Protozoan Parasites In Food And Water Affect Human

Health
Abstract:

In low- and middle-income countries, better wash is important for reducing diarrheal morbidity and
mortality brought on by protozoa. Due to the close and intricate connections between the various
wash components, it is frequently required to improve not just one but all of them in order to achieve
long-lasting improvements. This paper's goal was to review the current situation of parasitic protozoa-
related health issues caused by wash by providing an overview and classification of protozoa and their
impact on human health, talking about various strategies to increase access to clean water, sanitation
services, and personal hygiene practises, and suggesting an institutional strategy to ensure improved
wash. The results show that Giardia and Cryptosporidium are more frequently found during
waterborne or water-washed epidemics and are less responsive to standard drinking water and
wastewater treatment technologies than the majority of bacteria and viruses. In affluent nations, there
are numerous institutions for the management and prevention of water-related illnesses brought on by
protozoa. Unfortunately, there are no similar systems in the underdeveloped world. As a result, in
these nations, the institutional and systems approach to wash is required.

Introduction:

Parasites are those organisms that follows their life-cycle on depending over a host plant or animals.
Sometimes it would be beneficial to their host, and commonly its spread disease. The protozoan
parasites mainly cause foodborne and waterborne disease to human host. The commonly found
protozoan parasites is Entamoeba histolytica. The disease cause by this parasites is diarrhoea. In a
medical research, near about 1.76 billion diarrheal cases are recorded in a global death by this disease.
The pathogens are spreading by contaminating food and serye to host. The intestinal protozoan are not
only causing the diarrhoea, as well as low grade fever, weight loss, vomiting, fatique etc. Food like
vegetables, fruits and as well as water provide nutrient, minerals and vitamines to human. It is most
common and cost friendly supply to nutrients. It also the preferable source of foodborne and
waterborne parasites. It a great threat to all over world that the contamination of parasites to raw
vegetables and water source. In other hand that nutrient source will make a healthy host in danger, and
those food don’t have only pharmacological importance. Epidemic and endemic diseases are caused
by parasitic infections that are spread through water by protozoa in both developed and poor nations.
The former, however, maintain greater hygiene and typically not through to be a cause of those
disorders. Despite having met their water treatment criteria, the latter, where the populace consumers
both treated and untreated water, has a high rate of protozoan illnesses. Therefore, numerous steps
must be taken to improve wash in resources limited environments in order to detect there pathogens in
underdeveloped nations. There have appeared to be more instances of waterborne and foodborne
parasites disease epidemics in recent years across the globe. The cause of this appears to be the
community's deteriorating or improperly maintained sanitary and water supply infrastructure.
Additionally, protozoa tests are rarely conducted and non-existent in small treatment facilities.
Protozoa tests are also infrequently conducted and non-existent in smaller treatment centers. Practical
difficulties in drinking water research for cystes and oocysts at pathogenic enteric protozoa include
withdrawal and delivery of large amounts of water (50L) to a lab, the length of filtration, the low
likelihood of identifying cysts and oocysts, and methods high cost. Because of this, sanitary rules
microbial indices of water quality typically only comprise indicator microorganisms, especially in
developing areas. Due to the intricate interactions between wash and diarrheal illness, it is frequently
impossible to determine the primary cause. Increase the water supply and sanitation services coverage
may occasionally fail to reduce diarrhoea for this reason, among others due to the close intricate
connections between the many wash components, one but all of long-lasting outcomes. This paper's
goal is to review the current situation of wash related health issues brought on by parasite protozoa.
Increases in water supply and sanitation service coverage many occasionally fail to reduce diarrhoea
for this reason, among others. Due to the close and intricate connection between the many wash
components, it is frequently required to enhance not just one but all of these components in order to
have long-lasting outcome.

Classification and occurrence of Protozoa:

On earth, there are rarely 15000 different species of protozoa. However, significance of following
classes for health, is primarily, Sporozoa, Infusoria, Sarcosine, and Flagellants. Toxoplasma gondii,
Entamoeba histological, Cyclosporine calyetanensis, Silpira belli, Blastocyst hominid, Balantidium
folk, Acanthanoeba spp., Sarcophagus spp, and Naegleria spp. Are parasitic protozoa that spread
through water and contaminated food results human disease. Zoonotic agents like Guardian and
cryptisporidium are more frequently found during epidemics brought on by tainted drinking water.
Giardiasis outbreaks predominate(71%) in systems with surface water. Where as cryptosporidiosis
outbreaks predominate (53%) in underground water. These enteric protozoan parasites are significant
contributors in underdeveloped nations. Even after treatment using traditional techniques, samples of
waste, surface, and groundwater, as well as drinking water, are discovered to contain protozoan cysts
and oocysts. Giardia and cryptosporidium cysts and oocysts can pass through the water treatment
system due to their small size(1-18µm), which can lead to outbreaks and epidermis after consuming
purified drinking water. Giardiasis is spread by cysts and cryptosporidium is spread by oocysts. In
cold water, cysts and oocysts can both endure for several months due to other resistance cysts and
oocysts are doing in contaminated food, drink, hands, or insects enter the host’s digestive track and
cause infection. Two trophizoites are produced by each cyst in the small intestine. Tropozoites
continue to grow in the proximal small intestine lumen where they can be free or linked to the mucosa
by a ventral sucking disc. They do so by longitudinal binary fission. The parasites start to reproduce
as they move towards the colon. The faces include both trophozoites and cysts. Cysts and oocysts are
discharged during detection and spread to other hosts through the environment.

