Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T02:48:00.309Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sewage contamination of coastal bathing waters in england and wales1 A bacteriological and epidemiological study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Bacteriological surveys of more than forty popular bathing beaches around the coasts of England and Wales have been made during the past 5 years. The great majority of the beaches studied were subject to contamination with sewage.

2. A rough grading of the beaches studied gave a similar ranking order whether the results of the presumptive coliform test or faecal coli counts were used as the basis of grading.

3. Grading of beaches was valid only when surveys were carefully planned to ensure representative sampling from the areas on the beaches concerned where bathing actually took place.

4. The coliform test as used in the bacteriological examination of drinking waters was the main test procedure used but had certain limitations. Promising results with plate counts on relatively non-inhibitory media were obtained.

5. Various salmonella serotypes, notably Salm. paratyphi B, were isolated in small numbers from a high proportion of sea-water samples. The proportion of positive results for salmonella isolation increased from 13·3% in samples with less than 1000 coliform organisms per 100 ml. to 40·1% in samples with over 10,000 coliforms per 100 ml. Comparison of the numbers of salmonellae isolated with what is known of the minimum infective doses of these organisms suggested that very large volumes of sea water would require to be ingested for infection to occur.

6. Poliovirus was not isolated from a small series of sea-water samples examined. Because of the very large dilution factor, special concentration procedures would probably be required to isolate this virus from sea water.

7. Four cases of paratyphoid fever probably due to bathing were recorded. Surveys of the two associated beaches had given median presumptive coliform counts of more than 10,000 per 100 ml., and both showed gross macroscopic pollution with sewage.

8. A statistically controlled study of the bathing histories of 150 poliomyelitis cases in children living permanently by the seaside gave no evidence that bathing had played any part in causing the disease.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 57 , Issue 4 , December 1959 , pp. 435 - 472
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1959

