Content uploaded by Hardev Singh Virk
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Hardev Singh Virk on Jun 25, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
RESEARCH ARTICLES
CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 126, NO. 12, 25 JUNE 2024
1495
*e
-mail: hardevsingh.virk@gmail.com
Arsenic contamination in groundwater of the
Majha belt of Punjab and its probable
carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic health
hazards
Hardev Singh Virk*
Sri Guru Granth Sahib World University, Fatehgarh Sahib 140 406, India
Arsenic is widespread in groundwater in India. High
levels of arsenic in the three districts of Amritsar,
Gurdaspur and Tarn Taran (also called Majha belt)
have caused a crisis in Punjab. According to the Indian
Council of Agriculture Research report, 13 districts of
Punjab have arsenic content beyond the safety limit.
This study aims to estimate probable health hazards
due to ingestion of water with high levels of arsenic in
the groundwater of Majha belt. Analysis of ground-
water samples done using inductively coupled plasma
mass spectrometry were collected from the Department
of Water Supply and Sanitation, Government of Punjab,
Mohali. The highest arsenic contamination of 111 ppb
was found in the groundwater of Amritsar district, fol-
lowed by Gurdaspur and Tarn Taran districts. The ave-
rage value of hazard quotient (HQ) for children and
adults in Amritsar district is estimated to be 11.13 and
8.0 respectively. HQ values for all the 650 habitations
surveyed in the Majha belt of Punjab are greater than
1, which is a matter of concern because of high-risk
potential for developing adverse carcinogenic and non-
carcinogenic health hazards. The predicted values for
cancer induction in children and adults of Amritsar
district are 500 and 360 per million respectively. Miti-
gation of arsenic in groundwater is an urgent need in
the Majha belt of Punjab.
Keywords: Arsenic, cancer risk, groundwater, health
hazards, mitigation.
ARSENIC occurrence and distribution in groundwater of
different states of India (Figure 1) have been of wide in-
terest since the 1980s (refs 1–3). We have previously stud-
ied groundwater contamination caused by uranium and
other heavy metals4–8. Health risk analysis due to fluoride
and arsenic in the groundwater of Patiala and Roopnagar
districts respectively, has been reported recently9,10. This
study focuses on arsenic (As) contamination of groundwater
and its probable carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic health
hazards in the three districts of Majha belt of Punjab,
India (Figure 2).
An extensive study of arsenic contamination in ground-
water of Indian and Pakistani Punjab was undertaken by
the scientists of both countries in a collaborative research
project funded by Columbia University, New York, USA11.
However, there is no epidemiological study on health haz-
ards of arsenic in the Majha belt of Punjab. To date, the
source of arsenic contamination in Punjab groundwater is
uncertain. We5,7 along with other researchers12–14 have re-
ported high levels of arsenic beyond the permissible limit
fixed by WHO (10 ppb) in groundwater of Punjab.
Arsenic is widely distributed as a metalloid in the envi-
ronment (soil, water, air and rocks). It possesses charac-
teristics of both a metal and a non-metal. Inorganic arsenic
is the most prevalent in nature, and its high toxicity is the
cause of major health hazards. It can react with oxygen or
other molecules in the air, water or soil. It forms various
Figure 1. Map showing locations of arsenic contaminated groundwater
in different states of India1.
RESEARCH ARTICLES
CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 126, NO. 12, 25 JUNE 2024
1496
Figure 2. Map showing districts of Amritsar, Gurdaspur and Tarn Taran in the Majha belt of Punjab, India.
compounds15 by reaction with oxygen in the environment;
trivalent arsenite and pentavalent arsenate are most pre-
dominant among these.
