4.8 Article

Sources of Blood Lead Exposure in Rural Bangladesh

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 53, 期 19, 页码 11429-11436

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.9b00744

关键词

-

资金

  1. Stanford University's Woods Institute
  2. United States Agency for International Development (USAID)
  3. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation [OPPGD759]
  4. Stanford's Center for South Asia
  5. Stanford's Emmett Interdisciplinary Program in Environment and Resources

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Lead (Pb) exposure is a major public health problem worldwide. Although high levels of Pb in blood in Bangladesh have been documented, the dominant Pb sources contributing to human exposure in rural Bangladesh have not been determined. Here, we first obtained blood from pregnant women from three rural Bangladeshi districts who were previously assessed by a case-control and sampling study, and we then conducted semistructured in-depth interviews to understand Pb exposure behavior and finally collected samples of the suspected Pb sources. We measured the Pb isotopic composition of both potential Pb sources and 45 blood samples in order to understand which of three sources predominate: (1) food from Pb-soldered cans, (2) turmeric, or (3) geophagous materials (clay, soil, or ash). The Pb isotope ratios of the three sources are distinct (p = 0.0001) and blood isotope ratios are most similar to turmeric. Elevated lead and chromium (Cr) concentrations in turmeric and a yellow pigment used in turmeric processing are consistent with reported consumption behavior that indicated turmeric as a primary contributor to blood Pb. The Pb isotopic composition analyses combined with a case-control and sampling approach provides evidence that turmeric adulterated with the yellow Pb-bearing pigment is the main Pb exposure source in these districts and illustrates the need to assess drivers and practices of turmeric adulteration, as well as the prevalence of adulteration across South Asia.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据