References

REFERENCES

Annotation (1932). Typhoid fever from bathing in polluted waters. Wkly Bull. N. Y. City Hlth Dep. 21, 257.Google Scholar
Annotation (1954). New technic in typhoid fever investigation. ‘News from the field’. Amer. J. publ. Hlth, 44, 765.Google Scholar
Boyer, J. & Tissier, M. (1950). Poliomyélite et bains de rivière. Pr. méd. 58, 1183.Google Scholar
Burman, N. P. (1955). The standardization and selection of bile salt and peptone for culture media used in the bacteriological examination of water. Proc. Soc. Water Tr. & Exam. 4, 10.Google Scholar
Buttiaux, R. & Leurs, T. (1953). Survie des ‘Salmonella’ dans l'eau de mer. Bull. Acad. Nat. Med. 137, 457.Google Scholar
Chick, Harriet (1908). An investigation of the laws of disinfection. J. Hyg., Camb., 8, 92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Childs, E. & Allen, L. A. (1953). Improved methods for determining the Most Probable Numbers of Bacterium coli and of Streptococcus faecalis. J. Hyg., Camb., 51, 468.Google ScholarPubMed
Clegg, L. F. L. & Sherwood, H. P. (1947). The bacteriological examination of molluscan shellfish. J. Hyg., Camb., 45, 504.Google ScholarPubMed
Coburn, S. E. (1930). Survey of the pollution of rivers and lakes in the vicinity of Rochester, N.Y. Indust. Engng Chem. 22, 1336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, C. R. (1951). Acceptable standards for natural waters used for bathing. Proc. Amer. Soc. civ. Engrs, 77, separate no. 74.Google Scholar
Dienert, F. & Guillerd, A. (1940). Étude de la pollution de l'eau de mer par le déversement des eaux d'égouts. Ann. Hyg. publ., Paris, 18, 209.Google Scholar
Dodgson, R. W. (1938). Shell-fish and the public health. Proc. R. Soc. Med. 31, 925.Google ScholarPubMed
Garber, W. F. (1956). Bacteriological standards for bathing waters. Sewage industr. Wastes, 28, 795.Google Scholar
Gévaudan, P. & Tamalet, J. (1956). Étude sur la pollution des plages et baignades sur le littoral méditerranéen. Rev. d' Hyg. Méd. Sociale, 4, 270.Google Scholar
Gorman, A. E. & Wolman, A. (1939). Water-borne outbreaks in the U.S. and Canada and their significance. J. Amer. Wat. Wks Ass. 31, 225.Google Scholar
Greenberg, A. E. (1956). Survival of enteric organisms in sea water. Publ. Hlth Rep., Wash., 71, 77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heinmets, F., Taylor, W. W. & Lehman, J. J. (1954). The use of metabolites in the restoration of the viability of heat and chemically inactivated Escherichia coli. J. Bact. 67, 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoskins, J. K. (1934). Most probable numbers for evaluation of coli-aerogenes tests by fermentation tube method. Publ. Hlth. Rep., Wash., 49, 393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houser, G. C. (1934). Standards for bacterial quality of water at natural bathing places.Amer. City (Mag.), 49, 51.Google Scholar
Jameson, J. E. & Emberley, N. W. (1956). A substitute for bile salts in culture media. J. gen. Microbiol. 15, 198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, K. A. & Jensen, K. E. (1942). Occurrence of tubercle bacilli in sewage, and experiments on sterilization of tubercle bacilli containing sewage with chlorine. Acta Tuberc. Scand. 16, 217.Google Scholar
Kelly, S. M., Clark, M. E. & Coleman, M. B. (1955). Demonstration of infectious agents in sewage. Amer. J. publ. Hlth, 45, 1438.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
King, E. G. (1951). Review of sewage disposal in seaside towns. J. R. sanit. Inst. 71, 327.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lafontaine, A., De Maeyer-Cleempoel, S. & Bouquiaux, J. (1956). Recherches sur les enterobacteriacées des eaux de mer du littoral belge. Arch. Belges Méd. Sociale, Hyg., Méd. du Travail et Méd. Légale, 14, 53.Google Scholar
Lendon, N. C. & Mackenzie, R. D. (1951). Tracing a typhoid carrier by sewage examination. Mon. Bull. Minist. Hlth Lab. Serv. 10, 23.Google Scholar
McCullough, N. R. & Eisele, C. W. (1951 a). Experimental human salmonellosis.I. J. infect. Dis. 88, 278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCullough, N. R. & Eisele, C. W. (1951 b). Experimental human salmonellosis.III. J. infect. Dis., 89, 209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCullough, N. R. & Eisele, C. W. (1951 c). Experimental human salmonellosis.IV. J. infect. Dis., 89, 259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, P. H. (1947). Field investigation of paratyphoid fever with typing of Salm. paratyphiB by means of Vi bacteriophage. Mon. Bull. Minist. Hlth Lab. Serv. 6, 148.Google Scholar
