Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
of coliform organisms as indi¬ cators of contamination has long dominated the thinking of sanitary bacteriologists, and there would appear to be more than a chance relationship to the great reduction in enteric infections during this period.However, the equally logical use of indicator organisms de¬ rived from the nose, mouth, and related struc- tures has lagged behind.It is obvious that con¬ tamination of air, eating utensils, swimming pool waters, and similar materials is not neces- sarily best measured by determining the pres¬ ence of organisms derived from the intestinal tract.The total count, an alternate method sanctioned more by use than logic, is often sub- stituted for or combined with the determination of coliform organisms.Unfortunately, such use of the total count gives little useful information.A high total count does not distinguish among biological growth in a system containing some type of utilizable nutrient, the introduction of large numbers of relatively harmless extraneous organisms from dust, soil, and similar sources, and the introduction of organisms from the mouth, throat, nose, and skin surfaces of per¬ sons using the facilities.Clearly, high total counts of organisms derived from nose, mouth, and skin sources, especially in swimming pools, Two of the authors are with the department of bac- teriology and public health9 Washington State Uni¬ versity, PuUmcai.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Favero et al. (1964) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: