Suchergebnisse

This article has focused on the relatively low priority accorded industrial wastes compared to human wastes by the public health community in the period from 1876 through 1932. The critical reason for this prioritization was the potential for acute health effects from human wastes as compared with the belief that industrial wastes had only indirect effects. State departments of health normally only responded to industrial wastes when they endangered the potable nature of water supplies or interfered with water and sewage treatment processes. Within the public health community, however, a relatively small group of interdisciplinary professionals argued for attention to the indirect health effects of industrial wastes and their impacts on the total stream environment. In conjunction with other groups interested in clean streams--such as sportsmen and manufacturers who required high quality process water--they pushed for a broader state legislative mandate in regard to pollution control. Some states created new bureaus or boards with responsibility for industrial wastes and the larger stream environment but the attack on industrial pollution remained limited in this period. The final significant development regarding industrial pollution and public health concerned the formulation by Streeter-Phelps of the Public Health Service of a theory of stream purification with a set of general quantitative indicators. This application was of particular importance in regard to the high-oxygen consuming nature of organic industrial wastes and the wide variety of effluents that existed. Industrial wastes constituted what Harvey Brooks, in his essay "Science Indicators and Science Priorities" calls a very "messy" research problem--one that does "not lend itself to elegant and widely applicable generalizations."(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)