Rotating biological contactors for wastewater treatment - A review

Rotating biological contactors (RBCs) for wastewater treatment began in the 1970s. Removal of organic matter has been targeted within organic loading rates of up to 120 g m−2 d−1 with an optimum at around 15 g m−2 d−1 for combined BOD and ammonia removal. Full nitrification is achievable under appropriate process conditions with oxidation rates of up to 6 g m−2 d−1 reported for municipal wastewater. The RBC process has been adapted for denitrification with reported removal rates of up to 14 g m−2 d−1 with nitrogen rich wastewaters. Different media types can be used to improve organic/nitrogen loading rates through selecting for different bacterial groups. The RBC has been applied with only limited success for enhanced biological phosphorus removal and attained up to 70% total phosphorus removal. Compared to other biofilm processes, RBCs had 35% lower energy costs than trickling filters but higher demand than wetland systems. However, the land footprint for the same treatment is lower than these alternatives. The RBC process has been used for removal of priority pollutants such as pharmaceuticals and personal care products. The RBC system has been shown to eliminate 99% of faecal coliforms and the majority of other wastewater pathogens. Novel RBC reactors include systems for energy generation such as algae, methane production and microbial fuel cells for direct current generation. Issues such as scale up remain challenging for the future application of RBC technology and topics such as phosphorus removal and denitrification still require further research. High volumetric removal rate, solids retention, low footprint, hydraulic residence times are characteristics of RBCs. The RBC is therefore an ideal candidate for hybrid processes for upgrading works maximising efficiency of existing infrastructure and minimising energy consumption for nutrient removal. This review will provide a link between disciplines and discuss recent developments in RBC research and comparison of recent process designs are provided (Section 2). The microbial features of the RBC biofilm are highlighted (Section 3) and topics such as biological nitrogen removal and priority pollutant remediation are discussed (Sections 4 and 5). Developments in kinetics and modelling are highlighted (Section 6) and future research themes are mentioned

The Role of High Technology In Training; Beyond Wilderness; Document Design from 1980 to 1989

Reviews of The Role of High Technology in Training, by Daniel Bissonnet; Beyond Wilderness, Aperture; Document Design from 1980 to 1989: Challenges That Remain, by Karen A. Schriver

Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults: systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: To update a 2005 Cochrane review that assessed the effects of neuraminidase inhibitors in preventing or ameliorating the symptoms of influenza, the transmission of influenza, and complications from influenza in healthy adults, and to estimate the frequency of adverse effects. Search strategy: An updated search of the Cochrane central register of controlled trials (Cochrane Library 2009, issue 2), which contains the Acute Respiratory Infections Group’s specialised register, Medline (1950-Aug 2009), Embase (1980-Aug 2009), and post-marketing pharmacovigilance data and comparative safety cohorts. Selection criteria: Randomised placebo controlled studies of neuraminidase inhibitors in otherwise healthy adults exposed to naturally occurring influenza. Main outcome measures: Duration and incidence of symptoms; incidence of lower respiratory tract infections, or their proxies; and adverse events. Data extraction: Two reviewers applied inclusion criteria, assessed trial quality, and extracted data. Data analysis: Comparisons were structured into prophylaxis, treatment, and adverse events, with further subdivision by outcome and dose. Results: 20 trials were included: four on prophylaxis, 12 on treatment, and four on postexposure prophylaxis. For prophylaxis, neuraminidase inhibitors had no effect against influenza-like illness or asymptomatic influenza. The efficacy of oral oseltamivir against symptomatic laboratory confirmed influenza was 61% (risk ratio 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.18 to 0.85) at 75 mg daily and 73% (0.27, 0.11 to 0.67) at 150 mg daily. Inhaled zanamivir 10 mg daily was 62% efficacious (0.38, 0.17 to 0.85). Oseltamivir for postexposure prophylaxis had an efficacy of 58% (95% confidence interval 15% to 79%) and 84% (49% to 95%) in two trials of households. Zanamivir performed similarly. The hazard ratios for time to alleviation of influenza-like illness symptoms were in favour of treatment: 1.20 (95% confidence interval 1.06 to 1.35) for oseltamivir and 1.24 (1.13 to 1.36) for zanamivir. Eight unpublished studies on complications were ineligible and therefore excluded. The remaining evidence suggests oseltamivir did not reduce influenza related lower respiratory tract complications (risk ratio 0.55, 95% confidence interval 0.22 to 1.35). From trial evidence, oseltamivir induced nausea (odds ratio 1.79, 95% confidence interval 1.10 to 2.93). Evidence of rarer adverse events from pharmacovigilance was of poor quality or possibly under-reported. Conclusion: Neuraminidase inhibitors have modest effectiveness against the symptoms of influenza in otherwise healthy adults. The drugs are effective postexposure against laboratory confirmed influenza, but this is a small component of influenza-like illness, so for this outcome neuraminidase inhibitors are not effective. Neuraminidase inhibitors might be regarded as optional for reducing the symptoms of seasonal influenza. Paucity of good data has undermined previous findings for oseltamivir’s prevention of complications from influenza. Independent randomised trials to resolve these uncertainties are needed

