Ganga-Meghna Brahmaputra || West Bengal || Bangladesh || Middle Ganga Plain, Bihar || Uttarpradesh
Jharkhand || North-East Hilly States || Rajnandgaon, Chattisgarh || Behala, Kolkata, WB || As toxicity- Homeopathic Treatment
Effectiveness & Reliability - As Field Testing Kits || Utility Of Treatment Plant
Causes, Effects & Remedies - Groundwater As Calamity || References

Our study on
EFFECTIVENESS AND RELIABILITY OF ARSENIC FIELD
TESTING KITS : ARE THE MILLION DOLLAR SCREENING PROJECTS EFFECTIVE OR NOT?

Reported work done by SOES


The exposure of millions to arsenic contaminated water from hand tube wells is a major concern in many Asiatic countries. Field kits are currently used to classify tube wells as delivering arsenic below 50 Ìg/L (the recommended limit in developing countries) as safe, painted green or above 50 Ìg/L, unsafe and painted red. More than 1.3 million tube wells in Bangladesh alone have been tested by field kits. A few million U.S. dollars have already been spent and millions are waiting for the ongoing projects. However, the reliability of the data generated through field kits is now being questioned. Samples from 290 wells were tested by field kits and by a reliable laboratory technique to ascertain the reliability of field kits. False negatives were as high as 68% and false positives up to 35%. A statistical analysis of data from 240 and 394 other wells yielded similar rates. We then analyzed 2866 samples from previously labeled wells and found 44.9% mislabeling in the lower range (<50 mg/L) although mislabeling was considerably reduced in the higher range. Variation of analytical results due to analysts and replicates were pointed out adopting analysis of variance (ANOVA) technique. Millions of dollars are being spent without scientific validation of the field kit method. Facts and figures demand improved, environmentally friendly laboratory techniques to produce reliable data.

Effectiveness and Reliability of Arsenic Field Testing Kits: Million Dollar Screening Projects Effective or Not! Dipankar Chakraborti, Mohammad Mahmudur Rahman, Debapriyo Mukherjee, Mrinal Kumar Sengupta, Uttam Kumar Chowdhury, Dilip Lodh, Bhajan Kumar Biswas, Chitta Ranjan Chanda, Shibtosh Roy, Md. Selim, Quazi Quamruzzaman, Abul Hasnat Milton, S. M. Shahidullah, Md. Tofizur Rahman. Environmental Science & Technology, 2002, 36, 5385-5394.

Top