Exposure to waterborne pathogens
in surface water may lead to health
complaints among recreants such
as bathers, divers, surfers, kayakers,
and anglers. In the Netherlands,
because of discharges of raw and
treated sewage and manure runoff
from agricultural land, pathogenic
microorganisms may enter surface
waters (e.g., Lodder and de Roda
Husman 2005; Schijven et al.
2004; Van den Berg et al.
2005). Swallowing this water may
lead to infection, which may lead
to symptoms such as nausea, fever,
and diarrhea or more severe illness. Campylobacter species
and waterborne viruses are of major
importance in that respect (de
Roda Husman 2001; Schijven 2003).
In addition, there are pathogens
indigenous to surface water, such
as Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Vibrio,
amoebae, and cyanobacteria. In
the Netherlands, skin complaints,
followed by gastrointestinal complaints,
were reported most often among
water recreants (Leenen and de
Roda Husman 2004; Schets and de
Roda Husman 2004). Skin complaints
were especially ascribed to cercaries
and cyanobacteria. In 1994 and
1995, ear complaints caused by P.aeruginosa (otitis
externa) were important incidents
in the Netherlands involving large
numbers of patients (Van Asperen
et al.
1995).
Water-associated health complaints
may occur despite the fact that
the microbiologic quality of the
bathing water complies with European
Union (EU) Directive 76/160/EEC
(1976), which sets limits for fecal
indicator bacteria and is primarily
aimed at protecting the bather
against gastrointestinal complaints
and acute febrile respiratory illness,
but not against eye, skin, and
ear complaints. Epidemiologic studies
have demonstrated that these legal
standards protect bathers insufficiently
(Kay et al.
1994; Van Asperen et al.
1998; Wiedenmann et al.
2006). The proposed new EU bathing
water directive COD 2002/0254 (2002)
aims to better inform the water
recreants on the risks of bathing
by means of bathing water profiles.
This proposed directive also addresses
the fact that water activities
other than bathing, such as diving,
surfing, and kayaking, have strongly
developed since 1976. Divers, surfers,
and kayakers may be exposed to
a greater extent to waterborne
pathogens than are bathers because
of more often and longer contact
with surface water that need not
be recreational water and that
may be more fecally contaminated
than are recreational waters. Therefore,
persons that practice these activities
may well be subjected to a higher
health risk than are bathers. Several
studies have reported health problems
related to water activities other
than bathing. Alcock (1977) reported
outbreaks of otitis externa caused
by P.aeruginosa in
saturation dives in the North Sea.
During saturation dives, the diver’s
tissue gasses reach equilibrium
with the aqueous environment, allowing
near unlimited time working underwater.
Occupational saturation divers
may acquire various skin disorders,
of which skin infections, most
often caused by P.aeruginosa,
are the most serious and frequent
(Ahlén et al.
2003). Skin lesions and skin infections
provide opportunities for microorganisms
and toxic chemicals to penetrate
under conditions of hydrostatic
pressure (Richter et al.
2003). Losonsky et al.
(1994) found a significant increase
in the frequency of isolation of Pseudomonas and Aeromonas from
respiratory surfaces and predominantly
the divers’ ears. The rates
of seroresponse to these microorganisms
suggested that repeated exposure
is necessary for generation of
a specific systemic immunologic
response and that there are various
levels of susceptibility to waterborne
pathogens in both experienced and
inexperienced divers. Garin et al.
(1994) found a higher percentage
of divers seropositive for coxsackievirus
B4 and B5 compared with a control
group. Dewailly et al.
(1986) documented the risks associated
with windsurfing on sewage-polluted
water. Relative risks were 2.9
[95% confidence interval (CI),
1.3-6.6] for occurrence of
one or more symptoms of gastroenteritis,
otitis, conjunctivitis, and skin
infection and 5.5 (95% CI, 1.4-21.4)
for symptoms of gastroenteritis
only. Relative risk increased with
the reported number of falls into
the water.