Mechanism for water pollution:

An infected person or animal several invasive cysts and oocysts bin their faces, which is how
cryptosporidiosis and giardiasis. Giardia and cryptosporidia are spread through oral contact with
faces. Swimmers in open pools might become infected by ingesting water or drinking it. Protozoa's
small size enables them to pass through filters used in drinking water treatment plants. According to a
study done in Japan, Giardia cysts were found in 12% (3/26; geometric mean concentration was 0.8
cysts/1000 L) and Cryptosporidium oocysts were found in 35% (9/26) of filtered water samples.
Additionally, they are highly stable in water and may sustain viability for at least six to twelve months
in an aquatic environment. This is due to the fact that Giardia cysts and oocysts from
Cryptosporidium have a substantial wall surrounding them. The development of such a protective
wall aids in the "freezing" of protozoa metabolism, causing them to remain in what is known as
"suspended animation.” Faecal matter in the water supply and poor hygiene are the primary causes of
waterborne and water-washed illnesses. There are many methods for faeces to get into the water,
including wastewater overflow, broken sewage systems, contaminated storm drains, and agricultural
effluent. Liquid sewage from inefficiently constructed toilets, cesspools, and livestock farms enters
the soil and aquifers, bringing about protozoan illness. Untreated livestock wastes from facilities near
communities that rely on the upper aquifers for water supply are particularly hazardous. Melt and rain
water on the ground can penetrate the groundwater aquifers and pollute the quality of water used for
drinking. Between the confining layers, confined water creates an underground reservoir with a level
that is consistent throughout time and reasonably high water quality. The most dependable water in
terms of sanitation and parasitology is enclosed water. However, if the integrity of the confining
stratum is compromised or there is insufficient supervision over old wells, cysts and oocysts can seed
even contained water. Because there is so much uncertainty around interactive wash components, it is
difficult to analyse statistics on the primary causes of outbreaks of diarrhoea. Most cases with test
confirmation are found in wealthy nations. These findings show that inadequate treatment was the
primary factor contributing to outbreaks. It goes without saying that low- and middle-income nations
experience a disproportionately higher number of outbreaks of parasitic protozoan illnesses that are
transmitted by water. Sadly, we don't have similar results for the emerging regions.

Treating Drinking Water:

