Swimming benefits outweigh risks of exposure to disinfection byproducts in pools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Disinfection of swimming pool water is critical to ensure the safety of the recreational activity for swimmers. However, swimming pools have a constant loading of organic matter from input water and anthropogenic contamination, leading to elevated levels of disinfection byproducts (DBPs). Epidemiological studies have associated increased risks of adverse health effects with frequent exposure to DBPs in swimming pools. Zhang et al. (2023b) investigated the occurrence of trihalomethanes (THMs), haloacetic acids (HAAs), haloacetonitriles (HANs), and haloacetaldehydes (HALs) in eight swimming pools and the corresponding input water in a city in Eastern China. The concentrations of THMs, HAAs, HANs, and HALs in swimming pools were 1-2 orders of magnitude higher than those detected in the input water. The total lifetime cancer and non-cancer health risks of swimmers through oral, dermal, inhalation, buccal, and aural exposure pathways were assessed using the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA) standard model and Swimmer Exposure Assessment Model (SWIMODEL). The results showed that dermal and inhalation pathways were the most significant for the associated cancer and non-cancer risks. This article provides an overview and perspectives of DBPs in swimming pools, the benefits of swimming, the need to improve the monitoring of DBPs, and the importance of swimmers' hygiene practices to keep swimming pools clean. The benefits of swimming outweigh the risks from DBP exposure for the promotion of public health.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".