Dear Editor,
In the recent article, “A New Phase for CYA” (Oct. 7, 2019), the author focuses on one side of the debate, while only mentioning that not all experts agree. In response, we wanted to offer the readership broader context.
First, the assertions quoted with respect to CYA and algae are unsubstantiated anecdotes not supported by the data. Every service professional has a story of a pool at one time that had a difficult algae problem. But basing maintenance practices on conjecture, rather than science, is not where we should be as an industry.
Second, our industry is small. There are only a handful of technical experts in any given field. Therefore, it is not hard for singular points of view to dominate the dialogue. As a recognized expert in microbiology and recreational water illnesses, I strongly disagree with multiple interpretations and conclusions proposed from the publication coming out of the CMAHC Ad Hoc Committee.
Third, yet another season has gone by in which there was no reported recreational water illness (RWI) epidemics linked to CYA in commercial pools. The fact is, the risk of getting ill from swimming in a properly maintained swimming pool according to historical practices, regardless of the CYA level, is near zero. This is what CDC data shows. In the 15 years between 2000 and 2014, there were only 1,899 non-crypto cases of illness attributed to swimming. Every single one of these illnesses was caused by free chlorine levels being allowed to drop below the standard of 1 ppm. CYA was not a factor in these reported illnesses.
Perhaps our focus would be better served addressing practices to ensure free chlorine is easier to maintain and studying opportunities that truly improve public health.
Roy D. Vore, Ph.D.
Technology Manager
BioLab - A KIK Custom Products Company