A key factor in determining health
risks involved in exposure to pathogens
in surface water is the volume
of water that is being swallowed.
To date, no study has aimed to
estimate volumes of swallowed water.Kay
et al.
(1994) related relative incidences
of gastroenteritis with concentrations
of fecal indicator organisms and
head immersions of swimmers. Similarly,
Wiedenmann et al.
(2006) related relative incidence
of gastroenteritis with head immersions
of swimmers and whether the swimmers
had swallowed water in a single
period of 10 min. The mean risk
attributable to swallowing water
above threshold concentrations
was significantly higher (3.6%)
than the attributable risk below
threshold concentrations (1.3%).
Neither of these studies quantified
volumes of swallowed water; instead,
head immersions were looked upon
as an equivalent for the uptake
of water.
In the present study we aimed
to collect data on the volume of
water that is swallowed during
diving. Toward that aim, such data
were collected by means of questionnaires
sent to occupational and sport
divers in the Netherlands. Divers
are an interesting group to study
because diving involves full immersion
in the water for a relatively long
period of time, allowing maximum
exposure on the one hand, but on
the other hand, divers immerse
in a very controlled manner as
opposed to accidental immersions
of swimmers, surfers, and kayakers.
In addition, we collected literature
data on concentrations of Campylobacter
jejuni and enteroviruses
in surface waters, for example,
and calculated the risks of infection
with these pathogens. Furthermore,
divers were asked about health
complaints that could have been
caused by infections acquired during
diving.
Questionnaires. We
used questionnaires to ask occupational
and sport divers about the number
and duration of dives for various
types of surface waters, the amount
of water that was swallowed per
dive, and the type of diving mask
that was worn. Also, questions
were included about health complaints
that may possibly have been due
to an infection from a waterborne
pathogen. The questionnaire for
the occupational divers concerned
the year 2002, and that for the
sport divers was for 2003. The
questionnaire for the occupational
divers was constructed in consultation
with the Dutch Association of Diving
Enterprises (NADO) and was sent
by letter in February 2003 to 25
Dutch diving enterprises with 233
occupational divers. NADO represents
95% of the Dutch diving industry
with about 500 employed occupational
divers (1-30 divers per enterprise).
The questionnaire for the sport
divers was constructed in consultation
with the Dutch Divers Union (NOB)
and by using the experience that
was obtained from the questionnaire
for the occupational divers. NOB
has approximately 26,000 members.
The questionnaire was announced
to the sport divers by means of
the NOB journal Onderwatersport and
on their website (NOB 2006).The
questionnaire was made accessible
from January through April 2004
as an Internet form on the website
of the National Institute for Public
Health and the Environment (RIVM
2006)and was linked to the NOB
website. Sport divers were required
to identify themselves by means
of their membership code.
Types of occupational divers
were starter, second diver, first
diver, all-round diver, and team
leader. Sport diver types were
diver with no certificate, classes
1*-4*, and instructor. The
types of water for occupational
divers were open sea and coastal
and fresh water. In addition, a
distinction was made for the presence
of sewage discharge within 1 km
upstream. In the case of sport
divers, the types of water were
open sea, coastal water, fresh
recreational water, canals and
rivers, city canals, and swimming
pools. In the case of sport divers,
no further subdivision by the presence
of sewage discharge was made
Table 1

|
Occupational divers commonly
wear a full face mask or a diving
helmet and sometimes scuba gear
with an ordinary diving mask. Sport
divers always wear an ordinary
diving mask and sometimes a full
face mask. The divers were asked
to estimate how much water they
swallowed in terms of a few drops
of water up to a soda glass full
(Table 1). Questions about health
complaints encompassed respiratory,
eye, skin, and ear complaints;
diarrhea; vomiting; and nausea.
Data analysis. The
data from the questionnaires were
scored using Mathematica (version
5.0; Wolfram Research Inc., Champaign,
IL, USA).Subsets of data were constructed
according to sex, certificate,
type of diver, diving mask, and
water for analysis of variance
(ANOVA). For comparison, also data
on sex, age, length, and weight
for the Dutch population in 2003
were collected using Statline (Statistics
Netherlands 2005).
