↓ Skip to main content

Toxicants in folk remedies: implications of elevated blood lead in an American-born infant due to imported diaper powder

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Geochemistry & Health, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Readers on

mendeley
9 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Toxicants in folk remedies: implications of elevated blood lead in an American-born infant due to imported diaper powder
Published in
Environmental Geochemistry & Health, October 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10653-016-9881-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mateusz P. Karwowski, Suzette A. Morman, Geoffrey S. Plumlee, Terence Law, Mark Kellogg, Alan D. Woolf

Abstract

Though most childhood lead exposure in the USA results from ingestion of lead-based paint dust, non-paint sources are increasingly implicated. We present interdisciplinary findings from and policy implications of a case of elevated blood lead (13-18 mcg/dL, reference level <5 mcg/dL) in a 9-month-old infant, linked to a non-commercial Malaysian folk diaper powder. Analyses showed the powder contains 62 % lead by weight (primarily lead oxide) and elevated antimony [1000 parts per million (ppm)], arsenic (55 ppm), bismuth (110 ppm), and thallium (31 ppm). These metals are highly bioaccessible in simulated gastric fluids, but only slightly bioaccessible in simulated lung fluids and simulated urine, suggesting that the primary lead exposure routes were ingestion via hand-mouth transmission and ingestion of inhaled dusts cleared from the respiratory tract. Four weeks after discontinuing use of the powder, the infant's venous blood lead level was 8 mcg/dL. Unregulated, imported folk remedies can be a source of toxicant exposure. Additional research on import policy, product regulation, public health surveillance, and culturally sensitive risk communication is needed to develop efficacious risk reduction strategies in the USA. The more widespread use of contaminated folk remedies in the countries from which they originate is a substantial concern.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 2 22%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 22%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 11%
Researcher 1 11%
Other 2 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 4 44%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 11%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 11%
Other 1 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 October 2016.
All research outputs
#9,857,172
of 12,340,143 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Geochemistry & Health
#244
of 314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,655
of 266,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Geochemistry & Health
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,340,143 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 314 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 266,187 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.