Talk:Water ionizer

Water Ionizers
@MrOllie

The existence of sham water ionizers does not change the fact that water ionizers raise the pH of drinking water. You can feel free to add clarification that many fake machines exist, but water ionizers do raise the pH of the water, and the cited source confirms this. Ronnocerman (talk) 18:26, 22 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Many of the 'ionizers' on the market don't actually separate the gases produced by electrolysis - they dissolve right back into the water leaving the PH unchanged. MrOllie (talk) 18:30, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Again, the existence of fake manchines or incorrectly-made machines that make false claims does not change the fact that a true water ionizer raises the pH of the water significantly and measurably, as confirmed in the source. Ronnocerman (talk) 18:32, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I returned some sourcing and content that was removed a while back that explains the issue. MrOllie (talk) 18:39, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
 * You returned an armchair chemist's explanation that is unsourced to prove why my edit should not be kept when my edit is backed by a cited medical systemic review referencing multiple specific consumer-grade water ionizers and their ability to produce high-pH water.
 * The only source cited in your edit disproves the edit if you actually read it. Ronnocerman (talk) 20:28, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I came here from the noticeboard. It seems you're having two different arguments here. @MrOllie is claiming water ionizers don't produce alkaline water at all, which I understand. The way they are usually presented by proponents does seem to imply that they produce water with dissolved OH- ions and no cation, which is an impossibility. It seems intentional to me, because otherwise it begs the question of why not just use baking soda water or something. @Ronnocerman is claiming they produce alkaline water, which seems to be true, but they produce it either using an ion exchange membrane in a weakly basic solution to obtain Ca(OH)2 and HCl (pro-ionizer site: https://www.3aaa.gr.jp/english/structure.html) or possibly by electrolyzing NaCl to obtain NaOH (polemic essay by a chemistry professor: http://www.chem1.com/CQ/ionbunk.html). The machines that allow you to control the pH apparently do that by mixing Cl2 back into the solution to make HOCl, which can be added to the NaOH solution according to the desired pH. HansVonStuttgart (talk) 11:30, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, this mostly mirrors most of my understanding of how they work. (I don't think Cl2 is necessary, though. Just CA(OH)2 and HCl.)
 * > produce it either using an ion exchange membrane in a weakly basic solution to obtain Ca(OH)2 and HCl
 * I don't think it's necessary for the solution to be weakly basic. For instance, you could take pure, neutral water and dissolve calcium chloride into it, creating an acid. This can then be electrolyzed via a water ionizer to form alkaline water (via Ca(OH)2), and acidic water (via HCl), as you say.
 * I believe that dissolved salts in tap water can be sufficient, without introduction of additional NaCl. That said, this is a part I want to do more research on.
 * I actually tried to split the non-medical discussion into its own topic, which I called "Water ionizers raise the pH of the water they're ionizing.", below. Ronnocerman (talk) 21:42, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
 * > The way they are usually presented by proponents does seem to imply that they produce water with dissolved OH- ions and no cation, which is an impossibility.
 * They usually present it as only needing tap water, which has dissolved salts, which is usually sufficient for their operation. Ronnocerman (talk) 21:56, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
 * @MrOllie
 * You may want to take a gander at WP:STATUSQUOSTONEWALLING Ronnocerman (talk) 18:30, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm familiar, thanks. Sometimes people are just going to disagree with you, it doesn't mean they are 'stonewalling' or that anything nefarious is going on. MrOllie (talk) 18:40, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
 * The article makes numerous sweeping claims that water ionizers are exclusively pseudoscience in both their mechanical/chemical function and their medicinal effects. This take is incorrect due to being seriously improperly unnuanced.
 * Some water ionizers exist that don't work at all (no method of action). Some water ionizers exist that technically work, but in a non-meaningful way (ones that don't use a proper membrane or separate outputs via some other method). Some water ionizers exist that meaningfully "work", but not in their stated way (they supplement via mineral infusion while claiming to work via electrolysis).
 * Many water ionizers exist that work and function via their exact stated methods. You're refusing to allow edits that attempt to clarify this, but are instead adding edits that are patently incorrect misunderstandings of science or with entirely unsourced claims. For example:
 * > so if the area between the alkaline and acidic water is at least semi-permeable, the water will undergo another reaction that just leaves neutral water
 * This is not true. "Semi-permeable" does not mean "slowly permeable" as the text you brought back unscientifically implies. I wish you had the same requirement of scientific rigor for your own edits as you do mine. "Semi-permeable" means that it is a membrane that only allows molecules of specific kinds to pass (usually based on size or charge). In the case of an anion-exchange membrane, it conducts anions, but rejects cations and gasses. For example, a semi-permeable membrane is used in Anion exchange membrane electrolysis. Even still, the presence of even a permeable membrane can still be sufficient to properly separate the resulting pH-imbalanced waters for the time necessary to create them before they are pumped out. The linked citation confirms this (referencing a "porous barrier" in the creation of its pH-imbalanced waters), and even tracks the amount of time it takes for the water to diffuse through it until it is neutralized.
 * On top of this, alkaline water has many "miracle cure" pseudoscience quackery claims made about it, but the fact of the matter is that (as the studies I have shared show) alkaline water does have some very specific health benefits relating to reflux disease.
 * You make a distinction that the studies I gave do not prove that alkaline water derived via electrolysis (electrolysis-reduced-alkaline-water, or ERAW) provide health benefits, and only suggest that "bicarbonate"-derived water has health benefits. Those studies find that "alkaline water" is effective, and only explain in their methods that the alkaline water they chose to use was bicarbonate-derived. They make their statements based on the alkalinity of the water exclusively, and not based on the method they used to derive it. In no part of their study do they claim that it must be bicarbonate-derived. You're moving the goalposts in a way that these peer-reviewed scientists did not when they made their claims.
