This is such a biased review. I get it, you’re sponsored and get paid to talk well about aquatru. This was intended to be a Bluevua review yet you made it a point to reference and compare it to aquatru is insane to me. Even when the Bluevua has an advantage by its glass carafe, you still manage to bring up aquatru in a different model. This review is a joke.
Thanks for posting this! I found it by searching for Bluevua vs AquaTru. I am having analysis paralysis! Bluevua has a limited deal on AMZ, and AquaTru sale is at the top of all of my Facebook ads as being on sale! I do appreciate the NSF/ANSI testing on AquaTru, however, am quite concerned about your water analysis finding aluminum when there was zero pre-filtered. I felt inclined to go with the BlueVua until I watched this and you mentioned concern about no US address and no NSF/ANSI testing. You seem to highly recommend the Aquatru - has there been more discussion (in these threads) about this or has AquaTru commented? Thanks for your work!
Yes, we do recommend the AquaTru because it's the only water filter in its category with all these NSF certifications. We don't worry about the aluminum because the level we found was so low and well below (factor 10) even the strictest health guideline. Also, according to our research, adults consume around 10 mg of aluminum a day via food. This is an equivalent of 53 gallons of AquaTru-filtered water. In other words, you would have to drink 53 gallons of AquaTru water to ingest the same amount of aluminum that you're ingesting with the food you eat on a daily basis. Or another way to put it: Let's say you drink a full gallon of AquaTru water a day. That means you'd ingest 0.19 mg aluminum. This equals around 2% of your total daily aluminum intake. Again, the remaining 98% comes from your food.
Nice review! I wonder how this model compares with the "lite" version (ROPOT-Lite)? The lite version seems to go for around $100 less, uses a single filter (as opposed to one filter per stage), and has a smaller footprint. A comparison between the two would be very helpful.
it would have been amazing if you review the remineralizing filter of bluevua, that is the only reason we are getting bluevua. We don't like the filter being plastic but those filters have a ton of reviews in Amazon, sadly there is not scientific review about them
@@boswater6065 please another detail to take into account. Can the remineralizing filter of bluevua be put in the refrigerator? can it be cooled? I am buying 3 glass carafe with 3 remineralizing filters because it is very inconvenient to detach the filter and put it to the next carafe, so the remineralizing filter has to kind of stick to the Carafe, but I am worried if when the filter is cooled with the water in the refri, then something happens to the components inside, or it reduces its life span. There is a ton of stuff to deal around the remineralization filters in general, and starting with the Bluevua ones would be amazing. This is why a lot of people is buying Bluevua and I just want to be sure everything is safe
Can you test their re-mineralization filter and see if it works? They essentially have an attachment to top of carafe and it adds back in essential minerals and I want to see if it’s actually working/doing something
I had the aquatru but it had a taste to it that i wasnt fond of. The mineral boost works but that taste wasnt something i can bear so i ended up returning it 🥲 been considering the blueva but just the whole msa testing got me thinking 🤔
I just purchased the Bluevua RO100ROPOT with UV and absolutely love this system. Water tastes great and don’t care much about the certification as long as it filters out all the main contaminants well as mentioned in this video.
would love to see a head to head comparing and contrasting this system and the aquatru Carafe. Is there one you would recommend out of the two all things considered? It looks like this one actually was given a higher filter score over the Aquatru Carafe despite the lack of certifications
Yes, the Bluevua performed slightly better. But keep in mind that we can only test for a limited number of contaminants. That's why we usually prefer water filters like the AquaTru Carafe because they have so many NSF certifications.
It looks like at 2:04 minute mark that the water contains bacteria after RO that was not there in the tap water sample. If so, it is above EPA standards it says on that data sheet. Am I reading this correctly, if so, why did it get bacteria?
