Animal Waste, Water Quality and Human Health

Comparative risk analysis 413Teunis, P. F. M., & Havelaar, A. H. (2000). The Beta Poisson model is not a single-hitmodel. Risk Analysis, 20, 511–518.Teunis, P. F. M., van der Heijden, O. G., van der Giessen, J. W. B., & Havelaar, A. H.(1996). The dose-response relation in human volunteers for gastro-intestinalpathogens. RIVM Report No. 284 550 002, Antonie van Leeuwenhoeklaan 9, POBox 1, NL-3720 BA Bilthoven, The Netherlands, 89 p.Thomas, M. K., Charron, D. F., Waltner-Toews, D., Schuster, C., Maarouf, A. R., &Holt, J. D. (2006). A role of high impact weather events in waterborne diseaseoutbreaks in Canada, 1975–2001. International Journal of EnvironmentalHealth Research, 16(3), 167–180.Tian, J, & Liu, X. M. (2009). Risk assessment of Listeria monocytogenes in deli meats andvegetable salads. Zhonghua Yu Fang Yi Xue Za Zhi, 43, 781–784 (Chinese).Till, D. G., & McBride, G. B. (2004). Potential public health risk of campylobacter andother zoonotic waterborne infections in New Zealand. Chapter 12. In: WaterborneZoonoses: Identification, Causes and Control (Cotruvo, J.A., Dufour, A., Rees, G.,Bartram, J., Carr, R., Cliver, D.O., Craun, G.F., Fayer, R. and Gannon, V.P.J. (eds.),World Health Organization and IWA publishing, Geneva and London, pp. 191–208.Till, D., McBride, G., Ball, A., Taylor, K., & Pyle, E. (2008). Large-scale microbiologicalstudy: Rationale, results and risks. Journal of Water and Health, 6(4), 443–460.USEPA (2000a). Risk assessment evaluation for concentrated animal feeding operations,USEPA Report EPA/600/R-04/042, National Risk Management ResearchLaboratory, Cincinnati, OH. http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/pubs/600r04042/600r04042.pdf Washington, D.C.: United States Environmental Protection Agency.USEPA, (2000b). Report to Congress – EPA Studies on Sensitive Subpopulations andDrinking Water Contaminants. USEPA Report EPA 815-R-00-015, Office of Water.Washington, D.C.: United States Environmental Protection Agency.USEPA (2003). National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Long Term 2 EnhancedSurface Water Treatment Rule.. 40 CFR Parts 141 and 142, Federal Register 68(154), August 11. Washington, D.C.: United States Environmental Protection Agency.USEPA (2009a). Review of published studies to characterize relative risks from differentsources of faecal contamination in recreational water. USEPA, Office of Water,Health and Ecological Criteria Division. Report EPA 822-R-09-001. Washington, D.C.: United States Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/recreation/pdf/faecalcontamrecreationalwaters.pdfUSEPA (2009b). Review of zoonotic pathogens in ambient waters. USEPA, Office ofWater, Health and Ecological Criteria Division. Report EPA 822-R-09-002.Washington, D.C.: United States Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/ criteria/recreation/pdf/zoonoticpathogensreview.pdfUSEPA (2010). Quantitative microbial risk assessment to estimate illness in freshwaterimpacted by agricultural animal sources of faecal contamination. USEPA Office ofWater. Report EPA 822-R-10-005. Washington, D.C.: United States EnvironmentalProtection Agency. http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/criteria/health/recreation/upload/P4-QMRA-508.pdf