Several procedures are used to treat drinking water according to traditional practises. They assist in
lowering bacteria that are harmful to public health when used on raw water sources. When particles
settle under gravity, coagulation, flocculation, and settling work to separate solids from the liquid
phase. Protozoa, bacteria, and viruses tend to sorb into coagulation or flocculation, and are
subsequently eliminated. The efficacy of removing Giardia cysts and Cryptosporidium oocysts is
about 90%. Sadly, these techniques are thought to be economically unprofitable for developing
nations. Plummer and co. Evaluated the effectiveness of clarifying for removing Cryptosporidium
oocysts under various conditions (sedimentation versus dissolved-air flotation). The findings of this
investigation demonstrated that oocyst absorption was greatest at pH 5.0 and at coagulant
concentrations greater than those normally employed to eliminate turbidity. Filtration can act as a
reliable and effective barrier for microbial pathogens with the right setup and operation. The size and
density of microorganisms, the size and surface charge of organisms, the size and surface charge of
coagulant particles, the depth of the filter material, and the filtration rate are technological factors that
affect the transfer efficiency. Rapid filtration, such as a straightforward screen filter, is ineffective at
properly removing microbiological pathogens. When it comes to purifying water of microbiological
contamination, slow sand filters can be highly successful. However, studies have demonstrated that
diatom filtration is superior to other traditional filtrations or granulated medium for lowering the
quantity of Giardia cysts and Cryptosporidium oocysts. In the United States and Europe, reverse
osmosis, microfiltration, ultrafiltration, and nanofiltration are important steps in the manufacture of
drinking water. As an alternative to the conventional purification and elimination of protozoal cysts,
reverse osmosis, microfiltration, ultrafiltration, and nanofiltration have drawn a lot of attention. The
maximum permeability and biggest pores in the range of 0.1 to 10µm are found in microfiltration
membranes. Removing particles that could cause issues with subsequent processing by microfiltration
is a successful process. Clarification, pre-treatment, and the removal of particles and bacteria are all
steps in the use of microfiltration membranes in water purification. Since ultrafiltration membranes
have substantially smaller pores (0.002-0.1 m) than microfiltration membranes, tremendous pressure
is necessary. Currently, the removal of particles and germs from water is accomplished using
ultrafiltration membranes. It is believed that the primary method for removing protozoal cysts is
physical sieving. The range of protozoan cyst sizes (4–15 m) is at least one order of magnitude less
than the range of pore sizes for microfiltration and ultrafiltration used in water purification (0.01–0.5
µm). The pores on nanofiltration membranes are about 0.001µm in size. Nanofiltration is frequently
used for water softening because it removes divalent ions from water. The pores of reverse osmosis
membranes are the tiniest, measuring just 0.0001 micrometres. Due to its capacity to remove
monovalent ions, reverse osmosis is required for the manufacture of drinking water from seawater,
brackish water, or groundwater. In order to protect people from water-borne protozoa like Giardia and
Cryptosporidium, high levels of disinfection or more effective disinfection techniques were required.
Since most pathogens cannot be removed from water by granular filter material alone, disinfection is
a necessary component for most treatment systems, especially those that use surface water. The
primary benefit of using reagent methods to disinfect drinking water is the simplicity of ongoing
evaluation of their efficacy. A centralised water supply system requires that water quality be
monitored using epidemiological indicators at least once every hour. When using reagent disinfection
techniques, the efficacy of water disinfection is assessed by calculating the amount of disinfectant that
is still present. The concentration of the disinfectant, contact duration, temperature, and pH
(depending on the disinfectant) are the primary variables that affect how effectively something is
disinfected. In many industrialised and developing nations, chlorine is the most often used
disinfectant for the treatment of drinking water. Chlorine has a long history of use in water treatment,
and it has been effectively applied to the treatment of both drinking water and sewage. In addition,
chlorine is suggested as a home water treatment solution because it is a cheap and simple disinfectant,
especially in underdeveloped nations. Increased chlorine disinfection at the point of use can decrease
the risk of E. coli-related diarrhoea in children by 29%. However, it has a number of drawbacks,
including a lack of activity against protozoa, a decline in effectiveness, a strong odour, and an
unpleasant taste caused by the presence of organic material in the treated water. Viruses and
bacteriophages are thought to be more resistant to chlorine inactivation than vegetative bacterial cells.
found that Giardia cysts had exhibited a fair amount of chlorine inactivation resistance. One of the
water's most resilient microbes is Cryptosporidium. The presented data show that even after 18 hours
of interaction with 1.05% and 3% chlorine, Cryptosporidium is still alive. While the popularity of
chlorinating drinking water has increased due to worries about potential dangers associated with long-
term intake of chlorinated disinfection by-products. Since monochloramine requires 25 to 100 times
more exposure time than free chlorine to achieve equivalent inactivation, it is regarded as a weaker
biocide than chlorine. Currently, alternative disinfectants including chlorine dioxide, ozone, and UV
radiation are the main focus of many researchers. In water with a pH between 6.0 and 9.0, chlorine
dioxide occurs as an undissociated gas dissolved. It is a potent disinfectant and, under certain
circumstances, it is generally believed that its biocidal efficiency is comparable to or slightly higher
than that of chlorine. Giardia and Cryptosporidium can be effectively disinfected with chlorine
dioxide (cysts and oocysts are inactivated to a degree of about 90%). The disinfectant does, however,
produce by-products including chlorite and chlorate. Additionally, chlorine dioxide costs five to 10
times as much as regular chlorine. In contrast, ozone is a very potent oxidant that is lethal to the
majority of waterborne infections, including certain protozoan cysts like Cryptosporidium. It is
employed to purge organic and inorganic contaminants from water, as well as to enhance flavour and
colour. Ozone offers several benefits, but its application in water treatment is constrained by a number
of drawbacks, including high cost, the necessity for operational and servicing infrastructure, and the
lack of residual protection in the distribution system. According to a different theory, the capacity of
UV light to pass through cell walls and reach the nucleic acids DNA and RNA, the cell's information
centre, causes ultraviolet water-disinfection. DNA is irreversibly damaged by ultraviolet water
contamination, which can inhibit cell replication or even cause cell death. The main benefits of UV
radiation include the fact that it does not require the use of chemical additives, is effective at
inactivating protozoan parasites, only requires a brief period of contact, and leaves no discernible
disinfection by-products. However, its drawbacks include the inability to evaluate the lamp dose in
practise, interference from turbidity, and lack of residual protection in the water distribution system,
as well as variances in efficiency across various UV lamp types and reactor designs. Unfortunately,
neither ultraviolet radiation nor ozonization have a bactericidal aftereffect, so they cannot be used as
independent methods of water disinfection when treating water for utilities, drinking water supplies,
or swimming pools. Additional disinfection techniques include ozonization and ultraviolet irradiation.
They improve the effectiveness of chlorination and minimise the amount of chlorine-containing
chemicals consumed when used in conjunction with it.

