you want it to filter/keep?

                I am questioning the benefits of a product, posted as a bargain in OzBargain
                It's not our duty in OzBargain to report every single product sold in Australia to ACCC, it's our duty to discuss the validity of a deal and how useful a product is

                Note I haven't negged the deal, yes, there is a market for snake oil too, the key to a well educated free society is education, but perhaps snake oil is highly beneficial, I do take both sides of the argument but I am asking you to explain your side

                When you also question "science", make sure you are not selective of the sources of information, take a neutral stance and see things objectively.

                • frugalftw on 24/12/2019 - 13:50

                  @cwongtech: I appreciate your time writing it up, but sorry I really can't go into this discussion here. All I can do is to remind you that I had provided you with very simple and concrete steps to verify the popular opinion either way in your own body, what you do with it is up to you. Hope you have a great holiday!

              • 0jay on 24/12/2019 - 11:55

                @frugalftw: Ridicule does not equal a personal attack, it is an engagement with the underlying substance (or lack) of an idea or presentation.

                Leaving the question of efficiency to filter flouride (which is the premise of your post), there’s the question of value of a $169 water filter jug.

                Given an equivalent Brita jug retails at around $50 this product is a very bad deal indeed (and justifiably deserves a neg).

  • Thefong on 23/12/2019 - 21:46
    +5

    Really nails that whole "A fool and his money are soon parted" sorta aesthetic too

  • belongsinforums on 23/12/2019 - 21:47
    +5

    9 out of 10 dentists recommend this

  • bigbadboogieman on 23/12/2019 - 22:12

    What's wrong with unfiltered Tap water?

    • 0jay on 23/12/2019 - 22:18
      +2

      The flourides iz foreign matter an mah body iz mah temple (gummint wanna squeeze muh free thinks, yo)

  • sa-ozzie on 23/12/2019 - 22:31
    +1

    Drink out of a tap..save all those used water bottles

    • white-rhino on 23/12/2019 - 23:54

      we are told to run taps 30 secs before use to flush harmful lead. enough for me to be worried

      • cwongtech on 24/12/2019 - 00:09

        we are told to run taps 30 secs before use to flush harmful lead. enough for me to be worried

        We don't use lead pipes, we use copper pipes and PVC.

        You can check out the below video, which sheds some truth to the myth of "drinking hot water from the tap" is terrible for you, using purely common knowledge (some hot water tank systems in Britain were in lead containers)
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfHgUu_8KgA

        • white-rhino on 24/12/2019 - 00:42

          The fittings have lead. Are you unaware of the problems in Perth regarding the Childrens Hospital and Public water fountains?

          • cwongtech on 24/12/2019 - 01:15

            @white-rhino:

            Are you unaware of the problems in Perth regarding the Childrens Hospital and Public water fountains?

            I actually am not, as a Sydneysider, and that's terribly concerning.
            Looks like we have an article

            That does mean the water source is not the problem, rather the configuration of the system (brass fittings)
            I wouldn't be buying a jug or filtration system if that was the case, I would be attempting to change over the fittings if this were the case..

  • pistachio1 on 23/12/2019 - 23:52

    Thanks OP I need to get a tooth removed but this will work out cheaper than the dentist.

    • CJ31 on 24/12/2019 - 07:38

      Only just.

  • white-rhino on 23/12/2019 - 23:55

    im sceptical as reverse osmosis doesnt even make pure water. destilled has got to be the only way

    • cwongtech on 24/12/2019 - 00:07
      +1

      You need 18 ohms resistance water.
      It's measured in ohms because pure water is non-conductive, it's because of the dissolved ions, that make "water" as we know it, conductive.

      Water so pure, that through the phenomenon of osmosis (movement of high concentration will move into lower concentration), your nutrients will be drained from your body, into the 18 ohms resistance water.

      All water in society (including distilled, de-ionized, 18 ohms water which is labgrade) is not natural, unless you leave a clean bucket outside and drink untreated rainwater.

      If you want to chase all natty, you gotta chase the definition.

      Go full Amish or nothing.

      • ozbking on 24/12/2019 - 01:12

        There is also ultra pure water

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrapure_water

        We used it regularly in our research lab

        • cwongtech on 24/12/2019 - 01:16

          Milli-Q water in a squeezy bottle? :)

          • ozbking on 24/12/2019 - 01:20
            +1

            @cwongtech: We had Milli-Q from a tap

            I wonder if water cooling a PC would be possible by putting the the components in Milli-Q water… Technically shouldn't be conductive

            • [Deactivated] on 24/12/2019 - 01:28
              +1

              @ozbking: Would probably start pulling metals from components lol

            • cwongtech on 24/12/2019 - 01:36

              @ozbking:

              We had Milli-Q from a tap

              The squeezy bottle is what you would use to transport the Milli-Q water for experiments, no? :)

              And you'd need to refill the bottle every now and then because the Milli-Q water would become slightly acidic because of atmospheric CO2 dissolving in it

  • [Deactivated] on 24/12/2019 - 01:26
    +1

    Australian company gets their testing done in Korea… You know this one's legit….

  • [Deactivated] on 24/12/2019 - 01:35
    +3

    In the certificates they picture:

    1. The results shown in this test report refer only to the offered sample by client.
    2. The test report cannot be used for the purpose of litigation of advertising, and shouldn't be republished without documented approval

    Yeah, nah.. I think I'm gonna neg that one ay. If people didn't already know this is dodgy they gotta see that lol

  • hongjai on 24/12/2019 - 14:07

    It all comes down to what you need; I have done research in the past that Alkaline Mineral do no help/harm to human body. What I am curious in is how often you need to change that filter and how much would it will cost in a long run?

    Came across these guys https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/505400; does anyone have experience dealing with them???

    • cwongtech on 24/12/2019 - 15:03

      Reverse osmosis isn't the best way, because water likes to flow through rocks, but at my budget it would do - Frugalftw

      • OP in your linked thread (your link doesn't work btw, there's a rogue ; at the end of the URL)

      Water likes to fall from the sky.. as.. rain

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join