That's Total Bacteria Count and nothing to worry about. Basically, these are bacteria that exist pretty much everywhere in our environment like every surface you touch. They didn't show up in the unfiltered tap water, because the chlorine kills them. However, as soon as you take the chlorine out, they can survive in the water. But again, Total Bacteria Count is not a health indicator. It's only that a high count may lead to stale or stagnant taste or odor. Another example where you will find a high Total Bacteria Count is in reusable water bottles, and it's why you should clean them every once in a while, just like you should clean your water filter.
@@boswater6065 Thank you for the response and I understand about bacteria. A concern is I don't see bacteria counts in your other product testing. Also noting that perhaps this is a good reason to get a system with UV to kill the bacteria. Have you tested how efficient UV in RO systems is for killing bacteria that might grow in the filters?
Actually, almost all the other countertop ROs had the same bacteria count - maybe check again? About the UV: The APEC ROCT-PLUS, Waterdrop A1, and SimPure Y7P-BW use UV and there was no difference in bacteria count. That said, we didn't perform our testing in a sterile environment. In other words, even if the UV did do something, there might have been secondary contamination for example when I touched the sample containers. Long story short, I can't say with 100% certainty if the UV provides any benefit or not. Personally, I wouldn't focus on it.
Could you test out the Melissani RO system? It looks like to have a ton of great bells and whistles and is reasonably priced, but I'm very interested to know how the lab results compare/if it adds anything bad to the water post-filter. TIA!
The manufacturers claim 25 percent of 15% water waste because all they are doing is recycling water back into the tank. By recycling water, sure you are saving more water, but at the same time, the contamination of water keeps going up. Bluevua could've done the same and waste less water but at what cost?
@@boswater6065 Fact is it does matter. If you take TDS testing at the beginning of the purifying process and at the end there is more contaminated at the end because RO can't filter out all of it. Also in the test videos, you didn't mention something about TDS creep, where RO filter is not effective at all in first 10 seconds of the testing.
No it doesn't. If the final product water is perfectly clean, then what does it matter how you got there? The only issue that I see is that recycling puts a higher burden on your RO membrane but that's it. Check our lab results - if you take the AquaTru Classic and compare that to the Bluevua RO100ROPOT, you'll find that TDS reduction was 91% for both systems so no difference at all. Both systems were also equally effective for each individual contaminant. In other words, there is no way for you to tell which water was recycled and which wasn't. I see your point about TDS creep, but it affects all RO systems. We might publish a separate video about this.
@@boswater6065 The 91% TDS reduction test you done was the the average of the entire cycle. Sure if you look at the average TDS score 50% recycle by Bluevua vs 75% AquaTrue at face value there seems no difference. But if you look at live TDS reading of any recycle RO system, in the beginning TDS shoots up due to TDS creep (Some manufacturers like Bluevua turns off first 10 seconds of live TDS reading because of this. This is them trying to hide TDS creep) then TDS goes down and TDS starts to climb little by little because of the concentration of contaminant starts going up in the tank. Now you might say this is no big deal. You might be right however we can't say the decisions made to have only 50% vs 75% recycled water doesn't have consequences. It raises the TDS which comes with other toxins. And that decision by manufacturer is not due to the filter performance rather them wanting to market their product by saying "we recycle 75%". So as a consumer what should we do ? We should pull out first 10 to 20 seconds of RO water either throw out or put back into the tank. Second, mindful that more recycling of water isn't necessarily doing anything to make your water better and it is okay to throw water away at 50%.
Hey thank you for your time and information. I have a question dealing with the additional UV, in your professional opinion do you think that will be that much better ? For $100 more
If you have harmful pathogens in your water, then I wouldn't rely on the UV to take care of them. On the other hand, some systems use UV to prevent filtered water that has been sitting for a few days from becoming stagnant. We've never tested if this really works, but the Bluevua doesn't have any sort of internal tank and thus no water that could even become stagnant. So personally, I wouldn't bother with the additional UV.
We haven't lab-tested the version with UV and remineralization. But assuming that there's no problem with any chemicals leaching, we like both versions. Remineralization is always a good thing to have when it comes to RO, but some people prefer to do it manually, so it depends on your preferences really!
