A review on the 40th anniversary of the first regulation of drinking water disinfection by‐products
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Water disinfection, primarily by chlorination, is one of the greatest achievements of public health. However, more than half a century after its introduction, studies in the 1970s reported that (a) chlorine interacted with organic matter in the water to form disinfection by-products (DBPs); (b) two DBPs, chloroform and bromoform, both trihalomethanes (THMs), were rodent carcinogens; (c) three brominated THMs were mutagenic; in six studies chlorinated drinking waters in the United States and Canada were mutagenic; and (d) in one epidemiological study there was an association between bladder cancer mortality and THM exposure. This led the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to issue its first DBP regulation in 1979. Forty years later, >600 DBPs have been characterized, 20/22 have been shown to be rodent carcinogens, >100 have been shown to be genotoxic, and 1000s of water samples have been found to be mutagenic. Data support a hypothesis that long-term dermal/inhalation exposure to certain levels of the three brominated THMs, as well as oral exposure to the haloacetic acids, combined with a specific genotype may increase the risk for bladder cancer for a small but significant population group. Improved water-treatment methods and stricter regulations have likely reduced such risks over the years, and further reductions in potential risk are anticipated with the application of advanced water-treatment methods and wider application of drinking water regulations. This 40-year research effort is a remarkable example of sustained cooperation between academic and government scientists, along with public/private water companies, to find answers to a pressing public health question.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".