Management of Sanitation:

The most crucial method of wastewater reuse in industrialised nations today for ensuring sanitary and
environmental standards is the use of treated wastewater for household, industrial, and agricultural
applications. If wastewater is not properly treated before being discharged to neighbouring rivers or
ponds, wastewater treatment plants may become a source of pollution for drainage areas. In addition,
cysts and oocysts are resistant to standard water disinfection (see preceding section), which makes
them a common presence in treated wastewater. Numerous studies of treatment facilities that simply
performed primary treatment or looked at each treatment separately found low rates of removal
efficiency in the initial phases. Contaminants like fats, oils, sand, gravel, and stones can be easily
gathered and removed as part of the first treatment. The first stage's major objective is to produce a
homogeneous liquid that can be treated biologically. However, some treatment facilities solely use
primary processing, and because basic treatment does not aim to remove parasites, their effectiveness
is quite low. Even after secondary therapy, Giardia cysts and Cryptosporidium oocysts have not been
entirely removed. An investigation of wastewater samples from 12 treatment facilities revealed that
the majority of cysts and oocysts were discovered in the spring and summer. Cysts and oocysts were
present in all samples of treated wastewater (100%) that flowed out of the treatment plants throughout
the year. For these parasites, which underwent primary and secondary treatment procedures, the
average elimination efficiency ranged from 16% to 86% for Cryptosporidium spp. to 90% for Giardia
lamblia. The hygiene and security of drinking and recreational water depend on the proper
management, treatment, and dispersal of human and animal waste. The size of the issue may appear
daunting when considering how much faeces are getting into the environment. The distribution of
toilets varies significantly over the globe. Pit latrines are the primary sanitation method for over 1.84
billion people worldwide. The simplest and least expensive method of better sanitation are pit latrines.
Typically, they consist of a hole in the ground that is round, rectangular or square and covered with a
concrete slab or a floor that has a hole through which faeces fall. Pit latrines typically don't have a
physical barrier, like concrete, between the excrement that's been stored and the ground or soil. More
than two billion people utilise groundwater as a source of drinking water in some nations where pit
latrines are popular. As a result, groundwater contamination from pit latrines poses a risk to human
health on the regional ecological context, in particular the hydrological and soil conditions. The type
of soil, the flow rate and direction of groundwater for both natural and manmade settings, and the
biogeochemical conditions of groundwater all have a role in regulating the distances and rates of
transport of pollutants. Pit troughs' capacity to significantly contaminate groundwater also depends on
societal aspects like toilet usage, toilet density, upkeep, and groundwater pumping. Due to the fact
that pit latrines and groundwater resources are used more frequently in low-income nations, there are
worries that they may have an adverse impact on human health and the environment. Fresh human
faeces from an infected person can contain between 106 and 108 bacteria, 104 protozoan cysts and
oocysts, 106 viral pathogens, and 10-104 helminth eggs per gramme. The location of pollution from
pit latrines is also influenced by the type, design, and construction quality of the toilet. In order to
evaluate the safety of the location of pit latrines and groundwater sources, it is necessary to consider
both ecological and anthropogenic elements. highlighted three crucial elements. First, a study of a few
crucial variables, like the depth of the infiltration layer and the direction of groundwater flow.
Secondly, to lessen the impact on groundwater, alternate sanitation should be developed, such as
raised or levelled pit latrines. Lastly, the use of a complete strategy to address sanitation issues,
combining geotechnology and hydrogeology. The building of toilets must adhere to national
regulations in every nation. For instance, in Haiti, the bottom of the excavation should be at least 1.5
m above the maximum height of the groundwater level, and toilets should be placed at least 30 m
away from any source of drinking water or surface water. Pit latrines should be placed at least 73
metres away from water sources, per South Africa's regulations for groundwater. If there is more than
2 m between the pit latrine and groundwater level, the WHO recommends a minimum risk of
groundwater pollution, provided that the fill rate is less than 50 L/m2/day. Additionally, a
recommended safe lateral distance between pit latrines and wells is 15 metres. However, later and
more cautious suggestions from WaterAid urge keeping toilets and water sources at least 50 metres
apart. The Sphere project proposed a minimum lateral separation of 30 metres (m) between local
sewage systems and water sources. Despite the possibility of groundwater pollution, pit latrines
continue to be a significant approach for improving the conditions of human waste elimination. The
most fundamental method to decrease the prevalence of open defecation and provide access to better
sanitation in low-income nations is this one. Given that 1.13 billion people do not currently have
access to basic sanitation, it is anticipated that the prevalence of pit latrines will rise as more people
attempt to transition from open defecation to basic sanitation. Therefore, significant work is required
to create more dependable yet practical alternatives to pit latrine installation and water supplies. The
proposed regulations must guarantee that groundwater is shielded from pathogen intrusion.