Regulators, Pivotal Clinical Trials, and Drug Regulation in the Age of COVID-19

Medicine regulators rely on pivotal clinical trials to make decisions about approving a new drug, but little is known about how they judge whether pivotal trials justify the approval of new drugs. We explore this issue by looking at the positions of 3 major regulators: the European Medicines Agency, Food and Drug Administration, and Health Canada. Here we report their views and the implications of those views for the approval process. On various points, the 3 regulators are ambiguous, consistent, and demonstrate flexibility. The range of views may well reflect different regulatory cultures. Although clinical trial information from pivotal trials is becoming more available, regulators are still reluctant to provide detailed information about how that information is interpreted. As medicines and vaccines come up for approval for treatment of COVID-19, transparency in how pivotal trials are interpreted will be critical in determining how these treatments should be used

The effect of high hydraulic loading rate on the removal efficiency of a quadruple media filter for tertiary wastewater treatment

It is well known that filtration removal efficiency falls with an increase in flow rate; however, there is limited supporting experimental data on how removal efficiency changes for filters with multiple layers of media and for wastewater filtration, a practice that is becoming more common. Furthermore, information is not available on the characteristics of particles that are removed at different flow rates. Here, a quadruple media filter was operated at hydraulic loading rates (HLRs) between 5 and 60 mh−1 with subsequent measurement of total suspended solids, turbidity and particle size distribution (PSD). Samples were collected from the filter influent, effluent and also from between media layers. Pressure changes across the filter layers were also measured. The solids removal efficiency of the filter varied inversely with the increase in filtration rate. However, the multiple media layers reduced the negative impact of increased HLR in comparison to a single media filter. High filtration rates were shown to transport solids, such that particle retention and headloss development was distributed across the entire depth of the multi-media filter. There was also a progressive decrease in the suspension particle size leaving each of the filter layers. The particle hydrodynamic force simulation was consistent with the changes in measured PSD through the filter layers

Regulators, Pivotal Clinical Trials, and Drug Regulation in the Age of COVID-19

Medicine regulators rely on pivotal clinical trials to make decisions about approving a new drug, but little is known about how they judge whether pivotal trials justify the approval of new drugs. We explore this issue by looking at the positions of 3 major regulators: the European Medicines Agency, Food and Drug Administration, and Health Canada. Here we report their views and the implications of those views for the approval process. On various points, the 3 regulators are ambiguous, consistent, and demonstrate flexibility. The range of views may well reflect different regulatory cultures. Although clinical trial information from pivotal trials is becoming more available, regulators are still reluctant to provide detailed information about how that information is interpreted. As medicines and vaccines come up for approval for treatment of COVID-19, transparency in how pivotal trials are interpreted will be critical in determining how these treatments should be used