Arsenic Exposure in Well Water From the Perspective of Patients and Providers.

BACKGROUND: Arsenic is a well-known toxin which may contaminate household water. It is harmful when ingested over prolonged periods of time. As a result, public health experts recommend that water should be screened and treated to prevent arsenic ingestion. In the United States, the responsibility of testing and treatment of private wells falls on homeowners. Despite recommendations for routine screening, this is rarely done. OBJECTIVES: To assess the prevalence of well water use in a Midwestern patient population, how patients and clinicians perceive the risks of arsenic in well water, and whether additional resources on well water testing are desired. These findings will be used to influence tools for clinicians regarding symptom and examination findings of chronic arsenic exposure and potentiate the distribution of informational resources on well water testing. METHODS: Surveys were sent via email to all actively practicing primary care clinicians at the Mayo Clinic in the United States Midwest, and all active adult patients at the Mayo Clinic in the same region. Our team analyzed survey data to determine whether both patients and clinicians are aware of the health effects of chronic arsenic toxicity from well water, the need for routine well water testing and whether each group wants more information on the associated risks. RESULTS: Both patients and primary care clinicians worry about arsenic exposure. Patients with well water are concerned about their water safety yet feel uninformed about testing options. Clinicians do not know how prevalent well water use is among their patients, feel uninformed about the chronic risks of arsenic exposure and the physical examination associated with it. Both groups unanimously want more information on testing options. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show a significant reliance on well water use in the American Midwest, and unanimous support for the need for further well water testing information and resources for patients and their clinicians.

What's in your water? A well-known risk for arsenic toxicity.

Arsenic cannot be tasted, seen or smelled and can vary in concentration between water wells even in condensed areas. American domestic well water is not regulated to meet the same drinking water standards as other types of water supplies and often contains arsenic. If arsenic is not detected in a well water sample, it is unlikely to be found later. Conversely, if it is detected in a new well, it is recommended to retest six months later as levels may fluctuate in the first months following well construction. It is up to the well owner to test their water and remove arsenic through commercially available water filters. If it is not detected and removed via filtration, a variety of serious, yet common, medical conditions may arise from chronic arsenic exposure, some of which are life-threatening. These include diabetes mellitus, hypertension, skin cancer, renal, bladder and lung cancers, polyneuropathy and cardiac QTc prolongation. Testing is best done through urine speciation if an initial total urine arsenic concentration is elevated. Consider a complete blood count, renal and liver function tests, an electrocardiogram as well as a urinalysis assessing for evidence of hematuria when examining patients with histories concerning for chronic arsenic exposure.

Compressing "the sandwiched": an examination of reductionist health policies on women in Canada.

Worldwide, policymakers are critically examining the escalating costs of health care. One proposed solution has been to move away from a centralized "general hospital"-type of treatment in favor of a family-based model emphasizing health as well as treatment. While I agree that such approaches constitute an innovative outlook on health care, I draw on a social ecological approach in order to attract attention to and lay out the argument for future research examining the unacknowledged and unstudied impact that such proposed policies will have on women. Undoubtedly, it is they who will bear the brunt of the proposed health-related responsibilities offloaded by governments. I examine the implications of such proposed policies on Canadians, particularly Canadian women, although the Canadian system is but an exemplar of the changing dynamics of caregiving in a broader world situation.