Moore, B. (1954 a). Sewage contamination of coastal bathing waters. Bull. Hyg. 29, 689.Google Scholar
Moore, B. (1954 b). A survey of beach pollution at a seaside resort. J. Hyg., Camb., 52, 71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murdock, C. R. & Lawson, G. T. N. (1957). The application of modern techniques to the detection of a typhoid carrier. Med. Offr, 98, 95.Google Scholar
Nichols, H. B. (1898). Sewage disposal in connection with tidal waters. J. R. sanit. Inst.. 19, 603.Google Scholar
Orlob, G. T. (1956). Viability of sewage bacteria in sea water. Sewage Industr. Wastes, 28, 1147.Google Scholar
Reece, R. J. (1909). 38th Annual Report to Local Government Board, 1908–9. Suppl. with report of Med. Officer for 1908–9. Appendix A, no. 6, 90.Google Scholar
Report (1904). Royal Commission on Sewage Disposal. Fourth Report, 1, 41. London: H.M. Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Report (1904). Looking forward in the bathing place sanitation field. Amer. J. publ. Hlth. 30, Suppl. (Year Book), pp. 50–1.Google Scholar
Report (1943). Report on a pollution survey of Santa Monica Bay beaches in 1942, 69 pp. California State Dep. Publ. Hlth Printing Office, Sacramento.Google Scholar
Report (1949). Recommended practice for design, equipment and operation of swimming pools and other public bathing places, 56 pp. New York: American Public Health Association.Google Scholar
Report (1956). Ministry of Health, The Bacteriological Examination of Water Supplies. Rep. publ. Hlth med. Subj., no. 71, London: H.M.S.O.Google Scholar
Report (1958 a). Food poisoning in England and Wales, 1957. Mon. Bull. Minist. Hlth Lab. Serv. 17, 252.Google Scholar
Report (1958 b). Report of the Ministry of Health for the year 1957. London: H.M.S.O.Google Scholar
Report (1958 c). Public Health Laboratory Service Water Sub-Committee. A Comparison between MacConkey broth and glutamic acid media for the detection of coliform organisms in water. J. Hyg., Camb., 56, 377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rittenberg, S. C. (1956). Studies on Coliform Bacteria Discharged from the Hyperion Outfall. Final Bacteriological Report, 130 pp. Allan Hancock Foundation for sci. Res., Univ. of S. Calif., Los Angeles, Calif.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savage, W. (1942). Paratyphoid fever: an epidemiological study. J. Hyg., Camb., 42, 393.Google ScholarPubMed
Scott, W. J. (1951). Sanitary study of shore bathing waters. Connecticut Hlth Bull. 65, 74.Google Scholar
Scott, W. J. (1953). Recent sanitary study of shore bathing waters. Connecticut Hlth Bull. 67, 139.Google Scholar
Smith, R. S. & Woolsey, T. D. (1952). Bathing Water Quality and Health. II. Inland River. Federal Security Agency, Public Health Service, Environmental Health Centre. Cincinnati, Ohio.Google Scholar
Steiniger, F. (1951). Paratyphus-B-Bakterien im Nordseewasser. Zbl. Bakt. (1 Abt. Orig.), 157, 52.Google Scholar
Steiniger, F. (1955). Über Verschiebung der Häufigkeit freilebender Salmonella-Formenan der Küste der Deutschen Bucht. Zbl. Bakt. (1 Abt. Orig.), 162, 440.Google Scholar
Stevenson, A. H. (1953). Studies of bathing water quality and health. Amer. J. publ. Hlth, 43, 529.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thompson, A. W. S. (1950). Poliomyelitis in Auckland, 1947–49. An epidemiological study. J. Hyg., Camb., 48, 96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaccaro, R. F., Briggs, M. P., Carey, C. L. & Ketchum, B. H. (1950). Viability of Escherichia coli in sea water. Amer. J. publ. Hlth, 40, 1257.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wallace, G. M. & Newman, L. E. (1953 a). Bacteriological survey of Auckland harbours. I. Extent of sewage fields in Waitemata harbour. N.Z. J. Sci. Tech. 34, 515.Google Scholar
Wallace, G. M. & Newman, L. E. (1953 b). Bacteriological survey of Auckland harbours. II. Condition of beaches to the east of Orakei sewer outfall, Waitemata harbour. N.Z.J. Sci. Tech. 35, 225.Google Scholar
Wallace, G. M. & Newman, L. E. (1954). Bacteriological survey of Auckland harbours. III. Tamaki river and estuary. N.Z. J. Sci. Tech. 36, 129.Google Scholar
Wallace, G. M., Newman, L. E. & Jerrome, J. L. (1956). Bacteriological survey of Auckland harbours. IV. Manukau harbour. N.Z. J. Sci. Tech. 37, 663.Google Scholar
Warr, G. W. (1932). Sea outfalls. Surveyor, 82, 45.Google Scholar
Weston, A. D. & Edwards, G. P. (1939). Pollution of Boston harbor. Proc. Amer. Soc. civ. Engrs, 65, 383.Google Scholar
Winslow, C.-E. A. & Moxon, D. (1928). Bacterial pollution of bathing beach waters in New Haven harbor. Amer. J. Hyg., 8, 299.Google Scholar