Volume of swallowed water. We
translated the descriptive swallowed
volumes from the questionnaires
into the average volumes (milliliters)
as shown in Table 1. Obviously,
the duration of a dive is relevant
for the exposure assessment; however,
we did not take this into account
because it was too difficult for
a diver to estimate the volume
of swallowed water per time unit.
Number of dives. In
the questionnaires for the occupational
divers, divers were asked about
the number of dives in 2002 (0,
1-10, 11-20, 21-50,
51-100, 101-200) for
each type of diving water. The
number of dives was calculated
from the group means. The sport
divers reported actual numbers
of dives for each type of diving
water and for each quarter of 2003.
Risk of infection. Risks
of infection with waterborne pathogens,
in this case, C. jejuni and
enteroviruses as examples, were
estimated from the volume of swallowed
water and the pathogen concentration.
The infection risk per dive, pd,
was calculated using the hypergeometric
dose-response model (Teunis
and Havelaar 2000):
pd = 1 - 1F1(
,
+ β,
- CV), [1]
Table 2

|
where
1F1 is
the hypergeometric distribution,

and β are
the parameters of the Beta-distribution,
C is
the pathogen concentration, and
V is
volume of water.In the case of
C.
jejuni, the best estimates
of parameters

and β are
0.145 and 8.007, respectively,
and in the case of enteroviruses,
the best estimates of

and β are
0.167 and 0.191, respectively (Teunis
and Havelaar 2000). Effects of
recurrent exposures either with
short- or long-time intervals were
not considered. We collected concentration
ranges of
C. jejuni and
enteroviruses for certain types
of water from the literature (Table
2). Assuming these concentration
ranges were the 99% intervals of
log-normally distributed pathogen
concentrations, we constructed
concentration distributions using
Monte Carlo sampling (10,000 samples).
Table 2 shows the arithmetic mean
concentrations for each type of
water. Because of their sensitivity
to chlorine disinfection, we assumed
that both pathogens were absent
in swimming pools.
We calculated infection risks
per dive, pd,
using Equation 1 with random sampling
from the concentration distributions
and the swallowed volumes of water
for each type of water. Infection
risks per year, py,
were calculated by random sampling
from the pd distributions
as many times as the number of
dives per diver, N, according
to
Response to the inquiries
and general characteristics
of the divers. We received
questionnaires from 37 occupational
divers from 8 of the 25 enterprises.
The response between diving
enterprises varied between
no response at all to 100%
(average, 16%). Only one of
the 37 respondents was female.
In total, 483 sport divers
responded to the inquiry (2.1%),
of whom 10% were females (49)
and 90% males (433). In 2005,
NOB had a total number of members
of 26,133, of whom 25% (6,576)
were female and 75% (19,577)
were male; therefore, female
divers appear to be underrepresented
in the study. The average age
of the divers who took part
in this study was very much
the same as that of all NOB
members and that of the Dutch
population. Also, these divers
had similar average body lengths
and weights as Dutch people > 20
years of age.
No apparent differences existed
between the certificates of the
female and male sport divers and
between the sport divers and NOB
members, except that no female
instructors took part in the study.
Duration of a dive. According
to ANOVA, no significant differences
existed in the
duration of a dive between the types of diving water among either the occupational
or the sport divers. However, occupational divers dived on average (60-95
min) significantly longer than sport divers (42-52 min). The dive duration
of sport divers, who reported per quarter, was relatively constant throughout
the year.
Table 3

|
Number of dives. Table
3 summarizes the percentage of
divers by type of water and the
number of dives per diver in a
year. Two of the 37 occupational
divers did not report the number
of dives per type of water. For
the occupational divers, no distinction
is made in Table 3 between wearing
an ordinary diving mask, a full
mask, or a helmet, because divers
wore either of those, usually a
full mask or a helmet, for a particular
type of water. Taking into account
all the possible combinations would
divide the divers into groups of
only a few divers. For the same
reason, no distinction was made
between type of occupational diver.
