See the published version of this preprint at BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
Research article
Nii Korley Kortei
University of Health and Allied Sciences
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8863-4694
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Introduction: Geophagia although pleasurable and somewhat a necessity among pregnant women, also comes along with its own attendant problems such as exposure to potentially hazardous substances like bacteria, fungi, helminthes and ova, radioactive materials, and toxic elemental minerals in the soil depending on the geographical location.
Methodology: This study evaluated the potential health risk involved during the exposure of pregnant women to toxic elemental minerals via the consumption of clay as pica (geophagia). Elemental mineral analysis was carried out using Buck Scientific 210VGP Flame Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer (Buck Scientific, Inc. East Norwalk, USA). Risk assessment methods were also used to ascertain the various risks factors and the overall risk level.
Results: Concentrations of the macro elements investigated were 1.38 ± 1.5, 2.40± 1.5, 7.74± 1.5, 4.01± 1.0, 13.24± 2.2 and 13.76± 2.1 mg/Kg for iron (Fe), copper (Cu), zinc (Zn), potassium (K), magnesium (Mg) and sodium (Na) respectively. While that for the micro elements were 1.63± 0.03 µg/Kg, 4.72±0.8, 0.53±0.02 and 1.85±0.3 mg/kg respectively for arsenic (As), manganese (Mn), lead (Pb) and nickel (Ni). Estimated Daily Intake (EDI), Hazard Quotient (HQ), Target Hazard Quotient (THQ) and Total Target Hazard Quotient (TTHQ) values ranged 0.611- 5.44 (mg/kg Bw/day), 6.26x10-4 – 106.5, 0.067-10.34 and 15 respectively.
Conclusion: There is the likelihood of posing adverse health problems when clay samples obtained from Anfoega which is sited in the Volta region of Ghana is consumed due to the fact that the HQ’s of these elemental minerals were >1 which points to high content of Manganese (Mn) and Nickel (Ni). It is also likely to cause adverse health problems in an individual’s life time since THQ for Arsenic, Lead and Nickel were above 1. Ultimately, the cumulative effect of these toxicants were exceedingly great (≤ 15) which implied a high level of unsafety associated with this clay. Per the results from this study, it is not safe for pregnant women to consume clay as pica since these toxic elements may cause detrimental effects on the foetus of the unborn child.
Keywords
Pica, geophagy, clay, Volta Region, pregnant women, risk assessment, Ghana
Figure 1
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth.
Version 4
Posted 09 Mar, 2020
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Accept
On 05 Mar, 2020
Editor assigned
On 04 Mar, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 03 Mar, 2020
Editor invited
On 03 Mar, 2020
No comments provided
Submission checks complete
On 03 Mar, 2020
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 03 Mar, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 26 Feb, 2020
Review #3 received
Received 24 Feb, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 20 Feb, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 20 Feb, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 20 Feb, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 19 Feb, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 17 Feb, 2020
Editor assigned
On 17 Feb, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 17 Feb, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 16 Feb, 2020
Editor invited
On 16 Feb, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 27 Jan, 2020
Review #3 received
Received 26 Jan, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 13 Jan, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 25 Nov, 2019
Review #1 received
Received 22 Nov, 2019
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 11 Nov, 2019
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 08 Nov, 2019
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 04 Nov, 2019
Submission checks complete
On 25 Oct, 2019
Editor assigned
On 24 Oct, 2019
Editor invited
On 23 Oct, 2019
First submitted
On 22 Oct, 2019
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Maternal & Fetal Medicine
Learn more about our company.
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
See the published version of this preprint at BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
Nii Korley Kortei
University of Health and Allied Sciences
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8863-4694
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth.
Version 4
Posted 09 Mar, 2020
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Accept
On 05 Mar, 2020
Editor assigned
On 04 Mar, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 03 Mar, 2020
Editor invited
On 03 Mar, 2020
No comments provided
Submission checks complete
On 03 Mar, 2020
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 03 Mar, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 26 Feb, 2020
Review #3 received
Received 24 Feb, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 20 Feb, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 20 Feb, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 20 Feb, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 19 Feb, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 17 Feb, 2020
Editor assigned
On 17 Feb, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 17 Feb, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 16 Feb, 2020
Editor invited
On 16 Feb, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 27 Jan, 2020
Review #3 received
Received 26 Jan, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 13 Jan, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 25 Nov, 2019
Review #1 received
Received 22 Nov, 2019
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 11 Nov, 2019
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 08 Nov, 2019
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 04 Nov, 2019
Submission checks complete
On 25 Oct, 2019
Editor assigned
On 24 Oct, 2019
Editor invited
On 23 Oct, 2019
First submitted
On 22 Oct, 2019
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Maternal & Fetal Medicine
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
View the published article at BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth.
Introduction: Geophagia although pleasurable and somewhat a necessity among pregnant women, also comes along with its own attendant problems such as exposure to potentially hazardous substances like bacteria, fungi, helminthes and ova, radioactive materials, and toxic elemental minerals in the soil depending on the geographical location.
Methodology: This study evaluated the potential health risk involved during the exposure of pregnant women to toxic elemental minerals via the consumption of clay as pica (geophagia). Elemental mineral analysis was carried out using Buck Scientific 210VGP Flame Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer (Buck Scientific, Inc. East Norwalk, USA). Risk assessment methods were also used to ascertain the various risks factors and the overall risk level.
Results: Concentrations of the macro elements investigated were 1.38 ± 1.5, 2.40± 1.5, 7.74± 1.5, 4.01± 1.0, 13.24± 2.2 and 13.76± 2.1 mg/Kg for iron (Fe), copper (Cu), zinc (Zn), potassium (K), magnesium (Mg) and sodium (Na) respectively. While that for the micro elements were 1.63± 0.03 µg/Kg, 4.72±0.8, 0.53±0.02 and 1.85±0.3 mg/kg respectively for arsenic (As), manganese (Mn), lead (Pb) and nickel (Ni). Estimated Daily Intake (EDI), Hazard Quotient (HQ), Target Hazard Quotient (THQ) and Total Target Hazard Quotient (TTHQ) values ranged 0.611- 5.44 (mg/kg Bw/day), 6.26x10-4 – 106.5, 0.067-10.34 and 15 respectively.
Conclusion: There is the likelihood of posing adverse health problems when clay samples obtained from Anfoega which is sited in the Volta region of Ghana is consumed due to the fact that the HQ’s of these elemental minerals were >1 which points to high content of Manganese (Mn) and Nickel (Ni). It is also likely to cause adverse health problems in an individual’s life time since THQ for Arsenic, Lead and Nickel were above 1. Ultimately, the cumulative effect of these toxicants were exceedingly great (≤ 15) which implied a high level of unsafety associated with this clay. Per the results from this study, it is not safe for pregnant women to consume clay as pica since these toxic elements may cause detrimental effects on the foetus of the unborn child.
Figure 1
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...