In several countries of the world, viz. Argentina, Aus-
tralia, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Chile, China, Hungary, India,
Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Mexico, Myanmar,
Nepal, Pakistan, Peru, Thailand, United States and Viet-
nam16, arsenic contamination higher than the WHO limit
(30 ppb) has been detected in the groundwater. A limit of
10 ppb (1 ppb = 1 µg/l)17 was fixed in 2016 by the US En-
vironmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the WHO for
arsenic in drinking water. Exposure to arsenic in drinking
water over long periods poses a great risk to human health18.
Arsenic caused mass poisoning of a population in Bangla-
desh due to groundwater contamination with naturally occur-
ring inorganic As19 in groundwater. An estimated 160
million people are living in regions where arsenic levels in
drinking water20 are known to be higher than WHO limit.
The physical characteristics of arsenic make it difficult to
be observed in environment, especially when ingested
through drinking water.
Reviews of carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic health
effects of arsenic have been published earlier20–22. Arsenic
ingestion has been associated with several types of can-
cers, including skin and several other organs, including
bladder, kidney, liver, prostate and lung23–27. In addition to
several types of cancers, arsenic-related diseases include
several other diseases and neuropathies28–31. A daily con-
sumption of 1.6 litres of water with inorganic arsenic con-
tamination of 50 µg/l has been estimated to cause cancer
with a probability of 21/1000 (ref. 32).
Evidence of carcinogenicity of arsenic in humans has
been confirmed. The International Agency for Research on
Cancer (IARC) has classified arsenic as the number one
human carcinogen. Animal models fail to replicate the obser-
ved effects of arsenic-related carcinogenicity33, hampering
the progress in the field of cancer research.
Materials and methods
Geographical location
Punjab is situated in the northern part of India between lat.
29.30°N to 32.32°N and long. 73.55°E to 76.50°E. Malwa
Majha, and Doaba constitute three geographical entities in
Punjab, with natural boundaries created by rivers Sutlej
and Beas. These rivers are the primary freshwater sources
in Punjab. Himachal Pradesh and Haryana states are on
the north and east respectively, and Rajasthan in the south
of Punjab. Pakistan forms an international boundary on
the western side.
The groundwater conditions of recharge are influenced
by soil characteristics of the region. Surface contaminants
affect the quality of water at a higher rate if recharge rate
is higher. The groundwater level in various districts of
Punjab is falling rapidly due to the overexploitation and is
recorded beyond 60 mbgl (metre below ground level)34.
Geomorphology and soil types of Majha belt
The geographical location, geomorphology, and nature of
soil of three districts of Amritsar, Gurdaspur and Tarn
Taran of Majha belt of Punjab have been described by us
in a recent study5. The major portion of the Majha belt
constitutes the Indo-Gangetic alluvial plains, which are
RESEARCH ARTICLES
CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 126, NO. 12, 25 JUNE 2024
1497
deposited by the rivers Ravi and Beas and their tributaries.
Soils in the Majha belt vary from coarse loamy to calcare-
ous soils in the western part, but in the central part, they
are fine loamy, calcareous and well drained. Gurdaspur
district can be divided into three geomorphological regions,
i.e. hilly area, piedmont zone and alluvial plain. Approxi-
mately 86% of the study area is predominantly used for
intensive agriculture35.
Sample collection and analysis
Standard protocol was used for sample collection and
analysis as described by the author36. Arsenic data used
for our investigation is derived from Annual Water Quality
Report of DWSS37 for 2021–22. The process used for col-
lection, processing, and analysing the samples in the labo-
ratories of the DWSS, based in SAS Nagar (Mohali), Punjab,
has been accredited by the National Board for Accredita-
tion of Testing and Calibration Laboratories (NABL). The
accreditation is renewed every two years. The calibration
of the Agilent 7700 series inductively coupled plasma mass
spectrometry used for sample analysis was done using cer-
tified reference material provided by the National Institute
of Standards and Technology (NIST), USA. The correlation
coefficient of the linear calibration curve (R2) is ≥0.999.
The relative standard deviation (RSD) was found to be
<4%. We have been using the DWSS facility for heavy
metal analysis since 2016 and have published more than
two dozen papers.
Carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic health
hazards of arsenic
Arsenic contamination in groundwater has added signifi-
cance in the Majha belt of Punjab due to its probable
health hazards. Arsenic investigation in groundwater and
canal waters in Majha belt of Punjab was undertaken by
Punjab Agriculture University (PAU) scientists12 before
anyone else. The Indian Council of Agriculture Research
(ICAR) reported high arsenic beyond WHO limit (30 ppb)
in groundwater of 13 districts of Punjab38. There is an urgent
need to undertake epidemiological investigations to study
the health hazards of arsenic in groundwater on the popu-
lation of Punjab.
Arsenic dissolved in water is toxic and can lead to several
health problems. Tseng Multistage Model39 based on an
epidemiological study has been used to estimate the risk
of cancer from arsenic in drinking water. Long-term expo-
sure to arsenic in drinking water, beyond 0.01 mg/l, causes
increased risks of cancer of skin, lungs, bladder and kid-
ney21.
There are two routes, respiratory exposure and gastroin-
testinal exposure40, open for Arsenic to cause cancer. The
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)41 of-
ficially recognized arsenic as a carcinogenic agent during
the 1980s. Further studies42 were conducted in the United
States, Taiwan, Bangladesh, India, Argentina and Chile to
examine the association of arsenic with carcinogenicity.
Repeated epidemiological investigations have confirmed
that arsenic induces numerous diseases, which include
dermal, cardiovascular, respiratory, gastrointestinal, endo-
crinological (diabetes mellitus), neurological, reproductive
and developmental, cancer and other effects22. American
Cancer Society43 has also enumerated long- and short-
term exposure health effects of arsenic on human health.
Bangladesh residents exposed to drinking water with arse-
nic content of 10 ppb or less suffered from melanosis and
keratosis. This study44 proved that 36 out of 167 residents
exposed (13.9%) were affected by arsenic. In another
study by Lee et al.45, it was reported that arsenic may be
the cause of some cardiovascular diseases as it affects
thrombocytes.
Arsenic health-risk assessment
Risk assessment46 is a probability of occurrence of any
given magnitude of adverse health effects over a specified
time-period. It is a function of two variables, the hazard
caused and the exposure time. Health risks consist of two
types: carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic.
The two principal toxicity risk factors are the slope fac-
tor (SF) and the reference dose (RefD). They are used for
calculating carcinogenic and non-carcinogen risks47,48 re-
spectively. Average daily dose (ADD in mg/kg/day) due
to ingestion of the arsenic-rich water is a useful parameter
used to calculate the health-risk assessment. ADD is cal-
culated using the formula49,50 given below
ADD = C × IR × ED × EF/BW × AT,
where C is the arsenic concentration (mg/l = ppm) in
groundwater, IR is the average daily intake rate which is
assumed to be 2 l/day and 3.45 l/day for children and
adults respectively51; ED, exposure duration which is assu-
med to be 10 years for children, and 70 years for adults;
EF, exposure frequency which is 365 days/year; BW is the
average body weight which is assumed to be 25 kg and
60 kg for children and adults respectively; AT, average
time which is 25,550 days, i.e. (70 × 365) days for adults,
and 3650 days, i.e. (10 × 365) days for children49,51.
Hazard quotient (HQ) is a parameter used for calculating
the non-carcinogenic risk for the consumers of arsenic-rich
groundwater in the study area. It is defined as the ratio of
ADD and RefD, where RefD for arsenic is 3 × 10−4 mg/kg/
day52.
There are two limits of hazard quotient: HQ > 1 indicates
potential health risk to the consumers of arsenic-rich water
due to non-carcinogenic type hazard, whereas HQ < 1 is
considered safe for consumers of drinking water47.