Differences in numbers of dives
between types of sport divers were
not apparent. Differences in numbers
of dives between water types were
highly significant.
More occupational divers than
sport divers dived in open sea.
Most of both types of divers dived
in coastal and fresh waters, but
a few of the sport divers dived
in rivers, canals, and city canals.
The number of dives in open sea
was about the same as that of diving
in coastal water when not considering
the presence of sewage discharge.
Occupational divers dived more
often in fresh water than in seawater.
Sport divers dived about four
times more often in April-September
than in the winter months October-March
in all surface waters. In swimming
pools, they dived about twice as
often in October-March as
in April-September and least
often in July-September.
Although we collected no seasonal
data on the number of dives of
occupational divers, this number
is known to vary little between
seasons (Struik PJ, personal communication).
Offshore, occupational divers dive
throughout the year except under
bad weather conditions such as
storms. Diving frequencies of sport
divers when wearing a full face
mask were two orders of magnitude
lower. Occupational divers dived
more often in surface waters than
did sport divers.
Volume of swallowed water. Table
1 shows the distributions of the
volumes of swallowed water per
dive. Most frequently, the divers
reported swallowing no water or
only a few drops. However, in the
case of open sea and coastal water,
divers also frequently reported
swallowing enough water to fill
a shot glass. Higher volumes were
reported much less frequently.
Table 3 shows the calculated
volume of swallowed water per dive
for each type of water. For volumes
that were not significantly different
according to ANOVA, estimated volumes
from combining the data of these
types of water are also given.
The estimates of the combined data
were applied in the infection risk
calculations. The occupational
divers swallowed about twice as
much water per dive in seawater
and coastal water than in fresh
water. Sport divers wearing ordinary
diving masks swallowed as much
seawater and coastal waters as
did the occupational divers, but
occasionally much more. Sport divers
swallowed more water when diving
in fresh recreational water, but
much less in canals, rivers, and
city canals. Apparently in the
latter cases, divers were more
cautious. The highest volumes were
swallowed in swimming pools.
One of six occupational divers
reported swallowing no water when
wearing scuba gear with an ordinary
diving mask, 10 of 25 when wearing
a full face mask, and 25 of 26
when wearing a diving helmet. Sport
divers wearing a full face mask
appeared to swallow about 10 times
less water per dive than did sport
divers wearing an ordinary diving
mask. This strongly indicates that
much less water was swallowed when
divers wore a full face mask instead
of an ordinary diving mask and
even less when wearing a diving
helmet.
Table 4

|
Risk of infection. Table
4 shows the infection risks per
dive,
pd, and
per year,
py.
The infection risks for
C. jejuni are
generally one order of magnitude
higher than for enteroviruses.
This is mainly because of the chosen
concentration ranges and the high
sensitivity of the infection risk
for the concentration values. In
the case of
C. jejuni, the
upper limit of the concentration
range was always as high as 10
4 per
liter, regardless of the presence
of sewage discharge (Table 2).
This high limit was chosen because
birds may still be present and
contaminate the water. A 10-times
lower upper concentration limit
would lead to an approximately
10-times lower estimate of the
infection risk. Also, the 97th
percentileof the risks are usually
10 times higher than the arithmetic
mean risks.
The mean risk of infection with C.
jejuni is generally near
1% per dive for occupational
divers and sport divers wearing
ordinary diving masks. This risk
is 10 times lower for sport divers
wearing full face masks. The
risk of infection with enteroviruses
per dive differs more among the
water types because of the different
concentration ranges of enteroviruses,
and varies between 0.02 and 0.3%.
Differences between the annual
infection risks are more apparent
than between the risks per dive
because of the inclusion of the
numbers of dives. In the case of
occupational divers diving in fresh
water with unknown sewage discharge, py is
highest because of the highest
number of dives in that water.
