Recreational use of inland water and health: Are windermere and coniston water a health hazard?

Jessop, Edmund; Horsley, Sarah; Wood, L.

doi:10.1016/s0033-3506(85)80080-9

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of these, 27 (Table 1) were included in the final review. Of the 28 excluded studies, eight (Balarajan et al 1991;Calderon and Mood 1981;Fewtrell et al 1994;Harrington et al 1993;Jessop et al 1985;New Jersey Department of Health 1989;Seyfried et al 1985a;van Asperen et al 1995) were excluded because the data analysis and reporting were deemed insufficient, 11 were duplicated in other articles or reports (Bandaranayake et al 1995;Cabelli et al 1975Cabelli et al , 1979Cabelli et al , 1982Dufour 1984b;Jones et al 1991;Ktsanes et al 1981;Public Health Laboratory Service 1959;Pike 1990Pike , 1991Zmirou et al 1990), five reported outcomes that were not of immediate interest (typhoid, polio, serologic results, or public health impact) (D'Alessio et al 1981;ElSharkawi and Hassan 1979;Fleisher et al 1998;Philipp et al 1989;Taylor et al 1995); one examined a water quality measure not reported in any other study (cyanobacteria) (Pilotto et al 1997); and three did not measure GI illness (Calderon and Mood 1982;Charoenca and Fujioka 1995;Fleisher et al 1996).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do U.S. Environmental Protection Agency water quality guidelines for recreational waters prevent gastrointestinal illness? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Wade

Pai

Eisenberg

et al. 2003

Environ Health Perspect

395

251

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the 1950s, numerous studies have examined the association between recreational water quality and health outcomes. Many of these studies have reported an increased risk of illness associated with exposure to recreational water. Several have related the level of contamination in the water, as measured by indicators of water quality, with the magnitude of risk. Despite extensive research on this topic, uncertainty remains about how water quality indicators can best be used in the regulation of recreational water environments. In 1986, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA 1986) published recommended water quality criteria for recreational waters, which proposed the use of enterococci in marine water and enterococci and/or Escherichia coli in fresh water as indicator organisms. That report recommended regulatory levels based on geometric means of at least five samples over a 30-day period of 35 colony-forming units (cfu)/100 mL and 33 cfu/100 mL for enterococci in marine and fresh water, respectively; and 126 cfu/100 mL for E. coli in fresh water (U.S. EPA 1986). Fecal coliforms, which had been previously proposed for use as an indicator, were no longer recommended. The studies upon which these revised guidelines were based (Cabelli 1983;Dufour 1984a) have been criticized (Fleisher 1992), and the draft revised World Health Organization (2001) guidelines have been developed using more recent controlled studies ).Few attempts have been made to summarize and evaluate the existing literature in a systematic and quantitative framework. Pruss (1998) concluded that the literature strongly suggests a dose-response relationship between fecal contamination and the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) illness but did not examine the relationship between specific water quality indicators and health outcomes.Our primary goal in this systematic review was to evaluate the evidence linking specific microbial indicators of recreational water quality to specific health outcomes under nonoutbreak conditions. Secondary goals were to identify and describe critical study design issues, to quantify and evaluate sources of heterogeneity among the studies, and to evaluate the potential for health effects at or below the current suggested regulatory standards. MethodsLiterature search. Our literature search included several computerized databases: MEDLINE (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed), BIOSIS (www.biosis.org), OLDMEDLINE (http:// gateway.nlm.nih.gov/gw/Cmd), and EMBASE (http://openaccess.dialog.com/med/) for the period from 1950 to the present. We searched dissertations using the UMI/ProQuest Digital Dissertation Database (http://wwwlib.umi.com/ dissertations/gateway). The search terms included key words "recreational water and health" and subject heading searches for "environmental pollutants, adverse effects" or "water pollution, adverse effects." We consulted experts in the field and reviewed the bibliographies of relevant studies for additional references. We reviewed the titles and abstracts of a...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do U.S. Environmental Protection Agency water quality guidelines for recreational waters prevent gastrointestinal illness? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Wade

Pai

Eisenberg

et al. 2003

Environ Health Perspect

395

251

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Prior to the introduction of bathing water standards, there was little or no drive to assess the impact of Windermere on human health. An exception was provided by local doctors who assessed both Windermere and Coniston as theoretical hazards to those who use the lake to swim, boat or water ski (Jessop, Horsley & Wood, 1985). However, a case–control study of patients consulting local doctors for acute gastro‐intestinal symptoms showed no association with lake use.…”

Section: Windermere In Relation To Public Healthmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, a case–control study of patients consulting local doctors for acute gastro‐intestinal symptoms showed no association with lake use. This emphasises the feasibility and importance of practical assessment of local health hazards, but the study did not assess the annually increasing numbers of visitors (Jessop et al. , 1985).…”

Section: Windermere In Relation To Public Healthmentioning

confidence: 99%

The bacteriology of Windermere and its catchment: insights from 70 years of study

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary 1. This review on the bacteriological research conducted on the Windermere catchment over the last 70 years addresses the significant contributions made to the understanding of freshwater microbial processes, such as nitrification, the spread of antibiotic resistance and the development of process‐based ecological tools. 2. Water quality fluctuated through periods of decline and recovery. Although the general microbial community responded to lake trophic status, it is a poor indicator of change because of poor resolution and lack of long‐term monitoring of Windermere’s general bacterial community. 3. Long‐term monitoring has shown that bacterial faecal indicators, conversely, have not shown any significant change when comparing data from the last 13 years to those obtained in 1939. Bathing water quality continues to pass the imperative value as defined by the current Bathing Water Directive and Windermere is safe for recreation. 4. Notwithstanding, the bacterial community includes pathogens and other bacteria containing transferable antibiotic resistance genes which remain unmonitored. These have the potential for an as yet unquantified and possibly long‐term impact on human health. 5. Despite increased knowledge and technological advances, a complete description of the bacterial diversity of Windermere, as with most environmental sites, remains unresolved because of technological constraints. The application of the latest technologies, such as next generation sequencing, can help measure the diversity and elucidate the possible roles of the silent majority of bacteria to overcome these constraints [Correction inserted on 24 October 2011, after first online publication. The text has changed from “measure the diversity and possible roles” to “measure the diversity and elucidate the possible roles”.].

show abstract

Evaluating health risks associated with exposure to ambient surface waters during recreational activities: A systematic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recreational use of inland water and health: Are windermere and coniston water a health hazard?

Cited by 3 publications

References 7 publications

Do U.S. Environmental Protection Agency water quality guidelines for recreational waters prevent gastrointestinal illness? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Do U.S. Environmental Protection Agency water quality guidelines for recreational waters prevent gastrointestinal illness? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

The bacteriology of Windermere and its catchment: insights from 70 years of study

Evaluating health risks associated with exposure to ambient surface waters during recreational activities: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About