The carcinogenic risk or cancer risk (CR) for the con-
sumers of arsenic-rich groundwater in the study area is
RESEARCH ARTICLES
CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 126, NO. 12, 25 JUNE 2024
1498
Figure 3. Arsenic concentration in groundwater of Majha belt vis-á-vis WHO value.
Table 1. The values of average daily dose (ADD), hazard quotient (HQ) and cancer risk (CR) of arsenic in groundwater of Majha belt districts of Punjab
Amritsar
Gurdaspur
Tarn-Taran
Parameter
Minimum
Maximum
Average
Minimum
Maximum
Average
Minimum
Maximum
Average
ADD children (mg/kg/day)
9.00E-04
8.90E-03
3.30E-03
8.80E-04
6.80E-03
2.60E-03
9.60E-04
6.60E-03
2.50E-03
ADD adult (mg/kg/day)
6.00E-04
6.40E-03
2.40E-03
6.30E-04
4.90E-03
1.90E-03
7.00E-04
4.80E-03
1.80E-03
HQ children
2.93
29.6
11.13
2.93
22.67
8.67
3.2
22.13
8.21
HQ adult
2.11
21.28
8
2.11
16.29
6.23
2.3
15.91
5.9
CR children
1.32E-03
1.33E-02
5.00E-03
1.30E-03
1.02E-02
3.90E-03
1.44E-03
9.96E-03
3.69E-03
CR adult
9.50E-04
9.57E-03
3.60E-03
9.50E-04
7.30E-03
2.80E-03
1.04E-03
7.16E-03
2.65E-03
calculated as the product of ADD and SF where the value
of SF for oral carcinogenic arsenic is 1.5 mg/kg/day49.
Results and discussion
Health risk assessment due to groundwater arsenic con-
tamination has been reported in case of children and
adults by some workers10,53. The purpose of our study is to
evaluate both carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic health
hazards for the population of Majha belt of Punjab. The
arsenic content of groundwater in the three districts of
Majha belt, namely, Amritsar, Gurdaspur and Tarn Taran
are recorded in Supplementary Tables 1–3. Amritsar district
has 325 habitats with groundwater arsenic contamination
varying from 11 to 111 ppb, Gurdaspur has 218 habitats
with arsenic content variation from 11 to 85 ppb, and Tarn
Taran has 107 habitats with arsenic variation 12–83 ppb.
All these habitats record arsenic higher than the safe limit
of 10 ppb recommended by WHO. A histogram (Figure 3)
represents the peak values of arsenic in these districts vis-
á-vis the threshold recommended by WHO.
The average daily dose (ADD), hazard quotient (HQ),
and cancer risk (CR) for the consumers of arsenic-rich
groundwater for all the three districts of Majha belt are
listed in Table 1. ADD depends upon the toxicity of heavy
metals, and it is a function of magnitude, frequency and
duration of human exposure to the potentially toxic metals
in the environment52. Non-carcinogenic risk is measured
in terms of HQ and carcinogenic or cancer risk in terms of
the product of ADD and SF, as defined in the last section.
Depending upon variation of arsenic concentration, these
parameters also vary from minimum to maximum. The
average HQ for children and adult consumers in Amritsar
district is 11.13 and 8.0 respectively. For Gurdaspur and
Tarn Taran districts, HQ values are lower than in Amritsar
district. However, the HQ values calculated for all the 650
habitations surveyed in the Majha belt are greater than 1,
which shows that all of the consumers of the arsenic-rich
groundwater in the study area are at high potential risk for
developing non-carcinogenic adverse health effects. The
health risk is more pronounced in children compared to
adults. The average CR values for children and adults in
Amritsar district are 5.00E-3 and 3.60E-3 respectively. It
translates into 500 and 360 cancer cases per million for
children and adults respectively. These values for other
two districts are lower than in Amritsar district. Rapant
and Krčmová54 reported a high value of the cancer risk
caused by arsenic in groundwater in Slovakia. It is estimated
to be 10–4, or 100 people per million population, which is
lower than the risk calculated for the Majha belt. Carlson-
Lynch et al.55 have published their commentary on the ap-
proaches adopted for arsenic risk assessment challenging
the CR criteria, which is based on a linear dose–response
relationship for cancer even for low doses of arsenic.
