National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

PAPERBACK
price:$66.50
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Global Issues in Water, Sanitation, and Health: Workshop Summary (2009)
Board on Global Health (BGH)

Citation Manager

. "4 Addressing Risk for Waterborne Disease." Global Issues in Water, Sanitation, and Health: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2009.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
266
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Global Issues in Water, Sanitation, and Health: Workshop Summary

BOX 4-5

Basic and Behavioral Science to Reduce Arsenic Exposures

Dr. Joseph Graziano and his colleagues have worked over many years to understand the dose-response relationships between exposure to arsenic and human disease. It is estimated that between 35 and 77 million people are at risk of drinking arsenic-contaminated water in Bangladesh alone (Khan et al., 1997). Over long periods of time, such consumption leads to skin lesions, cancer, and in some cases death.

Working in a 25 km2 region in Bangladesh, the Graziano team blends a spectrum of disciplines, including environmental health, geochemistry, hydrology, and social science. This interdisciplinary approach grew naturally due to a number of factors, one of which was the startling discovery that tube wells put in place in the 1970s led to unhealthy levels of arsenic in drinking water over much of Bangladesh and South Asia. With accomplishments in lead toxicology already, Dr. Graziano turned attention to the issue of arsenic and manganese in drinking water. Basic research led to discoveries about the cellular mechanisms of toxicity and interventions aimed at reducing impact of arsenic on specific subsets of individuals.

In 2000, Graziano and colleagues van Geen and Ahsan expanded their studies to try to understand more fully water usage patterns and preferences for mitigation should local wells be found to exceed accepted limits of arsenic (see Mead, 2005, for overview). With help from local villagers, handheld Global Positioning System devices were used to map the location of each well in an individual village. Later, 12,000 village residents were recruited for a study to determine arsenic levels in urine compared to that found in wells. The team determined that high-arsenic wells and low-arsenic wells could be found in the same village, and the distribution of arsenic in one village did not necessarily correlate with that in the next. This finding suggests that mitigation strategies should be tailored at the subvillage level.

More recent work has shown that, even when presented with information on the health impacts of arsenic, other factors come into play in decisions about whether to use water from high- or low-arsenic wells. Distance to the low-arsenic well appears to be one of the factors involved: if the distance is too far, some will choose to use water from the high-arsenic well over the low-arsenic well.

In terms of scale-up and long-term adoption of the interventions, both examples illustrate the challenges in moving from a basic research understanding of a problem to a populations-based intervention strategy. In the case of the folded sari intervention, despite its clear effectiveness in filtering out the cholera vector, and demonstrated reduction in illness after filtering, uptake of the intervention was sustainable in that filtration continued after the project was completed, but the details, namely, the number of folds effective for filtering out the plankton were not adhered to in every case. Similarly, there was a lack of permanent switching to the use of low-arsenic wells. Two challenges present themselves. First, the

Page
266