Heavy metal content and potential health risk of geophagic white clay from the Kumasi Metropolis in Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Geophagia is the craving for non-food substances and commonly practiced among pregnant women and children. Consumption of geophagic clay samples can have serious implications on the health of the consumers as a result of the presence of toxic metals such as Pb, As, Hg and Cd. This study sought to determine the levels of heavy metals in the studied geophagic clay samples and to determine the potential risks of heavy metals as cumulative carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risks to the health of the consumers via oral (ingestion) and dermal exposure routes. A total of thirty (30) white clay samples were analysed using Niton Thermo scientific XRF Analyser (Mobile Test S, NDTr-XL3t-86956, com 24). The clay samples were found to contain essential elements such as Ca, Fe, K and Zn as well as toxic metals such as As and Pb. There were isolated cases of the presence of Hg and all samples had Cd levels below detection. Health risk indices such as hazard quotient and cancer risk were calculated and the results indicated that consumers are likely to suffer from cancer through ingestion of geophagic clay. Bioaccessibility studies were done on zinc and it did not indicate any potential toxicity due to zincs essential nature. The levels of heavy metals in some of the geophagic clay consumed by some residents in the Kumasi were high compared to the Permitted Maximum Tolerable Daily Intake (PMTDI) by (WHO/FAO) and may pose potential health threat over time.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".