Quantitative microbial risk assessments for drinking water facilities: evaluation of a range of treatment strategies

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (11) ◽  
pp. 1943-1955
Author(s):  
Joshua G. Elliott ◽  
Liz Taylor-Edmonds ◽  
Robert C. Andrews

Impact of treatment on pathogen risk.

2004 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 31-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
R.M. Carr ◽  
U.J. Blumenthal ◽  
D. Duncan Mara

The use of wastewater in agriculture is occurring more frequently because of water scarcity and population growth. Often the poorest households rely on this resource for their livelihood and food security needs. However, there are negative health implications of this practice that need to be addressed. WHO developed Guidelines for the Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture in 1989. The Guidelines are currently being revised based on new data from epidemiological studies, quantitative microbial risk assessments and other relevant information. WHO guidelines must be practical and offer feasible risk management solutions that will minimize health threats and allow for the beneficial use of scarce resources. To achieve the greatest impact on health, guidelines should be implemented with other health measures such as: health education, hygiene promotion, provision of adequate drinking water and sanitation, and other health care measures.


2014 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 727-735 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Van Abel ◽  
E. J. M. Blokker ◽  
P. W. M. H. Smeets ◽  
J. S. Meschke ◽  
G. J. Medema

Quantitative microbial risk assessments (QMRAs) of contaminated drinking water usually assume the daily intake volume is consumed once a day. However, individuals could consume water at multiple time points over 1 day, so the objective was to determine if the number of consumption events per day impacted the risk of infection from Campylobacter jejuni during short-term contamination events. A probabilistic hydraulic and risk model was used to evaluate the impact of multiple consumption events as compared to one consumption event on the health risk from the intake of contaminated tap water. The fraction of the population that experiences greater than 10−4 risk of infection per event at the median dose was 6.8% (5th–95th percentile: 6.5–7.2%) for one consumption event per day, 18.2% (5th–95th: 17.6–18.7%) for three consumption events per day, and 19.8% (5th–95th: 14.0–24.4%) when the number of consumption events varied around 3.49 events/day. While the daily intake volume remained consistent across scenarios, the results suggest that multiple consumption events per day increases the probability of infection during short-term, high level contamination events due to the increased coincidence of a consumption event during the contamination peak. Therefore, it will be important to accurately characterize this parameter in drinking water QMRAs.


2009 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 535-543 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. S. Signor ◽  
N. J. Ashbolt

Some national drinking water guidelines provide guidance on how to define ‘safe’ drinking water. Regarding microbial water quality, a common position is that the chance of an individual becoming infected by some reference waterborne pathogen (e.g. Cryptsporidium) present in the drinking water should <10−4 in any year. However the instantaneous levels of risk to a water consumer vary over the course of a year, and waterborne disease outbreaks have been associated with shorter-duration periods of heightened risk. Performing probabilistic microbial risk assessments is becoming commonplace to capture the impacts of temporal variability on overall infection risk levels. A case is presented here for adoption of a shorter-duration reference period (i.e. daily) infection probability target over which to assess, report and benchmark such risks. A daily infection probability benchmark may provide added incentive and guidance for exercising control over short-term adverse risk fluctuation events and their causes. Management planning could involve outlining measures so that the daily target is met under a variety of pre-identified event scenarios. Other benefits of a daily target could include providing a platform for managers to design and assess management initiatives, as well as simplifying the technical components of the risk assessment process.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 ◽  
pp. 100132
Author(s):  
Veronika Zhiteneva ◽  
Uwe Hübner ◽  
Gertjan J. Medema ◽  
Jörg E. Drewes

2016 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 307-314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyoung-Hee Choi ◽  
Heeyoung Lee ◽  
Soomin Lee ◽  
Sejeong Kim ◽  
Yohan Yoon

2008 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 525-530 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristina D. Mena ◽  
Linda C. Mota ◽  
Mark C. Meckes ◽  
Christopher F. Green ◽  
William W. Hurd ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 8 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. S19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc C Kennedy ◽  
Helen E Clough ◽  
Joanne Turner

2015 ◽  
Vol 526 ◽  
pp. 177-186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ekaterina Sokolova ◽  
Susan R. Petterson ◽  
Olaf Dienus ◽  
Fredrik Nyström ◽  
Per-Eric Lindgren ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document