Personal Care:

Education in sanitation and hygiene, a plentiful supply of clean water, sanitary circumstances, and
proper disposal of human and animal waste are the key elements that lessen the relevance and impact
of protozoal infections in the field of public health. In the context of the family, people should be
educated and motivated to modify their hygiene habits. after providing for by maintaining proper
personal hygiene, including washing their hands before preparing and eating food, after using the
restroom, after changing diapers, and before approaching someone who is ill, people can protect
themselves and others against water-related protozoan illnesses. Even if there is a constant supply of
microbiologically healthy water, people might contaminate it at the household level by misusing it. As
a result, the water tanks must be tidy and closed, and regular cleaning and disinfection is required. It is
not permitted to dip one's hands into the water or take a drink straight from the water tank when
collecting or storing water. If at all possible, water tanks should have a short neck and a stopper to
prevent hands from coming into contact with the liquid; otherwise, a ladle or cup must be used to
draw water from the tank. Additionally, it is essential to use all of the water that is available before
fully rinsing the tank with clean water and continuing with the filling process. Additionally, water for
residential use must to be maintained in tanks for the shortest amount of time possible. People should
be responsible for the safety of the water they consume and be aware of how crucial it is to safeguard
the source of the water supply from contamination by pathogenic protozoa when there is a non-
centralized water supply. When installing a hand pump and adequate drainage, people should keep
wells closed. They should also maintain jugs, jars, and other containers used to collect and store water
clean and in clean places. Faeces and sewage must be removed from any sources of water supply, and
toilets must be constructed in accordance with regulations. Finally, a frequent sanitary inspection of
water sources and water quality should be carried out by the general public. Another crucial
component of hygiene in underdeveloped nations is domestic water filtration. There are a few
compact water filtration tools available for use right away. For instance, household filters can purify
modest amounts of water. In this situation, all filters share the requirement that they be used correctly
(i.e., maintained and cleaned on a regular basis). Not all household water filters, meanwhile, can get
rid of parasite protozoa. Boiling water is therefore thought to be the most effective way to ensure that
it is free of biological contaminants. People frequently boil drinking water in many impoverished
nations because they don't trust the quality of the water source or because it's in danger. Water should
be kept at a rolling boil for one minute (three minutes at elevations above 6500 feet) to destroy or
inactivate Giardia and Cryptosporidium. The water should then be allowed to cool, then refrigerated
in a clean, sanitised container with a tight lid. Nevertheless, advising the populace of low-income
developing countries to boil their water every day is not only environmentally unsustainable but also
commercially unprofitable. Therefore, the use of boiling to disinfect drinking water is only advised in
extreme cases, and only those who can afford it should do so. The primary defence against the spread
of the protozoan parasites present in faeces in the home and close proximity to the home is the proper
disposal of human waste, which keeps it away from contact with other people, animals, and flies.
Improved faeces disposal practises can cut the risk of intestinal illnesses by 32.054%. After each
usage, the toilet should be flushed. It should also be routinely brushed with specialised cleaners, then
flushed. Additionally, a derusting solution must be used in the toilet. Regular cleaning with
specialised detergents is required for the surface of the toilet bowl as well as other surfaces that come
into touch with hands, including the edge, toilet seat, lid, and flush handle. It is important to wash the
toilet bowl with a separate towel. The brush and rag must then be thoroughly cleaned, washed with
soap or detergent, and dried. Additionally, the toilet needs to be kept covered to stop flies from
spreading disease. The removal and treatment of human waste is carried out at the "local" level in
regions without centralised sewerage. It is crucial that the land where waste seeps is appropriately
chosen, the toilet is constructed correctly, taking into consideration the distance to water sources and
the depth of the groundwater, and is well maintained (see suggestions in the preceding section).
People who lack access to basic sanitation facilities should quickly bury their waste and refrain from
urinating close to their homes. Additionally, it's crucial to adopt appropriate and secure anus care
techniques. There can be a lot of dangerous protozoa in even a small amount of leftover faeces. Use of
toilet paper or other material, followed by disposal into the toilet bowl or burying it in the ground, is
the best method for caring for the anus following defecation. People in many impoverished nations
utilise leaves, sticks, stones, etc. after defecating. It's crucial in these situations to properly dispose of
these goods, perhaps by burying them underground. If flowing water is used, the anus must be
completely rinsed, followed by a flush, before making sure that no water is left in the toilet bowl or on
the ground. The use of soap after urinating is also strongly advised. Since giardiasis and
cryptosporidiosis are common among children, it is crucial to properly dispose of children's waste in
order to stop the spread of these protozoan infections. It is important to teach young kids how to use a
pot. If toilet paper is not accessible, as can be the case in rural regions, it is necessary to clean the
child's bottom with water from a bucket or under running water so that the rinse water collects in the
pot. This is significant because harmful protozoa may be present in the rinse water. the pot's contents,
the toilet paper, etc. To prevent attracting flies, the pot needs to be cleaned, dried off, and covered. If
kids poop outside of a pot, the waste needs to be removed right away by flushing it down the toilet or
digging it up from the ground. If someone defecates within the home, the area should be cleaned and,
if feasible, disinfected. Additionally, after such hygiene practises with a child, it is vital to wash your
hands. Improved personal hygiene practises are therefore essential for the prevention of giardiasis and
cryptosporidiosis.

