4.5 Article

Potential health risk of arsenic and cadmium in groundwater near Xiangjiang River, China: a case study for risk assessment and management of toxic substances

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT
Volume 175, Issue 1-4, Pages 167-173

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10661-010-1503-7

Keywords

Drinking water; Human health risk assessment; Risk management; Maximum Permissible Concentration (MPC); Toxic substance

Funding

  1. China National Funds for Distinguished Young Scientists [50925417]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [50830301]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

As part of our efforts to find effective methods to the drinking water risk management, the health risk assessment of arsenic and cadmium in groundwater near Xiangjiang River was analyzed. The results suggest that although the arsenic and cadmium concentrations in 97% of groundwater sources are less than the requirement of Water Quality Standards for Drinking Water (GB5749-2006) in China, the residents served by almost all of the investigated centralized drinking water sources have a significant potential health risk by consumption, especially cancer risk. It is justified through analyses that risk assessment is an effective tool for risk management, and the maximum permissible concentration of arsenic and cadmium in drinking water (0.01 and 0.005 mg L-1, respectively) is suitable for China at present, considering the current economic status of China. Risk managers develop cleanup standards designed to protect against all possible adverse effects, which should take into account highly exposed individuals, effects of mixtures of toxic substances, attendant uncertainties, and other factors such as site-specific (or generic) criteria, technical feasibility, cost-benefit analyses, and sociopolitical concerns.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available