I had previously sent BOS Water an email but I never received a reply. I have been looking at RO Systems and I was trying to find one with UV lights because my local water supply is know to have bacteria present. Are you saying in your reply above that UV lighting is nothing more than a gimmick? So if so what do I do about addressing the bacteria in the local water supply Also how important is the number of stages in the filtration process, In the price range that I have been searching I've seen listed between 4 and 6 stages? Does more mean better and how does a regular potential customer assess which is better? Thanks
Sorry that we've missed your email! If you have harmful bacteria in your water, then I'd reach out to my water utility and ask them what to do. I wouldn't rely on an RO system like the Bluevua for treatment, even if it has UV. Those bacteria could make you seriously ill, so you need to ensure proper treatment long-term. Number of filter stages doesn't matter. This is often more a marketing thing. Check for NSF certifications and what they cover. Check any other available test data for filtration effectiveness.
No, it's certified by the IAPMO against NSF standards. Check out our top countertop RO system video on the channel. The description contains a link to the corresponding Google Sheet. You'll find all the links you need there!
Bluevua and AquaTru Classic. But we prefer the AquaTru Classic because it's NSF-certified for 93.5% average fluoride reduction. You can check our countertop RO comparison video for more info.
The ProOne pitcher uses a ceramic filter element and that was part of our big pitcher comparison video. We're also testing the ProOne gravity filter, the British Berkefeld (Doulton), and other similar systems right now!
@@boswater6065 Awesome! I actually have a ProOne gravility filter (ceramic)! i love it but it's a bit much for a one person household. It's recommeneded that if it's not in use for 24hrs it has to filter out 1 liter of water, doesn't explain why. Which is annoying because the tank gives 2-3 days worth of water supply for me.
Do you mean both microplastics and nanoplastics? The latter are much smaller and there hasn't been done much research on that. But any RO system should filter out microplastics because RO membranes have an extremely small pore size.
@StanislavKozlovsk @user-uu1wy5dy8c That's a fair question. The reason we have to go the "affiliate model" for now is because it's the only way we can keep this channel running - for all of our newer videos we conduct lab testing and sometimes spend literally thousands of dollars on a single video, for example when we compared the top 10 countertop RO systems or the top 11 water filter pitchers. And we have several more of these videos coming up. Maybe we can switch to a supporter-backed model at some point in future, but this simply isn't feasible right now. So I totally understand that this isn't ideal, but it's either that or no videos at all to be honest. Are our reviews unbiased and do we also share the bad stuff? Yes. That's why we make all our lab results publicly available so you can go check yourself. To give you one example: We made a video about the Waterdrop A1 RO system leaching chemicals into our water, and based on that did not recommend the product, which obviously resulted in $0 in commissions. We still had to pay for the lab testing and the overall video production cost. Hope that helps!
There are 2 reports published on the Bluevua website stating that it has passed NSF 58 testing for TDS and chromium 3 reduction (conducted by the WQA). But there are still no official certificates available on the WQA website.
Manual says to "Turn on the power, find and pull the reset toggle switch behind the panel for 3 seconds to enter filter selection mode. (...) Press the banana-shaped water volume button to switch between different filters, then pull the reset toggle switch again to complete the reset process."
I do not want any minerals in my water. I get my minerals and enzymes from my fruits and vegetables does this system add back in minerals or can you choose to add a mineral filter or not? I do not want a mineral filter.
@@boswater6065 and actually, I talked to a representative from clearly water and they said they don’t add any minerals to their water. They said that they just leave whatever minerals are good from the tapwater and I don’t know how that’s possible that a filter determine to leave in calcium and magnesium and potassium and then block the lead or something like that that doesn’t even make sense either it removes everything or it does not.
Obviously, I thought you were talking about the Bluevua system. As for the Clearly Filtered Pitcher, our lab reports do show that they pretty much don't affect mineral content.
@@boswater6065 yeah I don’t want minerals in my water so the fact that they either add minerals to the water or leave a lot of minerals in the water is not a good thing. In my opinion you should be getting your minerals from fruits and vegetables not your
