Long term Health Effects

We all have to die from something... not sure if the worms will like the chlorine cologne.

DDL, I have found that showering BEFORE entering the pool greatly decreases the chlorine smell I carry around after swimming. Whether this indicates a decreased absorption of chlorine or is strictly anecdotal, I don't know. There may be no changes in health consequences but at least I don't smell like a washing machine after my wife washes the whites!

Hi I'm writing an article on the safety of swimming pools, touching on some of the dangers of chlorine disinfecting products. In researching this, I came across your website and read some of the concerns expressed, by athletes, aquatics directors, and parents, having to do with various potential or imagined threats. My impression before this was that few people are even aware of these issues of asthma, respiratory ailments, skin rashes, eye infections, etc. etc. In the aquatics field, do people think this is a serious issue that demands more study? Are parents of athletes in training, coaches, and swim clubs aware of these issues? Let me know if you have any perspectives on this you'd like to share. Thanks..... F Lyman chicha19@comcast.net

When I swam competitively there were 4 kids I knew whose doctors recommended competitive swimming because the kids had asthma. During the years I swam with them none of them had an asthma attack or carried an inhaler. AFAIK, they had no other issues. While swimming 2x/day as well as having meets on weekends, no one I knew suffered any skin, eye, respiratory or other ailments. Everyone was, and continues to be, as healthy as the proverbial horse. That said, I live in San Diego and always swam in outdoor pools. I don't know if that makes a difference... **and a funny P.S....our family dog drank exclusively from our pool. She refused to drink out of a dog dish. The dog was never sick, died at 16, and had the whitest doggie teeth you have ever seen.

As usual some worry about how healthy life styles or endeavors might "not" be healthy. I got criticized for running long distances, even by a cardiologist! The sedentary people and even the overweight are sometimes critical and try to find some excuse for not doing exercises. Not your case, I hope. Back in the late 60s the swimming pools were loaded with chlorine, and we didn't have any eye protection. No one ever got hurt or had any health problems even while doing extensive practice in the pools. Nowadays, pools have pretty much a mixture in their sanitation process, using a blend of chemicals that one hardly perceives. I will add that even the sun exposure problem in outdoor pools is exaggerated. As an aside, there are many pool sanitation methods that do not use chlorine.

There's no doubt that too much chlorine exposure is bad. If you have access to a lake or ocean nearby that would help mix it up every once in a while. Also to help balance the chlorine absorbed into your system through your skin there are herbs and minerals you can take (balance your own pH out, just like the pool).

Flyman, As the original poster of this thread, I cheer you on with your studies. Knowledge is power and we don't seem to have a lot of science on this. My gut tells me the safety question is highly variable depending on the composition of the "soup" we swim in, the external environment in the pool area, time spent in contact, pre-shower vs. no shower, de-chlorinating rinses and lotions, and on and on. I still believe the health benefits outweigh the risks but vigilance is warranted. I'm sure running is a very healthy activity but I wouldn't recommend doing it on the interstate or in Chernobyl. Besides, you might get something published that would be of interest to somebody. I had a professer once that said "The definition of a drug is any compound which, upon injection into a laboratory rat, generated a paper". Good Luck!

Also to help balance the chlorine absorbed into your system through your skin there are herbs and minerals you can take (balance your own pH out, just like the pool). Such as?

I have a copy of this article,from the journal "Human and Ecological Risk Assessment", if anyone wants it. Send me your e-mail address. "Human and Ecological Risk Assessment" 2006, Volume 12, Number 1, February Development of Factors for Estimating Swimmers’ Exposures to Chemicals in Swimming Pools - 139 Richard Reiss, Gerald P. Schoenig, and Gary A. Wright Abstract: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has developed a model to estimate chemical-specific exposures to swimmers following pool treatments. This model is called SWIMODEL. The model was first introduced in 1996, and the USEPA has made refinements to the model over the last decade. One of the most significant parameters in this model is the duration of exposure. Unfortunately, there was no reliable source of data for these exposure durations, so highly conservative estimates were used in the earlier version of SWIMODEL. In order to address this data deficiency, a telephone survey of competitive swimming coaches was conducted to provide data for the refinement of the SWIMODEL. The survey collected data on practice durations and other factors that are potentially relevant to swimmer exposures. Two different surveys were developed. The first survey was designed for coaches of amateur swim club teams, and the second survey was for collegiate coaches. The survey found that the average practice durations for youth, adult Masters, and collegiate teams were 9.1, 6.4, and 17.0 hours/week, respectively. The use of these data to estimate acute, chronic, and lifetime exposures is discussed. The data developed in this study were used to update the exposure duration and frequency estimates in SWIMODEL for competitive swimmers based on survey responses. The survey was also used to determine the percentage of competitive swimmers that wear eye goggles and other protective gear, and to supplement other measurements of the incidental water ingestion of competitive swimmers. Also, I found this on the EPA web site: Swimmer Exposure Model (SWIMODEL) User's Guide epa.gov/.../swimodelusersguide.pdf