RESEARCH ARTICLES
CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 126, NO. 12, 25 JUNE 2024
1499
What is the source of arsenic in the groundwaters of
Majha belt? To eliminate health hazard effects of arsenic,
a detailed investigation needs to be undertaken of ground-
water resources of the Majha belt. High levels of arsenic
are attributed to both geogenic and anthropogenic sources.
Anthropogenic sources include intensive agricultural prac-
tices based on use of fertilizers, herbicides and weedi-
cides10. It is revealed that heavy metal contamination is a
significant problem in the water and soil56 of agricultural
communities because of excessive use of agrochemicals.
Mitigation of effects of arsenic in the Majha belt is on
top priority of Punjab government. Report of mitigation
measures adopted has been published by the author7,
which include a nanotechnology-based technique called
AMRIT (arsenic and metal removal by Indian technology)
and ion-exchange technology. Considering high costs of
technologies being proposed for mitigation, DWSS37 has
opted to use surface water available from irrigation channels/
canals for drinking purposes as a cost-effective measure.
Our investigation57 of heavy metals content in surface water
of Sirhind canal has confirmed that arsenic content is
either below the detection limit (1 ppb) or much lower
than the recommended limit of WHO (10 ppb). There is
an urgent need for undertaking an epidemiological survey
of the villages/habitations showing arsenic anomalies in
groundwater being used for drinking.
Conclusion
The 650 habitations covered in this study of the ground-
water contamination of three districts of Majha belt exhibit
arsenic contamination beyond the safe limit of 10 ppb
fixed by the World Health Organisation. HQ values for
children and adults in all habitations are >1; the maximum
values for Amritsar district are 29.6 and 21.6 respectively.
Hence, both these population groups are exposed to non-
carcinogenic health hazards.
CR factors are estimated for both adult and child popu-
lation groups and predicted values are 500 and 360 per
million respectively, which is extremely high compared
with national and global values. Epidemiological survey is
a must to determine health hazards due to arsenic in
groundwater in the Majha belt. Mitigation measures must
be prioritized to eliminate the risk of health hazards.
1. Vikaspedia, Arsenic Contamination in Ground Water in India;
https://vikaspedia.in/energy/environment/know-your-environment/
water/arsenic-contamination-in-ground-water-in-india#:~:text=
The%20most%20affected%20areas%20are,up%20to%20100%20m-
%20depth (accessed on 6 September 2023).
2. Kumar, S. and Pati, J., Assessment of groundwater arsenic contam-
ination using machine learning in Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India. J.
Water Health, 2022, 20(5 ), 829–848.
3. Shaji, E., Santosh, M., Sarath, K. V., Prakash, P., Deep Chand, V.
and Divya, B. V., Arsenic contamination of groundwater: a global
synopsis with focus on the Indian Peninsula. Geosci. Front., 2021,
12(3), 101079.
4. Virk, H. S., A crisis situation due to uranium and heavy metal con-
tamination of ground waters in Punjab state, India: a preliminary
report. Res. Rev. J. Toxicol., 2017, 7(2), 6–11.
5. Virk, H. S., A preliminary report on groundwater contamination of
Majha belt of Punjab due to heavy metal arsenic. Res. Rev. J. Toxi-
col., 2017, 7(3), 27–33.
6. Virk, H. S., Selenium contamination of groundwater of Malwa belt
of Punjab, India. Res. Rev. J. Toxicol., 2019, 9(1), 13–20.
7. Virk, H. S., Groundwater contamination of Amritsar district of
Punjab due to heavy metals iron and arsenic and its mitigation. Res.
Rev. J. Toxicol., 2019, 9(2), 18–27.
