4.3 Article

The level and distribution of heavy metals and changes in oxidative stress indices in humans from Lahore district, Pakistan

期刊

HUMAN & EXPERIMENTAL TOXICOLOGY
卷 35, 期 1, 页码 78-90

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0960327115578063

关键词

Toxic metals; environmental contamination; human exposure; Pakistan; antioxidants enzymes

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Human biomonitoring is a well-recognized tool for estimating the exposure of humans to environmental pollutants. However, heavy metals' pollution from anthropogenic origin is a cause for concern because of its potential accumulation in the environment and living organisms, leading to long-term toxic effects. This study was aimed to assess the concentrations of cadmium (Cd), chromium (Cr), lead (Pb), copper (Cu), nickel (Ni), cobalt (Co), manganese (Mn), iron (Fe), and zinc (Zn) in human biological samples (urine, whole blood, hair, and nails) and antioxidant response in blood samples from 48 individuals exposed to heavy metals and to compare them with different age classes and sites. The results indicated that there were metal-specific differences in concentration in exposure groups among the studied sites. The concentration of heavy metals in blood samples showed the following order : Pb > Cd > Ni > Co > Cr. In urine samples, the order was Cu > Pb > Cr > Ni > Co > Cd; in nails samples, the order was Pb > Ni > Cr > Co > Cd > Mn; and in hair samples, the trend was Pb > Ni > Cr > Mn > Cd > Co. A significant (p > 0.05) decrease in antioxidants enzymes activity was observed with increase in heavy metals concentrations. This is the first study reporting biological evidence of altered toxic metals' concentration in humans in Lahore, Pakistan, due to environmental exposure. Further research, including risk analysis studies, food chain contamination, and epidemiological and clinical investigations, are needed to assess optimal levels for dietary exposure in the study area and associated adverse health outcomes.

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

4.3
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