| Literature DB >> 29360747 |
Dipankar Chakraborti1, Sushant K Singh2, Mohammad Mahmudur Rahman3, Rathindra Nath Dutta4, Subhas Chandra Mukherjee5, Shyamapada Pati6, Probir Bijoy Kar7.
Abstract
This study highlights the severity of arsenic contamination in the Ganga River basin (GRB), which encompasses significant geographic portions of India, Bangladesh, Nepal, and Tibet. The entire GRB experiences elevated levels of arsenic in the groundwater (up to 4730 µg/L), irrigation water (~1000 µg/L), and in food materials (up to 3947 µg/kg), all exceeding the World Health Organization's standards for drinking water, the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization's standard for irrigation water (100 µg/L), and the Chinese Ministry of Health's standard for food in South Asia (0.15 mg/kg), respectively. Several individuals demonstrated dermal, neurological, reproductive, cognitive, and cancerous effects; many children have been diagnosed with a range of arsenicosis symptoms, and numerous arsenic-induced deaths of youthful victims are reported in the GRB. Victims of arsenic exposure face critical social challenges in the form of social isolation and hatred by their respective communities. Reluctance to establish arsenic standards and unsustainable arsenic mitigation programs have aggravated the arsenic calamity in the GRB and put millions of lives in danger. This alarming situation resembles a ticking time bomb. We feel that after 29 years of arsenic research in the GRB, we have seen the tip of the iceberg with respect to the actual magnitude of the catastrophe; thus, a reduced arsenic standard for drinking water, testing all available drinking water sources, and sustainable and cost-effective arsenic mitigation programs that include the participation of the people are urgently needed.Entities:
Keywords: Ganga River basin; arsenic; cancerous; drinking water; health effects; mitigation; social issues
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29360747 PMCID: PMC5858255 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15020180
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Current status of groundwater arsenic contamination in the GRB.
Figure 2Different skin symptoms due to arsenic toxicity: (a) diffuse melanosis; (b) spotted melanosis; (c) leucomelanosis; (d) tongue melanosis; (e) diffused and nodular keratosis on the palm; (f) spotted keratosis on the sole; and (g) dorsal keratosis.
Figure 3Patients suffering from arsenical keratosis, affected by pre-malignancy.
Figure 4Common dermatological features due to arsenicosis among surveyed children of Bihar, India. Note: DMT: Diffuse Melanosis on Trunk; SMT: Spotted Melanosis on Trunk; DMP: Diffuse Melanosis on Palm; SKP: Spotted Keratosis on Palm; WBM: Whole Body Melanosis; SKS: Spotted Keratosis on Sole; SMP: Spotted Melanosis on Palm; DKS: Diffuse Keratosis on Sole; DKP: Diffuse Keratosis on Palm; LEUCO: Leuco Melanosis; DORSUL: Dorsal Keratosis.
Figure 5A group of children suffering from arsenical skin lesions in Bangladesh.
Distribution of arsenic in water from irrigated tube wells in Deganga block, North 24 Parganas, West Bengal, India.
| Total No. of Irrigated Tube Wells | Total No. of Irrigated Tube Wells Analyzed | No. of Water Samples Having Arsenic (μg/L) | Distribution of No. of Samples in Different Concentration Range (μg/L) of Arsenic | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| >10 | >50 | <10 | 10–50 | 51–99 | 100–299 | 300–499 | 500–699 | 700–1000 | >1000 | ||
| 3200 | 597 | 574 | 234 | 23 | 339 | 118 | 98 | 11 | 5 | 2 | -- |
Figure 6(a) Susanta Roy; (b) Makhan Pal; (c) Bipasha Bhowmik and her son and (d) a lady in a village Godagari in Murshidabad.
Figure 7Malnutrition.