8. Virk, H. S., Heavy metals contamination of groundwater in Patiala
district of Punjab state, India. Res. Rev. J. Toxicol., 2019, 9(3), 34–
42.
9. Nizam, S., Virk, H. S. and Sen, I. S., High levels of fluoride in
groundwater from Northern parts of Indo-Gangetic plains reveals
detrimental fluorosis health risks. Environ. Adv., 2022, 8, 100200;
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envadv.2022.100200.
10. Krishan, G., Ghosh, S. and Virk, H. S., Arsenic pollution and asso-
ciated human health hazards in Rupnagar district, Punjab, India.
Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 2023, 30, 69258–69273.
11. Geen van, A. et al., Field testing of over 30,000 wells for arsenic
across 400 villages of the Punjab plains of Pakistan and India: im-
plications for prioritizing mitigation. Sci. Total Environ., 2019,
654, 1358–1363.
12. Hundal, H. S., Kumar R., Singh, K. and Singh, D., Occurrence and
geochemistry of arsenic in groundwater of Punjab, northwest India.
Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal., 2007, 38(17–18), 2257–2277.
13. Hundal, H. S., Singh, K. and Singh, D., Arsenic content in ground
and canal waters of Punjab, Northwest India. Environ. Monit. As-
sess., 2009, 154(1–4), 393–400.
14. Bajwa, B. S., Kumar, S., Singh, S., Sahoo, S. K. and Tripathi, R.
M., Uranium and other heavy toxic elements distribution in the
drinking water samples of SW-Punjab, India. J. Radia. Res. Appl.
Sci., 2017, 10(1), 13–19.
15. Toxicological profile for arsenic. Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry, 2007 (cited 16 September 2014).
16. Argos, M., Ahsan, H. and Graziano, J. H., Arsenic and human
health: epidemiologic progress and public health implications. Rev.
Environ. Health, 2012, 27(4), 191–195.
17. Rao, C. V. et al., Biological effects and epidemiological conse-
quences of arsenic exposure, and reagents that can ameliorate arse-
nic damage in vivo. Oncotarget, 2017, 8(34), 57605–57621.
18. Mazumder, D. N. G., Diagnosis and treatment of chronic arsenic
poisoning. In United Nations Synthesis Report on Arsenic in
Drinking Water, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland, 2000.
19. Smith, A. H., Lingas, E. O. and Rahman, M., Contamination of
drinking-water by ars enic in Bangladesh: a public health emergency.
Bull. World Health Organ., 2000, 78(9), 1093–1103.
20. Victor, D. M., Emily, A., Daiana, V., Becker-Santos, D., Lionel, G.
and Wan, L. L., Arsenic exposure and the induction of human can-
cers. J. Toxicol., 2011, 2011, Article ID 431287, p. 13.
21. Hong, Y.-S., Song, K.-H. and Chung, J.-Y., Health effects of chro-
nic arsenic exposure. J. Prev. Med. Public Health, 2014, 47, 245–
252.
22. Martínez-Castillo, M. et al., Arsenic exposure and non-carcinogenic
health effects. Hu m. Exp. Toxicol., 2021, 40(12S), S826–S850.
23. Smith, A. H., Goycolea, M., Haque, R. and Biggs, M. L., Marked
increase in bladder and lung cancer mortality in a region of north-
ern Chile due to arsenic in drinking water. Am. J. Epidemiol., 1998,
147(7), 660–669.
24. Hopenhayn-Rich, C. et al., Bladder cancer mortality associated with
arsenic in drinking water in Argentina. Epidemiology, 1996, 7(2),
117–124.
25. Morales, K. H., Ryan, L., Kuo, T. L., Wu, M. M. and Chen, C. J.,
Risk of internal cancers from arsenic in drinking water. Environ.
Health Perspect., 2000, 108(7), 655–661.