Although canals, rivers, and city
canals may be more fecally contaminated
than fresh recreational waters,
the infection risk per year for
sport divers was lower for the
rivers and canals because they
swallowed less water per dive and
the number of dives was very low.

Figure 1. Percentage
of divers who had each
health complaint of the
divers who reported health
complaints. Values in
parentheses indicate
the number of divers
who reported that complaint
of those who reported
health complaints.
|
Health complaints. Figure
1 shows the percentages of divers
who reported health complaints
in the study year. For each complaint,
about half were reported to have
occurred once and about half occurred
two to five times. Only 20% of
the divers reported having none
of these health complaints at all.
Occupational divers reported diarrhea
very often. Diarrhea, vomiting,
and nausea were reported more often
by occupational divers than by
sport divers, probably because
occupational divers dive more often
in more heavily fecally contaminated
water than do sport divers. According
to testing in a 2

2
contingency table, occupational
divers reported nausea significantly
more often than sport divers (
px2
=
1%), but the frequencies of reporting
the other complaints were not significantly
different between occupational
and sport divers, partly due to
the relatively small number of
occupational divers in the study.
Both occupational and sport divers
reported frequent ear complaints
(about 50%). Sport divers reported
skin complaints more often than
occupational divers. The latter
commonly wear fully closed suits,
and the former commonly do not.
Respiratory and eye complaints
were reported as often by both
types of divers.
The occupational divers reported
having had nausea, vomiting, and
diarrhea in January-March
and September-December, but
not in April-August. On the
contrary, they reported having
ear complaints only in the summer
months. The sport divers reported
40% more ear, skin, and eye complaints;
20% more nausea; and 60% more diarrhea
in the warmer months (April-August)
when they dive more often, compared
with the colder months. They reported
45% more respiratory complaintsduring
the colder months (September-March).
The occupational divers visited
a general practitioner for diarrhea
(2/35 = 6%), ear complaints (4/35
= 12%), and eye complaints (2/35
= 6%), and the sport divers for
nausea (3/482 = 0.6% of cases),
vomiting (2/482 = 0.4%), diarrhea
(6/482 = 1.2%), ear complaints
(98/482 = 20%), skin complaints
(30/482 = 6.2%), eye complaints
(15/482 = 3.1%), and respiratory
complaints (43/482 = 8.9%).
By means of questionnaires, occupational
and sport divers were asked to
estimate how much water they had
swallowed after diving as a key
factor for risk assessment. There
appeared to be consistence in these
estimates, supporting reliability
of the data: the estimated volumes
of swallowed water for similar
types of water could be combined
(Table 3). In all cases, uncertainties
in the estimated volumes were quite
large, with a high frequency of
small volumes and a low frequency
of high volumes, which is plausible.
We estimated that occupational
divers swallowed an arithmetic
mean of 9.8 mL and 5.7 mL of water
per dive in marine and fresh waters,
respectively. There was no difference
between the volumes of swallowed
water in water with known or unknown
sewage discharge, which shows that
occupational divers were in most
cases not aware of the presence
of sewage discharge. Per dive,
sport divers swallowed an arithmetic
mean of 9.0 mL of water in marine
waters; 13 mL in fresh recreational
water; 3.2 mL in canals, rivers,
and city canals; and 20 mL in swimming
pools.
Divers swallowed 10 times less
water when wearing a full face
mask instead of an ordinary diving
mask and even less when wearing
a diving helmet. The latter two
are therefore recommended when
diving in fecally contaminated
water.

