Editor:

I am becoming increasingly alarmed by the persistence of FHA, so here with my contribution:

So shortly the population of Chilliwack will be forced to consume drinking water poisoned by a chlorine compound at a sharply increased cost. In case one wants to remove the chlorine or buy one's clean water elsewhere, the cost increases again in order to obtain what one now has without the additional cost: clear and clean uncontaminated water. Does this sound ridiculous or what?

To stress the risks of chlorine contamination I quote the following:

"The chlorine used to reduce the risk of infectious disease may account for a substantial portion of the cancer risk associated with drinking water. Chlorination of drinking water was a major factor in the reduction in the mortality rates associated with waterborne pathogen.

The use of chlorine was believed to be safe. This view is evident in an article, which appeared on the back page of the New York Times.

"The report stated that with the use of chlorine, Any municipal water supply can be made as pure as mountain spring water. Chlorination destroys all animal and microbial life, leaving no trace of itself afterwards. This statement reflected opinion accepted until recent years when halogenated organic compounds, such as chloroform, were identified in chlorinated drinking water supplies. Recent surveys show that these compounds are common in water supplies throughout the United States. These concerns about cancer risks associated with chemical contamination from chlorination by-products have resulted in numerous epidemiological studies. These studies generally support the notion that by-products of chlorination are associated with increased cancer risks. Chlorine is used to combat microbial contamination, but it can react with organic matter in the water and form dangerous, carcinogenic Trihalomethanes. According to Dr. Joseph M. Price, MD, in Moseby's Medical Dictionary, Chlorine is the greatest crippler and killer of modern times. It is an insidious poison.

"In a 1992 study that made front-page headlines, and was reported on in the July issue of the American Journal of Public Health researchers at the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee found that people who regularly drink tap water containing high levels of chlorine by-products have a greater risk of developing bladder and rectal cancers than people who drink unchlorinated water. The study estimates that about nine percent of all bladder cancer and 18 percent of all rectal cancer cases are associated with long-term consumption of these by-products. This amounts to over 20,000 new cases each year."

Is FHA also going to order chlorination of bottled water, is that their next target? What about if one were to collect rainwater? Are they also going to dictate what we should be eating?

It seems to me that FHA should be managing the area where their real authority is: health care, an area that certainly can use improvement.

I wonder why we should be sitting idly by and accept all this nonsense. We will be at a greater risk with chlorine in the water than without it!

Frans Dullemond Chilliwack