RESEARCH ARTICLES
CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 126, NO. 12, 25 JUNE 2024
1500
26. Ferreccio, C., González, C., Milosavjlevic, V., Marshall, G., San-
cha, A. M. and Smith, A. H., Lung cancer and arsenic concentrations
in drinking water in Chile. Epidemiology, 2000, 11(6), 673–679.
27. Chen, C. J. et al., Increased prevalence of hypertension and long-
term arsenic exposure. Hypertension, 1995, 25(1 ), 53–60.
28. Engel, R. R., Hopenhayn-Rich, C., Receveur, O. and Smith, A. H.,
Vascular effects of chronic arsenic exposure: a review. Epidemiol.
Rev., 1994, 16(2), 184–209.
29. Kadono, T. et al., Skin manifestations of arsenicosis in two villages
in Bangladesh. Int. J. Dermatol., 2002, 41(12), 841–846.
30. Tseng, W. P., Effects and dose response relationships of skin can-
cer and black foot disease with arsenic. Environ. Health Perspect.,
1977, 19, 109–119.
31. Chen, C. J. and Wang, C. J., Ecological correlation between arsenic
level in well water and age-adjusted mortality from malignant neo-
plasms. Cancer Res., 1990, 50(17), 5470–5474.
32. Bates, M. N., Smith, A. H. and Hopenhayn, C. R., Arsenic ingestion
and internal cancers: a review. Am. J. Epidemiol., 1992, 135(5), 462–
476.
33. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). Some drinking-
water disinfectants and contaminants, including arsenic. Monographs
on chloramine, chloral and chloral hydrate, dichloroacetic acid, tri-
chloroacetic acid and 3-chloro-4-(dichloromethyl)-5-hydroxy-2(5H)-
furanone. In IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic
Risks to Humans, International Agency for Research on Cancer
(IARC), Lyon, France, 2004, vol. 84, pp. 269–477.
34. Saha, D., Shekhar, S., Ali, S., Vittala, S. S. and Raju, N. J., Recent
hydrogeological research in India. Proc. Indian Natl. Sci. Acad.,
2016, 82(3), 787–803.
35. Krishan, G., Bhattacharya, P., Sudarsan, N., Polya, D. and Vasisht,
R., Health risk assessment associated with arsenic in groundwater in
the state of Punjab, India. In Geological Society of America Ab-
stracts with Programs 2021; https://doi.org/10.1130/abs/2021am-
367603.
36. Virk, H. S., Groundwater contamination in Punjab due to high levels
of nitrate (NO3–) and its health hazards: a preliminary report. Res.
Rev. J. Toxicol., 2022, 12(3), 18–26.
37. Annual Water Quality Report FY 2021–22, Department of Water
Supply and Sanitation (DWSS), Government of Punjab, 1 April
2022.
38. ICAR , Punjab, Haryana groundwater has arsenic beyond limit –
Report, The Tribune Chandigarh, 27 November 2015; www.tri-
buneindia.com (accessed on February 2017).
39. Tseng, W. P., Effects of dose–response relationship of skin cancer
and blackfoot disease with arsenic. Environ. Health Perspect., 1977,
19, 109–119.
40. Centeno, J. A. et al., Environmental pathology, and health effects
of arsenic poisoning: a critical review. In Managing Arsenic in the
Environment: from Soil to Human Health (eds Naidu, R. et al.),
CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, 2006, pp. 311–327.
41. IARC Monograph, Arsenic and arsenic compounds. Eval. Carcinog
Risk Chem. Hum., 1980, 23, 39–141.
42. Kapaj, S., Peterson, H., Lib er, K. and Bhattacharya, P., Human
health effects from chronic arsenic poisoning: a review. J. Environ.
Sci. Health A. Tox. Hazard Subst. Environ. Eng., 2006, 41(10),
2399–2428.