Institutional Methodology to Ensure Better Wash:

One of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), often known as the Global Goals, is the
provision of access to clean water and sanitation for all people. SDG 6 includes six technical
goals in the areas of drinking water, sanitation and hygiene, wastewater management, water
efficiency, integrated water resource management, and aquatic environment conservation for
the period up until 2030. The first three of these are worth mentioning. The Sustainable
Development Goal (SDG) 6.1 aims to provide everyone with equitable access to on-site,
readily available, safe drinking water that is uncontaminated by hazardous chemicals and
faeces. Target 6.2 is to eradicate open defecation and ensure that everyone has access to
sufficient and equitable sanitation and hygiene, with a focus on the needs of women, girls,
and people in vulnerable situations. A basic sanitation facility that is not shared with other
houses and where excreta are safely disposed of on-site or treated off-site is required for
access to safely managed sanitation, which is essential. Target 6.3 is to improve water quality
by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping and minimizing release of hazardous chemicals
and materials, halving the proportion of untreated wastewater and substantially increasing
recycling and safe reuse globally Universal SDG targets may only be deemed met when all
population subgroups are included, which necessitates gradual data decomposition by factors such as
income, gender, age, race, ethnicity, migratory status, disability, location, and other factors important
in national settings. The US has instituted a number of organisations, such as the Centres for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC) and the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), which have
tracked water-related disease outbreaks since 1971. Sweden and Japan launched the National
Epidemiological Surveillance of Infection Diseases (NESID) system in 1980 and 1981, respectively.
Australia established the National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS) in 1990. In
2003, the UK's Health Protection Agency (HPA) was established. The Public Health Agency of
Canada (PHAC) was founded in December of 2004. Following the USA, the European Centre for
Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) was established in 2005 by a number of European nations.
Because environmental factors, especially water sources, have an impact on public health, these
organisations keep an eye on them, evaluate their quality, and recommend actions to mitigate any
negative effects. At the government level, environmental and public health conditions are monitored.
The investigation and evaluation of parasite morbidity is one of this activity's most important
components. Information gathering and analysis take place in a variety of departments and research
facilities. Most of these centres can provide pertinent data and documentation on parasitic protozoa
outbreaks. Epidemiological surveillance systems will be helpful in detecting and fighting parasitic
protozoa, which can help to enhance public health, when implemented in developing nations.
Therefore, reliable and economical diagnostic tools must be created, especially in underdeveloped
nations, to identify harmful protozoa. To get additional information on protozoan illnesses, further
research into novel techniques is necessary. Additionally, all nations should adopt a global reporting
standard that will result in standardised databases and effective cooperation in the management of
waterborne pathogenic protozoa.

Discussion:
An overview of the current state of wash-related health issues brought on by parasite protozoa was the
goal of this literature review. Preventing the spread of giardiasis and cryptosporidiosis requires clean
water, proper biowaste disposal, and enhanced hygiene practises. Water supply organisations all
across the world face a severe challenge in protecting drinking water from harmful protozoa.
Although much progress has been made in the field of water filtration, Giardia and Cryptosporidium
continue to be the two most significant water pathogens. For effective management of these parasites,
a thorough understanding of the mechanisms is necessary, and both developing and developed
countries need novel and creative purifying techniques. This can only be accomplished through
comprehensive research that looks at the environmental exposure, sources, concentrations, survival,
and transmission of water-related parasites, as well as the reliability of purification systems in
lowering the risk of protozoa spreading disease through water. The idea of a multiple barrier, which
involves safeguarding the water source (surface and groundwater), optimising water purification
procedures, and maintaining distribution infrastructure, serves as the guiding philosophy for
supplying safe water. In the process of purifying water, a multiple barrier method should also be used.
A lower risk of microbial contamination will be ensured by the treatment of drinking water, which
uses a variety of different disinfectants and filtration technologies to eliminate and inactivate various
microbial pathogens. Giardia and Cryptosporidium outbreaks caused by waterborne and foodborne
water-washed epidemics are preventable, but there is still a need to research new purification
techniques that can more effectively eradicate these organisms. Although it has been demonstrated
that these diseases can be released into recreational water during outbreaks, there are currently no
standards for testing recreational waters for protozoan parasites. Recreational beaches, as opposed to
swimming pools, feature bottom silt that can have 1000 times more bacterial and parasite pollution
indices than the surrounding water. Therefore, it is crucial to carry out parasitological control in
treatment plants and to define guidelines for acceptable cyst and oocyst concentrations based on the
wastewater's intended use. Additionally, in order to avoid or reduce the likelihood of protozoan
parasites spreading, steps should be concentrated on people's hygienic behaviour in addition to
strengthening water supply and sewage infrastructure. People should take personal responsibility for
their health and engage in actions like hand washing, boiling tap water, installing additional water
purification filters, disposing of human waste safely, and receiving health education.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, a systems-level institutional approach to wash is required to address health issues