There are studies that show a link between pool cleaning agents like chlorine and bromine interacting with organic material such as hair, skin, sweat, and urine, to trigger DNA markers (genotoxicity?). Here's one of these. I too swam for 45 years, then got bladder cancer (treated successfully without bladder removal) but intend to go back in but perhaps in pools that use other ways to clean it. N Science News ... from universities, journals, and other research organizations www.sciencedaily.com/.../bookmark.png Save www.sciencedaily.com/.../email.png Email www.sciencedaily.com/.../print.png Print www.sciencedaily.com/.../share.png Share Chemicals in Indoor Swimming Pools May Increase Cancer RiskSep. 14, 2010 — Swimming in indoor chlorinated pools may induce genotoxicity (DNA damage that may lead to cancer) as well as respiratory effects, but the positive health effects of swimming can be maintained by reducing pool levels of the chemicals behind these potential health risks, according to a new study published in a set of three articles online September 12 ahead of print in the peer-reviewed journalEnvironmental Health Perspectives (EHP). This study is the first to provide a comprehensive characterization of disinfection by-products (DBPs) in an indoor pool environment and the first to study the genotoxicity of exposure to these chemicals among swimmers in an indoor chlorinated pool. Share This: 308 DBPs form in pool water from reactions between disinfectants such as chlorine and organic matter that is either present naturally or is introduced by swimmers, such as sweat, skin cells, and urine. Previous epidemiologic studies have found an association between exposure to DBPs in drinking water and risk of bladder cancer, and one such study has found this association for dermal/inhalational exposure such as occurs during showering, bathing, or swimming. The new study details a comprehensive investigation of DBPs and mutagenicity of water samples collected from two indoor pools, one disinfected with chlorine, the other with bromine. In addition, short-term changes in biomarkers of genotoxicity and respiratory effects were studied in swimmers who swam in the chlorinated pool. No previous studies have combined investigations of the mutagenicity (ability to cause permanent DNA mutations) of pool water with a comprehensive chemical characterization of the water and studies of human exposures, the authors stated. Evidence of genotoxic effects were seen in 49 healthy adults after they swam for 40 minutes in the chlorinated pool. Specifically, researchers found increases in two genotoxicity biomarkers relative to the concentration of the most common types of DBPs in exhaled breath, which were used as a measure of the swimmers' exposures. The biomarkers that increased were micronuclei in blood lymphocytes, which have been associated with cancer risk in healthy subjects, and urine mutagenicity, which is a biomarker of exposure to genotoxic agents. Detailed measurements were also made of the most common exhaled DBPs (trihalomethanes) in air around the pool and in exhaled breath of the swimmers before and after swimming. Researchers measured several biomarkers of respiratory effects after swimming and found changes in only one -- a slight increase in serum CC16, which suggests an increase in lung epithelium permeability. This result was explained by the effects of exercise itself as well as exposure to DBPs. Further research is needed to sort out the clinical relevance of this acute change, the researchers stated. In addition, the authors identified more than 100 DBPs in the pool waters, some never reported previously in swimming pool water and/or chlorinated drinking water. In vitro assays showed that the swimming pool water was mutagenic at levels similar to that of drinking water but was more cytotoxic (can kill cells at a lower concentration) than drinking water. The human exposures studied were short-term, and further investigations of genotoxic and respiratory effects of longer-term exposures are needed, the authors stated. Also noted was a need for further research on an array of swimming pools under various conditions of maintenance and use, as well as more complete evaluations of the uptake and potential effects of the wide range of compounds present in pool water. These are preliminary results that should be confirmed in studies with larger sample sizes. This work was supported by the Spanish organizations Plan Nacional and Fondo de Investigación Sanitaria, Instituto de Salud Carlos III; and also by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.