|
| Author |
Message |
paulz
Member
|
# Posted: 2 May 2020 10:57
Reply
Saw this on Ford's Innovation Nation show.
Tested by MIT labs:
Test If ANY Water Source Is Safe To Drink In 2 Seconds
With The TestDrop Pro
Great for travelers!
https://www.lishtot.com/TDP1.html
Hmm. About #35
|
|
Nobadays
Member
|
# Posted: 2 May 2020 15:13
Reply
I see E-coli but not Giardia or Cryptosporidium.... those 2 are responsible for a lot of intestinal issues. From my days working in a water lab., we had to incubate samples for Coliform bacteria... E-coli. Wondering how this gadget can do all this without even a sample of the water? Hmmmm
|
|
Lishtot
Member
|
# Posted: 6 May 2020 14:22
Reply
These parasites are very important water contaminants. We do not have enough data to claim their detection in water, though they should behave like other biological samples and we believe that they should be detectable at relevant concentrations.
|
|
Nobadays
Member
|
# Posted: 6 May 2020 16:09
Reply
Lishtot... that is a very well written "politician" sort of answer.... it really says nothing, sorry. I have looked over your website and cannot find technical information as to how this device works. Perhaps it is there and I am missing it. Can you point me to the correct page?
I am just skeptical of a device that can indicate the presence or absence of a biological without an actual sample of the water. As I stated above, I have worked in a water lab... was (retired now) a certified water distribution and treatment operator, as well well as certified sewerage treatment plant operator in the state of Oregon. I have spent a considerable amount of time in water testing labs. I just can't wrap my head around this device.
Help me understand. Thank you.
|
|
DaveBell
Moderator
|
# Posted: 6 May 2020 18:23 - Edited by: DaveBell
Reply
I think it works.. I took the key fob for my Jeep and pointed it at cup of water, pressed the button, and to my surprise, the light blinked. Who knew? 
|
|
toyota_mdt_tech
Member
|
# Posted: 7 May 2020 08:50
Reply
Will my RAM FOB work, it doenst have a light? Truck beeps twice, water is good?
|
|
NorthRick
Member
|
# Posted: 7 May 2020 16:14
Reply
This is straight up BS. There is no way this thing can detect all those contaminants by simply waving it at the water. Let alone detecting contaminants down the maximum contaminant level (MCL) that the EPA requires for drinking water.
|
|
Ontario lakeside
Member
|
# Posted: 7 May 2020 19:04
Reply
I have a garage door opener, will that work?
|
|
|
Nobadays
Member
|
# Posted: 7 May 2020 19:23
Reply
I was really skeptical of the Steripen when it came out but... I understand the technology behind the UV light and how it renders pathogens harmless. We have used a Steripen now for literally 100s of gallons of water while backpacking... it works!
This device... yeah unless someone can provide better scientific data as to HOW it works.... I'll agree, your key fob and garage door opener will be just as accurate!
|
|
toyota_mdt_tech
Member
|
# Posted: 7 May 2020 20:14 - Edited by: toyota_mdt_tech
Reply
Quoting: Ontario lakeside I have a garage door opener, will that work?
It has to have a blinking light. Just be careful of RF burns.
|
|
DaveBell
Moderator
|
# Posted: 9 May 2020 21:20
Reply
MIT in India is Madras Institute of Technology, misleading advertising by Lishtot. The BBC link on Lishtot site, reporter states the fob detects electromagnetic field and then sips the fifth cup (bad) of water.
|
|
Lishtot
Member
|
# Posted: 11 May 2020 04:06
Reply
Folks:
MIT here really does mean Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The work in Nepal was performed by a group from their D-Lab (https://d-lab.mit.edu/)and was performed without any Lishtot input.
Some people asked about how the sensor works. I'll explain. Water, like most materials, is a triboelectric material. There are literature reports that other than air, nothing has a tendency to give electrons as much as does water. Those same reports and patents show that water transfers electrons to plastics. What we found was that the amount of charge transferred to plastic was very sensitive to what was in the water. PPB levels of organics or biologicals would interfere with electrons getting to the plastic (due to the hydrophobic materials binding there first) and thus reducing the electric field generated on the plastic cup. Heavy metals are also detectable in the PPB range, but they appear to interfere with the transfer of electrons via interaction with hydroxide ions. The device is not specific but is a very sensitive but general water quality sensor. The device itself passively detects electric fields, and the amplitude as well as the shape of the fields around the cup are very sensitive to what's in the water. We currently have 3 US patents as well one in Australia. My personal background is a Bachelors in Biochemistry from Harvard and a Ph.D. in the same from Wisconsin-Madison. If anyone wishes to have more information, please feel free to contact me at alan@lishtot.com
|
|
Nobadays
Member
|
# Posted: 11 May 2020 15:10
Reply
Thanks for the response! I guess just because I don't understand the technology doesn't mean it won't work.
Quoting: Lishtot The device is not specific but is a very sensitive but general water quality sensor.
Beginning to understand. So for travelers drawing water from a faucet, they may be able to tell if the water is... more less... safe to drink. Green light, give it a go. Seems that being non-specific kind of leaves you up in the air if it tests bad. By this I mean you can't know whether treating the water with say a Stripen or CL2 would make it safe to drink.... as the reaction could be from heavy metals. So where do you see this as useful?
I would still like to read technical information on this product if you could point me to that information. Thank you.
|
|
toyota_mdt_tech
Member
|
# Posted: 11 May 2020 15:32 - Edited by: toyota_mdt_tech
Reply
Quoting: Lishtot MITT here really does mean Massachusetts Institute of Technology
In Utah, it means a traitor.
|
|
Lishtot
Member
|
# Posted: 12 May 2020 06:00
Reply
Thanks for your follow-up note. The device can give some general information like biological/organic versus inorganic, again based on their reducing the fields in different manners. Still, I could not tell you if it's lead or cadmium; I also could not tell you if it's a parasite or bacteria. So what's it worth? Let's put it in perspective: if the device gives you a red light, it is telling you that there is something in the water that should not be there. The simplest test we do is to take clean water, get a blue LED, and then take a sip and it then goes red. The chemicals released in spit are enough to label the water as contaminated. Now, spit is not dangerous, and generally drinking someone else's spit is not dangerous, but the water is definitely not "clean" water and we think that most people would want to know that the water is not clean. So where does this help? If you have a filter, it might tell you when you really need to change your filter and not when they tell you to change the filter, which might be months or even years before it goes off. If you have tap and filtered water or you want to rely on your tap and save money on the bottled water, in such cases the device ideally would give you the confidence and ability to make decisions based on real information. We can detect Teflon-like chemicals that may be carcinogenic--it is estimated than tens of millions of Americans may be exposed to such chemicals. If we can give a heads-up so as to add filtration and/or look for a different water source, wouldn't that be worth it?
|
|
DaveBell
Moderator
|
# Posted: 29 May 2020 22:21
Reply
Post the MIT test report (or link to) that shows Massachusetts Institute of Technology, in Massachusetts. It should show "individual" results for each of the following: nitrogen, bleach, salts, pesticides, metals, toxins produced by bacteria, human or animal drugs, bacteria, viruses, protozoan, parasites, cesium, plutonium and uranium.
|
|
|