43. American Cancer Society; https://www.cancer.org/cancer/risk-pre-
vention/chemicals/arsenic.htm
44. Ahsan, H. et al., Associations between drinking water and urinary
arsenic levels and skin lesions in Bangladesh. J. Occup. Environ.
Med., 2000, 42(12), 1195–1201.
45. Lee, M. Y., Bae, O. N., Chung, S. M., Kang, K. T., Lee, J. Y. and
Chung, J. H., Enhancement of platelet aggregation and thrombus
formation by arsenic in drinking water: a contributing factor to car-
diovascular disease. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol., 2002, 179(2), 83–88.
46. Bortey-Sam, N., Shouta, M. M. N., Yoshinori, I., Osei, A., Elvis,
B., Hazuki, M. and Mayumi, I., Health risk assessment of heavy
metals and metalloid in drinking water from communities near gold
mines in Tarkwa, Ghana. Environ. Monit. Assess., 2015, 187, 397.
47. USEPA, Guidelines for exposure assessment, US Environmental
Protection Agency, Risk Assessment Forum, Washington, DC,
1992, EPA/600/Z-92/001.
48. USEPA, Guiding principles for Monte Carlo analysis. Risk Assess-
ment Forum, Environmental Protection Agency, Washi ngton (DC),
U.S. EPA/630/R-97/001, 1997.
49. Wongsasuluk, P., Chotpantarat, S., Siriwong, W. and Robson, M.,
Heavy metal contamination and human health risk assessment in
drinking water from shallow groundwater wells in an agricultural
area in Ubon Ratchathani province, Thailand. Environ. Geochem.
Health, 2014, 36(1 ), 69–82.
50. Lim, H. S., Lee, J. S., Chon, H. T. and Sager, M., Heavy metal con-
tamination and health risk assessment in the vicinity of the aban-
doned Songcheon Au–Ag mine in Korea. J. Geochem. Exp., 2008,
96, 223–230.
51. Roychowdhury, T., Tokunaga, H. and Ando, M., Survey of arsenic
and other heavy metals in food composites and drinking water and
estimation of dietary intake by the villagers from an arsenic-affected
area of West Bengal, India. Sci. Total Environ., 2003, 308(1–3),
15–35.
52. USEPA IRIS (US Environmental Protection Agency’s Integrated
Risk Information System), 2011; http://www.epa.gov/iris/ (accessed
on 15 January 2011).
53. Singh, S. K. and Ghosh, A. K., Health risk assessment due to
groundwater arsenic contamination: children are at high risk. Hum.
Ecol. Risk Assess., 2012, 18(4), 751–766.
54. Rapant, S. and Krčmová, K., Health risk assessment maps for arsenic
groundwater content: application of national geochemical databases.
Environ. Geochem. Health, 2007, 29, 131–141.
55. Carls on-Lynch, H., Beck, B. D. and Boardman, P. D., Arsenic risk
assessment. Environ. Health Perspect., 1994, 102(4), 354–356.
56. Rattan, R. K., Datta, S. P., Chhonkar, P. K., Suribabu, K. and Singh,
A. K., Long-term impact of irrigation with sewage effluents on
heavy metal content in soils, crops, and groundwater – a case study.
Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 2005, 109, 310–322.
57. Kailley, S. K. and Virk, H. S., Uranium and heavy metal contami-
nation of Sirhind canal water and groundwater in the Malwa Belt of
Punjab and its mitigation strategies. Res. Rev. J. Toxicol., 2020,
10(1), 34–41.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. We thank the Department of Water Supply
and Sanitation (DWSS), Punjab for sharing the groundwater arsenic data. We
also thank Srijita Ghosh of Presidency University, Kolkata, for helping with
calculations. The assistance of Anureet Virk of University of Birmingham
and Siddharth Kumar of Manipal University, Jaipur, is acknowledged
for the preparation of figures and map of the study area respectively.
Received 6 October 2023; revised accepted 26 March 2024
doi: 10.18520/cs/v126/i12/1495-1500
