Environmental Geochemistry and Health

, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp 63–68 | Cite as

Health effects of arsenic in drinking water: Research needs

  • John R. Fowie


Research needed to resolve the uncertainties of cancer risk from ingestion of arsenic in drinking water is described. The recommendations fall into two categories reflecting the areas of greatest uncertainty regarding the assessment of arsenic risk: research on the mechanism of cancer, and research on the metabolism and detoxification of arsenic. The recommendations are discussed in light of risk assessment and risk management issues, stressing the need for scientists to interpret research findings for decision managers.


Arsenic Geochemistry Drinking Water Cancer Risk Risk Assessment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abemathy, C.O. and Ohanian, E.V. 1992. Inorganic arsenic toxicity.Environ. Geochem. Health 14.Google Scholar
  2. Buchet, J.P. Lauwerys R.R., and Roels H. 1981. Comparison of the urinary excretion of arsenic metabolites after a single oral dose of sodium arsenate, morfomethyl arsenate or dimethyl arsenate,Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health,48, 71–79.Google Scholar
  3. EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency). 1988. Special Report on Ingested Inorganic Arsenic. Skin Cancer; Nutritional Essentiality. Risk Assessment Forum. EPA/625-87/013. July 1988. Washington.Google Scholar
  4. EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency). 1991. Report of the Ad Hoc Arsenic Research Recommendation Workgroup. April 1991. Washington.Google Scholar
  5. IARC (International Agency for Research Against Cancer). 1980.Monograph on the Evaluation of the Carcinogenic Risk of Chemicals to Humans. Some Metals and Metallic Compounds Vol.23, pp. 39–141. IARC, Lyon.Google Scholar
  6. Jacobson-Kram, D. and Montalbano, D. 1985. The Reproductive Effects Assessment Gronp's report on the mutagenicity of inorganic arsenic.Environ. Mutagen.,7, 787–804.Google Scholar
  7. Jasanoff, S. 1989. Norms for evaluating regulatory science.Risk Analysis. 9, 271–273.Google Scholar
  8. Jasanoff, S. 1990.The Fifth Branch. Science Advisors as Policy Makers. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  9. Landy, M.K. Roberts, M.J. and Thomas, S.R. 1990.The Environmental Protection Agency: Asking the Wrong Questions. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  10. Mashaw, J.L. and Harfst, D.L. 1990.The Struggle for Auto Safety. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  11. Mass, M.J. 1992. Human carcinogenesis by arsenic.Environ. Geochem. Health,14, 49–54.Google Scholar
  12. McKinney, J.D. 1992. Metabolism and disposition of inorganic arsenic in laboratory animals and humans.Environ. Geochem. Health,14, 43–48.Google Scholar
  13. NAS (National Academy of Sciences). 1983.Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process. NAS Press, Washington.Google Scholar
  14. North, D.W. 1992. Risk assessment for ingested inorganic arsenic: a review and status report.Environ. Geochem. Health,14, 59–62.Google Scholar
  15. Petito, C.T. and Beck, B.D. 1991. Evaluation of evidence of nonlinearities in the dose-response curve of arsenic carcinogenesis. In: Hemphill, D.H. and Cothem, C.R. (eds),Trace Substances in Environmental Health — XXIV, 9–12 July 1990, pp. 143–176. Science Reviews Limited, Northwood, UK.Google Scholar
  16. Pool, R. 1990. Struggling to do science for society.Science,248, 672–673.Google Scholar
  17. Reilly, W.K. 1991. Why I propose a national debate on risk.EPA Journal,17 (2), 2–5.Google Scholar
  18. Roberts, L. 1990. Counting on science at EPA.Science,249, 616–618.Google Scholar
  19. Science Advisory Board. 1990. Reducing Risk: Setting Priorities and Strategies for Environmental Protection. SAB-EC-90-021, September 1990. Washington.Google Scholar
  20. Science Advisory Board. 1991. Draft Letter Report to the Administrator: Review of the Office of Research and Development's Arsenic Research Recommendations. March 1991. Washington.Google Scholar
  21. Tseng, W.P. 1977. Effects and dose-response relationships of skin cancer and Blackfoot disease with arsenic.Environ. Health Perspect.,19, 109–119.Google Scholar
  22. Tseng, W.P. Chu, H.M. How, S.W. Fong, J.M. Lin, C.S. and Yeh, S. Prevalence of skin cancer in an endemic area of chronic arsenicism in Taiwan.J. Natl Cancer Irst.,40(3), 453–463.Google Scholar
  23. Uthus, E. 1992. Arsenic essentiality.Environ. Geochem. Health,14, 55–58.Google Scholar
  24. Yeh, S. 1973. Skin cancer in chronic arsenicism.Human Pathol.,4 (4), 469–485.Google Scholar
  25. Yeh, S. How, S.W. and Lin, C.S. 1968. Arsenical cancer of skin-histologic study with special reference to Bo wen's disease.Cancer,21 (2), 312–339.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Sciences and Technology Letters 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • John R. Fowie
    • 1
  1. 1.Health Effects Research Laboratory, MD-51AUS Environmental Protection AgencyResearch Triangle ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations