Water Filter Guide, A Consumer Guide to Choosing Drinking Water Purification Systems

Our Water Filter Guild will help you understand your options when choosing drinking water filters / purifiers.

Sorting out the facts from fantasy and dispelling many of the myths in the drinking water purification industry.

We explain the theories and discuss the science (or lack thereof) behind alkaline water, structured water, clustered water, bev water, bfrv water, electron charged water, oxygenated water and bottled water.

We also discuss the strengths and merits of these purification technologies: Granular Activated Carbon (GAC), Carbon Block Filters, Ceramic Filters, Reverse Osmosis, Deionization, Distillers, Ultra-Violet Light, and Ion Exchange systems.

Water Filter Guide (dot net, dot com) is under construction.

The purpose of this web site will be to help you understand your options when it comes to purifying your drinking water. There are a lot of companies to choose from, and there are a lot of false and misleading claims to sort through.

You will find information on:

Please visit one of these companies generously supporting our efforts:
Pure Water Systems, Inc.

You will also learn details on the strengths and weaknesses of the various methods used to treat water, including:

When this site is complete, and you've studied the information, you will have what you need to make an informed purchase.

Please also visit our blog.

What about BFRV water?

A good example of the kind of misinformation available about drinking water can be found by studying the marketing materials in the "source packet" available from John Thomas, author of the book "Young Again." John Thomas used to offer a product called a "BEV Series" water purification system. While the promotional language includes many bogus pseudo-scientific terms like "bond angle restructuring" and "unique energy footprint" the actual term 'BEV' comes from the body of research performed by Prof. L. C. Vincent of France. Prof. Vincent was granted a US patent in 1959 for a device that came to be known as a Bio Electronic Vincent (BEV).

John Thomas claims to have a proprietary 8 stage design to his water systems, but in reality he has a system which incorporates carbon, reverse osmosis, and deionization. There is nothing proprietary about this design. As soon as a competitor (Pure Water Systems, Inc.) began to offer a superior product using similar technologies, John Thomas changed the name of his product rather than improve it. What John Thomas used to sell as a BEV Series water system is now a BFRV water system. Only the name has been changed, the systems themselves have not.

The most interesting aspect of this kind of marketing deception is that John Thomas rails against the canola oil industry for changing the name of rapeseed oil because that term would never find widespread acceptance. Now he's using the very same tactics. Comparison of John Thomas 'Young Again Source Packet' from 2002 with his latest in 2003 shows the water system is marketed with exactly the same language, only the term BEV (which is an actual acronym) has been changed to BFRV (which means nothing at all.)

The systems Mr. Thomas offers are privately labeled systems assembled by a large water purification parts warehouse in California. Besides adding some colorful new language to the original manufacturer's product literature, there is nothing about these systems to support a claim they are "proprietary."

If you do decide Mr. Thomas products are worth pursuing, we encourage you to ask him to provide some evidence the systems are tested to exceed the "BFRV" standard, whatever those might be. Ask for documentation of the testing, ask the brand name and model number of the test equipment, and ask for details on the standards themselves.

While we believe Mr. Thomas offers some excellent health information in his book "Young Again," and while we find his water purification systems to be effective—none of his other claims "hold water." We encourage you not to be fooled by John Thomas and his BFRV systems. There are better products available from more reputable manufacturers at much lower prices.

| TOP |   

What about "structured" waters?

One of the largest misconceptions about water is that it exists in some type of "structured" or "clustered" arrangement at the molecular level. We find it fascinating there are a number of different ideas about how many molecules make up one of these structured arrangements. Some web sites propose the ideal arrangement is 12 molecules to a cluster, others six molecules, and others claim 5 molecules is the ideal number to make water somehow more healthful.

Unfortunately, there is no critical scientific evidence to support any of these ideas. A water molecule is composed of an oxygen atom that has bonded with two hydrogen atoms. These molecules then form "polar" bonds to each other due to the distribution of the electrical charge on the molecule. (This is well explained on numerous other web sites or in any first year chemistry book.) While polar bonds do have measurable force at the molecular level, the bonds themselves form and are broken billions of times per second. Science does not recognize any force that might exist in pure water causing these bonds to maintain stability for any length of time.

There are people who propose these water "clusters" can be verified using Nuclear Magnetic Resonance or NMR equipment. Dr. Mu Shik Jhon supposedly verified the existence of water clusters using NMR technology. Most of the web sites mentioning clustered water will in some place mention NMR research as evidence clustered water actually exists. Sadly, it is extremely common to find people who will reference some piece of scientific research in support of their ideas (or products) without having any understanding of the research itself. Often, the people making the claims are unable to evaluate the research to determine if the conclusions will stand up to scientific scrutiny.

We would like to refer you to an article written by a Dr. Paul Shin who has over 18 years experience with NMR instrumentation. Here Dr. Shin reports using NMR technology to test several other fluids to see if they differed in any way from the "hexagonal" clustered water. Certainly if this idea of structured water has any real basis one would expect to find its NMR signature to be unique. Sadly, this was not the case and regular tap water, bottled water, and even urine were found to have NMR signatures almost identical to the "hexagonal" structured water. Either the NMR signature does not describe the existence of water molecules forming hexagonal structures, or the structures don't exist. In the first case, this would mean using NMR technology to verify structures of water molecules is an inadequate approach, or, in the second case, it is much more likely the data simply does not support the idea. If clusters exist and maintain their shape, then finding evidence of their existence would only be the first step towards a proof. This would have to be followed by a sound theoretical framework that would describe the forces at work holding these molecules together.

After reviewing the article by Dr. Shin, it should be obvious the evidence does not support the hypothesis water molecules exist in clusters. Further, since no theoretical body of work exists to suggest what might cause the molecules to maintain their supposed shape, we conclude structured water is an interesting idea but one without any scientific evidence to support it. Therefore, the health benefits of drinking "structured" water can probably be explained in other ways, and any benefits are most likely the result of the patient becoming well hydrated—as there does exist significant research to show hydration plays a fundamental and critical role in health and wellness.


| TOP |   


The most important question anyone can ask when evaluating any scientific claim is "What else might explain that?" Asking this question opens up our minds to real, critical thinking. Just because some researcher suggest a link between A and B does not verify the existence of a link. Further, there might well be a dozen other ideas that could explain a relationship between A and B, but only solid research will determine this link exists or not. And, just because some research study claims a link exists, doesn't mean their scientific method is any good. Often a critical look at the experimental method will show huge gaps in understanding, or conclusions that are drawn even though the evidence is sketchy. This is the reason the teaching of science is so important - but more important would be to help children to understand what the limitations of science are, and give them sound instruction on just what the scientific method is. This way they'll be able to look at a sensational news report of some scientific research and immediately ask themselves "What else might explain that?"

drinking water filters =pure drinking water purification system / systems BEV BFRV

Water Filter Guide—here to lead you through the confusing world of drinking water treatment.