 * > Exposure of pepsin to alkaline water with a pH level greater than 8 has been shown to inactivate pepsin, suggesting that alkaline water might be useful as an adjunct treatment for patients with LPR.
 * Additionally, there are sources in this article itself that are about the specific health benefits of ERAW, and not about sodium-bicarbonate-derived alkaline water. See here. Suspiciously, the fact that this is a systemic review in favor of ERAW is ignored and it is only referenced as part of the definition of a water ionizer. You won't even let me make an edit to that very statement that is sourced with a systemic review that explains that water ionizers produce alkaline water. Your vague belief that "most of these machines don't actually change the ph", which you leave uncited, does not trump a medical review that explains multiple consumer-grade "water ionizer" machines that produce alkaline water.
 * Alkaline water is not going to cure cancer, but it is rigorously proven to have some specific health benefits. Yes, even ERAW. Not just sodium-bicarbonate-derived alkaline water.
 * You're refusing to allow this article to progress in a scientific direction. Large portions of this article are incorrect, unsourced, and make sweeping false generalizations. You're reverting any edits I make that provide for the proper nuance, instead reverting to incorrect and unsourced statements.
 * You're Status Quo Stonewalling on an article that seriously lacks NPOV. Ronnocerman (talk) 20:26, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:WALLOFTEXT... I will just pick a few sentences that strike me as false.
 * You're Status Quo Stonewalling Nonsense. The study you quoted was just not good enough: it was a WP:PRIMARY study. The revert was in line with the rules.
 * "Semi-permeable" does not mean "slowly permeable" Of course it doesn't. Which text is supposed to imply it does? You are not very transparent.
 * You have no good sources for your extraordinary claim that there are working water ionizers.
 * The paragraph starting with The effectiveness of the process is debatable is just basic chemistry you learn at school, applied to the claim. It's almost WP:SKYISBLUE territory. --Hob Gadling (talk) 19:37, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 * > The study you quoted was just not good enough: it was a WP:PRIMARY study.
 * Per your link
 * > Primary sources that have been reputably published may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them.
 * Additionally, the other two studies I posted were not, but were still deemed insufficient.
 * > Of course it doesn't. Which text is supposed to imply it does?
 * This text:
 * > if the area between the alkaline and acidic water is at least semi-permeable, the water will undergo another reaction that just leaves neutral water.
 * A semi-permeable membrane does not imply that the water will mix at any point, even if left for a long period. Semi-permeable membranes are, in fact, a critical component for the function of some kinds of alkaline water electrolyzers.
 * > You have no good sources for your extraordinary claim that there are working water ionizers.
 * Per citation 2 on the article itself. Look at Table 2. There are plentry of working ones. They even give the pH, before and after, of different tested streams which show that they produce alkaline water.
 * https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/5/4/2094
 * Look Anion exchange membrane electrolysis if you want more details on how various electrolysis-derived alkaline water producers work.
 * > is just basic chemistry you learn at school, applied to the claim. It's almost WP:SKYISBLUE territory
 * The citation for that sentence now cites an article that cites this wiki page. It's a self-citation. It's also scientifically wrong. Ronnocerman (talk) 21:37, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Here is a video that is highly critical of water ionizers (as I am!), and the only positive points that they mention among the snake oil are the fact that there are good, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies that point to benefit for reflux disease and *maybe* being decent for reducing oxidative stress.
 * See 1:22:29 for the discussion of the reflux study (and there are more than just the one she looked at).
 * See 1:27:18 where she discusses the fact that reflux disease is likely benefited.
 * Again, this is from someone who spent the time to make a two hours video tearing apart the idea of water ionizers so people don't get scammed. Her final conclusions throughout the video is that they're marketed in a scammy way, but they certainly produce alkaline water and she concedes that specifically for reflux diseases, they're likely to be helpful. She doesn't even see the other studies that further confirmed that alkaline water helps reflux disease.
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSkVkXZz2oA
 * I use alkaline water for treating my reflux disease, and I can't stand every time I have to hear all the snake oil that is peddled about other aspects of alkaline water. For anything besides reflux disease and (mild) antioxidant properties, alkaline water is snake oil.
 * Water ionizers do make alkaline water. Water ionizers help with some very specific health conditions. The majority of the positive claims made about them are misleading at best, and entirely false at worst. But they do help with reflux disease.
 * All I am trying to do is add that nuance to this article. Ronnocerman (talk) 22:10, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
 * MEDRS needs to be followed for health claims. --Hipal (talk) 22:11, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, the in-vitro study is insufficient unless even-more-heavily qualified than I qualified it. But it's also the least convincing study of the studies I pointed at, which were also discarded as being irrelevant. Ronnocerman (talk) 22:34, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Because none of them meet the requirements of WP:MEDRS, which you have been pointed to several times. Also, it bears mentioning that MDPI is well known as a predatory publisher. MrOllie (talk) 00:14, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

A request for assistance was posted at FTN: Fringe_theories/Noticeboard --Hipal (talk) 20:40, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 15 November 2023

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Reading Beans (talk) 19:35, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Water ionizer → Alkaline water – Checking Google Ngram, Google Trends, and Google Scholar (alkaline water, water ionizer) makes it very clear that "alkaline water" and its purported health benefits are what this page should focus on and be titled after. More recognizable, much more common. DFlhb (talk) 08:22, 15 November 2023 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Oppose. 'Alkaline water' is not a synonym for 'Water ionizer'. The device is the topic of this article. &#8213; Synpath 02:03, 17 November 2023 (UTC)