Health risk assessment of fluoride and trichloromethane in drinking water in rural schools in Guizhou Province
10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2025025
- VernacularTitle:贵州省农村学校饮用水中氟化物和三氯甲烷健康风险评估
- Author:
JIAN Zihai, ZHANG Jianhua, SU Minmin, CHEN Xuanhao, YUAN Minlan, YANG Dan, CHEN Gang
1
Author Information
1. Guizhou Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Guiyang (550004) , Guizhou Province, China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Drinking;
Fluorides;
Trichloromethane;
Risk assessment;
Rural health;
Students health services
- From:
Chinese Journal of School Health
2025;46(1):134-137
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To analyze the distribution characteristics of fluoride and trichloromethane in drinking water in rural schools in Guizhou Province and assess their health risks, so as to provide a scientific basis for ensuring the safety of drinking water in rural schools.
Methods:During the dry season (March to May) and wet season (July to September) of 2020 to 2022, 788 rural primary and secondary schools in agricultural counties (districts) in Guizhou Province were selected for investigation by using a direct sampling method. A total of 1 566 drinking water samples were collected from these schools, and the mass concentrations of fluoride and trichloromethane in the water samples were detected. The Mann-Whitney U test was used for intergroup comparison, and a health risk assessment model was employed to evaluate the health risks of students oral intake of fluoride and trichloromethane.
Results:From 2020 to 2022, the mass concentrations of fluoride and trichloromethane in the drinking water of rural schools in Guizhou Province all met the standards, and the ranges were no detection to 0.99 mg/L and (no detection to 0.06)×10 -3 mg/L, respectively. The mass concentrations of fluoride in dry and wet seasons were 0.05(0.05,0.10), 0.05(0.05,0.10) mg/L, the mass concentrations of trichloromethane were [0.02(0.02,1.00)]×10 -3 , [0.02(0.02,1.00)]×10 -3 mg/L, the mass concentrations of fluoride in factory water and terminal water were 0.05(0.05,0.05), 0.05(0.05,0.10) mg/L, and the differences were not statistically significant ( Z=-0.04, -0.88, - 0.98 , P >0.05). There was a statistically significant difference in the mass concentration of trichloromethane between factory water and peripheral water [0.02(0.02,0.02)×10 -3 , 0.02(0.02,1.05)×10 -3 mg/L]( Z=-2.16, P < 0.05 ). The non-carcinogenic risk assessment values for students oral exposure to fluoride and trichloromethane were in the range of 0.01(0.01,0.03)-0.03(0.03,0.06) and [0.26( 0.26 ,14.54)]×10 -4 -[0.52(0.52,48.62)]×10 -4 , respectively, all of which were at acceptable levels; the carcinogenic risk assessment values for oral exposure to trichloromethane were in the range of [0.08(0.08, 4.51 )]×10 -7 -[0.16(0.16,15.07)]×10 -7 , indicating a low risk.
Conclusions:The health risks of students expore to fluoride and trichloromethane in drinking water in rural schools of Guizhou Province are low. It is necessary to strengthen the standardized management of disinfection in some rural drinking water projects and the monitoring of fluoride in water sources to reduce the exposure risk to children.