brought on by parasite protozoa. First and foremost, access to safe drinking water must be ensured
through effective drinking water filtration. Second, to stop parasite protozoa from entering the human
body, personal hygiene is necessary on both a household and individual level. In third, maintaining
proper hygiene can shield our bodies from reinfestations. In order to prevent protozoan parasites in
faeces from contaminating water sources, effective wastewater treatment and excreta disposal in the
home are important. A suitable organisation should keep an eye on this intricate structure. So, in
developing nations, parasitic protozoa water monitoring systems are crucial. This monitoring will be
utilised to evaluate population risk, reliability and effectiveness of a full-scale water treatment system,
as well as to help with the investigation of water-related outbreaks and epidemics. These assessments
will be used to define the necessary treatment course.

Referance:

1. Bartram, J.; Cairncross, S. Hygiene, sanitation, and water: Forgotten foundation of health.
PLoS Med. 2010, 7, e1000367. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

2. Prüss-Üstün, A.; Bos, R.; Gore, F.; Bartram, J. Safer Water, Better Health: Costs, Benefits
and Sustainability of Interventions to Protect and Promote Health; World Health Organization:
Geneva, Switzerland, 2008; 53p.

3. Boschi-Pinto, C.; Velebit, L.; Shibuya, K. Estimating child mortality due to diarrhea in
developing countries.

Bull. World Health Org. 2008, 86, 710–717. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

4. Efstratiou, A.; Ongerth, J.E.; Karanis, P. Waterborne transmission of protozoan parasites:

Review of worldwide outbreaks—An update 2011–2016. Water Res. 2017, 114, 14–22. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]

5. Baldursson, S.; Karanis, P. Waterborne transmission of protozoan parasites: Review of

worldwide outbreaks—An update 2004–2010. Water Res. 2011, 45, 6603–6614. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]

6. Cotruva, J.A.; Durfour, A.; Rees, G.; Bartram, J.; Carr, R.; Cliver, D.O.; Craun, G.F.; Fayer,
R.; Gannon, V.P.J. Waterborne Zoonoses: Identification Causes and Control; World Health
Organization, IWA Publishing: London, UK, 2004; pp. 255–282.

7. Fletcher, S.M.; Stark, D.; Harkness, J.; Ellis, J. Enteric protozoa in the developed world: A
public health perspective. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2012, 25, 420–449. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

8. Mtapuri-Zinyowera, S.; Ruhanya, V.; Midzi, N.; Berejena, C.; Chin’ombe, N.; Nziramasanga,
P.; Nyandoro, G.; Mduluza, T. Human parasitic protozoa in drinking water sources in rural Zimbabwe
and their link to HIV infection. Germs 2014, 4, 86–91. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

9. Putignani, L.; Menichella, D. Global Distribution, Public Health and Clinical Impact of the
Protozoan Pathogen Cryptosporidium. Interdiscip. Perspect. Infect. Dis. 2010, 2010, 753512.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
10. Yang, K.; LeJeune, J.; Alsdorf, D.; Lu, B.; Shum, C.K.; Liang, S. Global Distribution of
Outbreaks of Water-Associated Infectious Diseases. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2012, 6, e1483.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

11. Cairncross, S.; Feachem, R.G. Environmental Health Engineering in the Tropics: An
Introductory Text, 2nd ed.;

John & Wiley Sons: Chichester, UK, 1983; 283p.

12. Cox, F.E.G. History of human parasitology. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2002, 15, 595–612.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

13. Yaeger, R.G. Protozoa: Structure, Classification, Growth, and Development. In Medical
Microbiology, 4th ed.; Baron, S., Ed.; University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston: Galveston,
TX, USA, 1996.

