Summary: UK Bottled Water Analysis (Protect Our Plates)

The video provides a critical breakdown of the UK bottled water market, categorising brands based on corporate ethics, environmental impact, and production processes.

10 Brands to Avoid & Key Reasons

• Voss: Alleged to be chemically identical to local Norwegian tap water and bottled far from the town of Voss.
• Harrogate Spring: Criticism focuses on its acquisition by Danone and local disputes over bottling plant expansions into woodland.
• Aqua Carpatica: Criticised for "health halo" marketing that implies medical-style benefits for children and adults without clinical backing.
• Nestlé Pure Life: Framed as the "commodification" of water, representing a shift from water as a right to a market commodity.
• Fiji Water: Noted for high carbon emissions due to shipping (9,000 miles) and social irony regarding water access in Fiji.
• Perrier: Involved in a 2024 scandal for using "illegal" (for mineral water) filtration methods like UV and carbon filters.
• Volvic: Accused of depleting local French aquifers, leading to water restrictions for residents.
• Evian: Cited for lawsuits regarding microplastics and "greenwashing" claims about being carbon neutral.
• Dasani: Famous for its 2004 UK failure involving purified tap water and a carcinogenic bromate recall.
• SmartWater: Criticised for a "pointless" distillation process that strips natural minerals only to add negligible amounts back in.

4 Recommended Alternatives

• One Water: A British brand that directs profits toward funding clean water projects in developing countries.
• Highland Spring: Sourced from organic land in Scotland; holds a 100/100 ethical score from The Good Shopping Guide.
• CanO Water: Uses aluminium cans to eliminate plastic-shedding concerns and improve recycling rates.
• Brecon Carreg: An independently operated Welsh brand praised for consistent quality and lower environmental baggage.

Key Takeaways on Filtration

The video suggests that UK tap water is safer and cheaper than many bottled brands. For those wanting extra purity, it recommends Reverse Osmosis or Five-stage filters (e.g., ZeroWater) over standard carbon jugs to effectively remove microplastics and "forever chemicals" (PFAS).

cross-posted from: https://discuss.tchncs.de/post/58694811

Happened to me when I saw a book on the US site, I wasn't able to see all reviews, but there was a button to sort-of "apply" to get approved for seeing all of them.

It took five days, then I got this email.

Interestingly, they're not doing this on the European site, you can still see all reviews there.

cross-posted from: https://quokk.au/c/flippanarchy/p/614149/hp-hate

cross-posted from: https://news.abolish.capital/post/16938

Web hosting company deletes archive of 300+ murdered Gaza journalists’ work

Domain registrar and web hosting company Namecheap has obliterated the work of over 300 Gaza journalists murdered by Israel. The mass deletion has led to accusations that Israel is trying to wipe out records of its countless crimes in Gaza.

Namecheap: deleting history

Namecheap revoked the domain of a digital memorial honouring the victims of Israel’s targeted murder of journalists in Gaza. The revocation removed an archive of over 16,000 videos, most of which documented Israel’s genocide and war crimes.

Namecheap allowed an Israeli website to register in May 2024 that targeted Palestinian children. The US-based firm justified its decision to delete the journalism archive by claiming that the content:

promotes, encourages, or depicts cruelty toward humans or animals.

Right.

The ‘Zionism Observer’ X account, which ran the archive, said that the videos catalogued atrocities by Israel. These crimes included the murder of children and the blocking of ambulances. The account has engaged in a debate with Namecheap CEO Richard Kirkendall about the deletion, accusing him of lying and deflecting in his responses, including a claim that they had requested the move to a different domain registrar:

Hey @namecheapceo123: since you just compared Palestinian journalists to ISIS beheading videos to justify censoring Databases for Palestine, could you at least respond to this? https://t.co/K8GH4a4OhT

— Zionism Observer (@receipts_lol) January 2, 2026

This is not true. https://t.co/tRv3ryouby

— Zionism Observer (@receipts_lol) January 2, 2026

Also, do you not know how domain registration works?

— Zionism Observer (@receipts_lol) January 2, 2026

Namecheap then began deleting tweets on its company X account that had attempted to explain away the deletion of the site:

Reached a new phase in the @namecheap censorship saga.

They are now deleting their own tweets, which they originally claimed clarified the reason for the censorship. pic.twitter.com/F6h3TddW8H

— Zionism Observer (@receipts_lol) January 3, 2026

Systemic human rights violations

Human rights watchdogs say Israel has long barred international journalists from Gaza while it erases physical evidence of its crimes. This scrubbing has escalated murderously with Israel’s new ban on almost 40 medical and humanitarian charities from entering Gaza.

Now anti-genocide and international law campaigners fear that the colony and its advocates are pressuring firms to do the same. However, Zionism Observer appears confident the scrubbed information can be restored:

We cannot share it until we recover from the Namecheap deplatform, but we’ve archived hundreds of videos of Israelis blocking ambulances. https://t.co/F3Ws9bMRug

— Zionism Observer (@receipts_lol) January 2, 2026

Israeli war criminals and genociders must be held to account. Their attempt to hide their crimes by murdering hundreds of Palestinian journalists, often with their families, must fail. If any attempt is being made to scrub the internet of their evidence and testimonies, that must fail too.

Featured image via the Canary

By Skwawkbox

From Canary via This RSS Feed.

cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/23211439

TL,DR: powder laundry detergent is better than the liquid one.

When it comes to choosing laundry detergent, I used to default to liquid detergent because powder would often clump together. However, I recently learned that liquid detergent has a bigger environmental impact - it contains microplastic particles that are hard to remove in wastewater treatment plants, and it's also less efficient at cleaning. Plus, liquid detergent usually comes in plastic bottles, whereas powder detergent is often packaged in plastic film or even cardboard. So, I switched back to powder detergent. To avoid clumping issues in my humid laundry room, I found a simple solution: I use an old fork to break up the powder before use. It's a small effort, and I'm happy to be reducing my pollution footprint a bit. Video source (in German, maybe this weekend I'll look for better sources and add an infografic): https://youtu.be/HgIe4oxe2eI

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/20770359

I don’t know about y’all, but I will not ever be going shopping here.

cross-posted from: https://lemmynsfw.com/post/15034200

Takes effect in October, finally some good news

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/25348904

What brands do you avoid at all cost? I don't keep up with the news all that much, and many of the reasons to avoid something don't make it there anyway. So I'm asking here to make a big list of things to avoid. It could be anything from bad security practices to really frustrating packaging. Working as a cashier myself, I definitely know there are plenty of brands I avoid purely on the basis that their product is a pain to stock.

On the flip side, what's the alternative? If you avoid Pepsi, for example, what do you turn to instead?

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/15047303

Report finds Nestlé adds sugars to baby food in low-income countries

Experts say there can be long-term health consequences for babies and infants who consume too much sugar at a young age.

In Switzerland, the label of Nestlé’s Cerelac baby cereal says it contains “no added sugar.” But in Senegal and South Africa, the same product has 6 grams of added sugar per serving, according to a recent Public Eye investigation. And in the Philippines, one serving of a version of the Cerelac cereal for babies 1 to 6 months old contains a whopping 7.3 grams of added sugar, the equivalent of almost two teaspoons. 

This “double standard” for how Nestlé creates and markets its popular baby food brands around the world was alleged in a report from Public Eye, an independent nonpartisan Swiss-based investigative organization, and International Baby Food Action Network. 

The groups allege that Nestlé adds sugars and honey to some of its baby cereal and formula in lower-income countries, while products sold in Europe and other countries are advertised with “no added sugars.” The disparities uncovered in the report, which was published in the BMJ in April, has raised alarms among global health experts.