Figure 2. Risk of
infection per dive, pd,
with enteroviruses (A)
and C. jejuni (B) as
a function of pathogen
concentration (n/L) in
the diving water and
the volume of swallowed
water per dive.
|
For sport divers wearing an ordinary
diving mask and for occupational
divers, the risk of infection
with
C.jejuni was
estimated to be near 1% per dive,
and the risk of infection with
enteroviruses was near 0.1% per
dive. The annual infection risks
were one order of magnitude higher,
dependent on pathogen concentration
and the number of dives. These
relatively high estimates indicate
that the risk of infection from
diving may be a significant health
problem. Figure 2 shows the risk
of infection with enteroviruses
and
Campylobacter species
as a function of the concentration
of these pathogens and the volume
of swallowed water per dive. With
these Figure 2 and the data from
Table 1 (volume description and
milliliters) and Table 2 (concentration
ranges of pathogens in different
types of water), one can estimate
the risk associated with a certain
swallowed volume of water and a
particular level of contamination
of that water. In the Netherlands,
a maximum risk of infection of
10
-4 per person
per annum is applied as the Dutch
legal standard for drinking water
(Staatsblad 2001). A risk of infection
of 10
-4 is exceeded
in water with > 0.001-0.1
enteroviruses per liter or > 0.03-3
C.
jejuni per liter, dependent
on swallowing a few drops up to
a soda glass of water. A risk of
infection 10
-2 is
notable from an epidemiologic point
of view (Craun et al.
1996). This risk of infection is
exceeded in water with > 0.1-10
enteroviruses per liter or > 3-300
C.
jejuni per liter, dependent
on the volume of swallowed water.
From the data on age, body length,
and weight of the occupational
and sport divers and the fact that
a physically active life is inherent
to divers, we may conclude that
they represent a group of healthy
adults. Nevertheless, only 20%
of both the occupational and sport
divers reported having none of
the health complaints. Although
the reported health complaints
may not have been caused by diving
activities, the high incidence
of reported health complaints suggests
that divers are subject to a higher
risk of infection with waterborne
pathogens due to diving.
De Wit et al.
(2001a) estimated gastroenteritis
incidence for adult persons in
the Netherlands to be 283/1,000
person-years. Gastroenteritis was
defined as three or more loose
stools in 24 hr, or diarrhea with
two or more additional symptoms,
or includes vomiting with two or
more additional symptoms, such
as abdominal pain and cramps, nausea,
fever, blood in the stool, mucus
in the stool, diarrhea, or vomiting.
An episode has to be preceded by
a symptom-free period of 2 weeks.
It also includes vomiting three
or more times in 24 hr. In the
present study, it was not possible
to apply this case definition of
gastroenteritis because no information
was collected on concurrency of
symptoms. Nevertheless, the reported
incidences of nausea and vomiting
are in reasonable agreement with
the gastroenteritis incidence of
283 per ≥ 1,000
person-years. However, the reported
incidence of diarrhea for sport
divers of 400 per 1,000 person-years
seems to be high and that for occupational
divers (610 per 1,000 person-years)
even higher. In 2002 and 2003,
the incidence rate of gastroenteritis
in general practices in the Netherlands
for men 15-64 years of age
was 67 and 74 per 10,000 person-years,
respectively (Bartelds 2005). Incidence
rates of the sport divers for nausea,
vomiting, and diarrhea in general
practices were 62, 41, and 125
per 10,000 person-years, respectively.
This is similar to the data of
Bartelds (2005). Therefore, our
data suggest that the incidence
of gastroenteritis-like symptoms
of divers is similar to that of
the Dutch population (excluding
young children and the elderly).The
incidence of ear complaints is
high (500 and 530 per 1,000 person-years
for sport and occupational divers,
respectively).
The present study has given insight
into the high risks of infection
that divers may experience in fecally
contaminated water. The exposure
data collected in this study can
also be of use for risk assessments
due to the exposure to toxic and
carcinogenic agents (Maibach 1975;
Richter et al.
2003). Divers should be made aware
of these risks, and protective
actions such as wearing the appropriate
diving gear should be taken. Legal
frameworks that aim toward this
are provided by the Dutch Working
Conditions Decree (2000), which,
among other things, requires a
risk assessment and evaluation
of a diving location, EU Directive
90/679/EEC (1990) on the protection
of workers from risks related to
exposure to biologic agents at
work, and the proposed new EU bathing
water directive COD 2002/0254 (2002),
which is aimed at better informing
water recreants on the risks of
bathing by means of bathing water
profiles.