14. Lane, S.; Lloyd, D. Current trends in research into the waterborne parasite Giardia. Crit. Rev.
Microbiol. 2002,

28, 123–147. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

15. Squire, S.A.; Ryan, U. Cryptosporidium and Giardia in Africa: Current and future challenges.
Parasites Vectors

2017, 10, 195. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

16. Huang, D.B.; White, A.C. An updated review on Cryptosporidium and Giardia. Gastroenterol.
Clin. N. Am.

2006, 35, 291–314. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

17. Edberg, S.C.; Rice, E.W.; Karlin, R.J.; Allen, M.J. Escherichia coli: The best biological
drinking water indicator for public health protection. J. Appl. Microbiol. Symp. Suppl. 2000, 88,
106S–116S. [CrossRef]

18. Enriquez, C.; Nwachuku, N.; Gerba, C.P. Direct exposure to animal enteric pathogens. Rev.
Environ. Health

2001, 16, 117–131. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

19. Hambidge, A. Reviewing efficacy of alternative water treatment techniques. Health Estate
2001, 55, 23–25. [PubMed]

20. Li, J.W.; Xin, Z.T.; Wang, X.W.; Zheng, J.L.; Chao, F.H. Mechanisms of inactivation of
hepatitis A virus by chlorine. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2002, 68, 4951–4955. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
21. Ashbolt, N.J. Microbial contamination of drinking water and disease outcomes in developing
regions.

Toxicology 2004, 198, 229–238. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

22. Smith, H.V. Detection of parasites in the environment. Parasitology 1998, 117, 113S–141S.
[CrossRef]

23. Giardiasis and Cryptosporidiosis. Available online:

http://wildlifedisease.unbc.ca/giardia_cryptosporidium. htm (accessed on 16 December 2017).

24. Esch, K.J.; Petersen, C.A. Transmission and Epidemiology of Zoonotic Protozoal Diseases of
Companion Animals. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2013, 26, 58–85. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

25. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Cryptosporidiosis. Available online:
https://www.cdc.gov/ dpdx/cryptosporidiosis/index.html (accessed on 27 November 2017).

26. Borowski, H.; Clode, P.L.; Thompson, R.C.A. Active invasion and/or encapsulation? A
reappraisal of host-cell parasitism by Cryptosporidium. Trends Parasitol. 2008, 24, 509–516.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

27. Karanis, P.; Kourenti, C.; Smith, H. Waterborne transmission of protozoan parasites: A
worldwide review of outbreaks and lessons learnt. J. Water Health 2007, 5, 1–38. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]

28. Hashimoto, A.; Kunikane, S.; Hirata, T. Prevalence of Cryptosporidium oocysts and Giardia
cysts in the

drinking water supply in Japan. Water Res. 2002, 36, 519–526. [CrossRef]

29. Chauret, C.P.; Radziminski, C.Z.; Lepuil, M.; Creason, R.; Andrews, R.C. Chlorine dioxide
inactivation of Cryptosporidium parvum oocysts and bacterial spore indicators. Appl. Environ.
Microbiol. 2001, 67, 2993–3001. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

30. Chistenko, G.N. Kriptosporidioz [Cryptosporidiosis]. Voyennaya Med. [Milit. Med.] 2011, 2,
131–134. Available online: https://www.bsmu.by/files/6db97a06df56fe3111efbd4a8d09710f/
(accessed on 10 February 2018).

31. Giardia and Drinking Water from Private Wells. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/private/wells/disease/giardia.html
(accessed on 27 November 2017).

32. Mazayev, V.T.; Korolev, A.A.; Shlepnina, T.G. Kommunal’naya Gigiyena (Municipal
Hygiene); GEOTAR-MED Publication: Moscow, Russia, 2005; pp. 59–60.
33. Waterborne Disease and Outbreak Surveillance System. Available online:
https://www.cdc.gov/ healthywater/surveillance (accessed on 29 May 2017).

34. Betancourt, W.Q.; Rose, J.B. Drinking water treatment processes for removal of
Cryptosporidium and Giardia.

Vet. Parasitol. 2004, 126, 219–234. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

35. Gregory, R.; Zabel, T.F.; Edzwald, J.K. Sedimentation and flotation. In Water Quality and
Treatment; McGraw Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1999.

36. Plummer, J.D.; Edzwald, J.K.; Kelley, M.B. Removing Cryptosporidium by dissolved air-
flotation. J. AWWA

1995, 87, 85–95. [CrossRef]

37. States, S.M.; Sykora, J.; Stadterman, K.; Wright, D.; Baldizar, J.; Conley, L. Sources,
occurrence, and drinking water treatment removal of Cryptosporidium and Giardia in the Allegheny
River. In Proceedings of the 1995 Water Quality Technology Conference, New Orleans, LA, USA,
12–16 November 1995; AWWA: Denver, CO, USA, 1995; pp. 1587–1601.