Publication Date: 18 Feb 2009
Journal: Environmental Health Insights
Citation: Environmental Health Insights 2009:3 1-10
Alan S. Kolok1,2, Cheryl L. Beseler1,3, Xun-Hong Chen4 and Patrick J. Shea1,4
1Department of Environmental, Agricultural and Occupational Health, 987850 Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198. 2Department of Biology, University of Nebraska at Omaha, 6001 Dodge Street, Omaha, NE 68182. 3Department of Epidemiology, 987850 Nebraska Medical Center Omaha, NE 68198. 4School of Natural Resources, 3310 Holdrege St., University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68583-0996.
Abstract
The watershed provides a physical basis for establishing linkages between aquatic contaminants, environmental health and human health. Current attempts to establish such linkages are limited by environmental and epidemiological constraints. Environmental limitations include difficulties in characterizing the temporal and spatial dynamics of agricultural runoff, in fully understanding the degradation and metabolism of these compounds in the environment, and in understanding complex mixtures. Epidemiological limitations include difficulties associated with the organization of risk factor data and uncertainty about which measurable endpoints are most appropriate for an agricultural setting. Nevertheless, it is our contention that an adoption of the watershed concept can alleviate some of these difficulties. From an environmental perspective, the watershed concept helps identify differences in land use and application of agrichemicals at a level of resolution relevant to human health outcomes. From an epidemiological perspective, the watershed concept places data into a construct with environmental relevance. In this perspectives paper, we discuss how the watershed can provide a conceptual framework for studies in environmental and human health.
PDF (4.25 MB PDF FORMAT)
RIS citation (ENDNOTE, REFERENCE MANAGER, PROCITE, REFWORKS)
BibTex citation (BIBDESK, LATEX)
PMC HTML
My experience in publishing with Environmental Health Insights was positive from the beginning of the initial manuscript submittal, to the published product. The peer reviewers provided helpful suggestions, while the editorial and production staff kept me fully informed of the paper's process every step of the way. I recommend Libertas Academica for anyone that is serious about publishing their research in an efficient, friendly and professional manner.
All authors are surveyed after their articles are published. Authors are asked to rate their experience in a variety of areas, and their responses help us to monitor our performance. Presented here are their responses in some key areas. No 'poor' or 'very poor' responses were received; these are represented in the 'other' category.See Our Results
Copyright © 2014 Libertas Academica Ltd (except open access articles and accompanying metadata and supplementary files.)
Facebook Google+ Twitter
Pinterest Tumblr YouTube