Toxicological Impact of Lead and Mercury in Urban Environment: Sources, Exposure and Health Consequences

The ecology contains naturally occurring metals. These are highly electrically conductive compounds that willingly give up electrons to become cations. The earth's atmosphere, crust, and water bodies are all home to metals, which may also build up in living things like plants and animals. Of the 35 naturally occurring metals, 23 are often referred to as heavy metals because they have an atomic weight larger than 40.04 and a high specific density exceeding 5 g/cm³. Antimony, tellurium, bismuth, tin, thallium, gold, arsenic, cerium, gallium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, iron, lead, mercury, manganese, nickel, platinum, silver, uranium, vanadium, and zinc are among the metals commonly referred to as heavy metals [1,2]. A heavy metal's concentration and mode of exposure also affect its toxicological potency. The age, genetic makeup, and nutritional state of the person exposed to heavy metals are additional variables that influence metal toxicity[3]. The toxicity of heavy metals varies with dose[4]. Heavy metals have beneficial effects on some bodily systems' biochemical and physiological processes at comparatively low concentrations, but they become harmful to human health at concentrations above a threshold[5,6]. The body's metabolic processes can be disrupted by heavy metals in a number of ways. Additionally, they can build up in important bodily organs, including the liver, heart, kidneys, and brain, impairing regular biological processes. Heavy metals stop the body's essential functions once they enter the biological systems.

It is an absolute fact, though, that a completely heavy metal-free world is unachievable. These heavy metals may enter the human body through a variety of routes, including ingestion of tainted food, water, or air[7]. Arsenic poisoning in humans can be brought on by unintentional absorption of powders or solutions containing As, suicide, murder, or consuming tainted food or water. High levels of arsenic have been linked to hepatic damage, hypertension, and major effects on the cardiovascular system[8,9]. Lead (Pb) is widely used in batteries, plumbing, ammunition, paints, and radiation shielding. It enters the human body through inhalation of dust, leaded gasoline fumes, and contaminated food or water. Plants and fish absorb lead from polluted soil, air, and water, contributing to its accumulation in the food chain. Industrial pollution and traffic emissions are major sources of atmospheric lead[10].

Mercury (Hg) and its compounds, especially methylmercury, are highly toxic and can cause severe neurological damage. It spreads globally through the atmosphere and bioaccumulates in aquatic food chains, with seafood being a major source of exposure. Mercury is used in dental amalgams, thermometers, and industrial processes. Notable mercury poisoning incidents include Minamata disease in Japan and widespread deaths from mercurial fungicide-treated seeds[11].

URBAN SOURCES OF LEAD

1. Leaded Gasoline:- In the 20th century, tetraethyl-lead was widely used as a gasoline additive, which resulted in the long-term buildup of lead in dust and urban soils. Despite restrictions in many nations, legacy pollution remains a serious issue[12].
2. Lead-based Paint Deterioration: Commercial and household paints employed a lot of lead-based pigments. Peeling or deteriorating with age, these paints contaminate the dust and dirt around them[12].
3. Industrial Emissions, Smelters & Recycling Units:- Metal smelting, battery recycling, and other industrial operations emit lead particles into the air, which settle in the surrounding soil and have an impact on the local population[13].
4. Drinking Water Contamination:- As seen in Flint, Michigan, lead contamination through drinking water results from corrosion in outdated plumbing systems that use lead pipes or solder[14].
5. House Dust & Soil Dust Ingestion:- One of the main ways that children are exposed to lead through hand-to-mouth behavior is through lead-contaminated household dust, which comes from plumbing, paint, and soil[15].
6. Traffic-Related Particulates & Tire/Brake Wear Debris:- Lead and other heavy metals, such as zinc, are released into the dust and soils of urban roads as a result of vehicle wear (brake pads, tires) and the combustion caused by fuel[16].
7. Landfills, Junkyards, and Autobody Shops:- Lead is released when batteries, paints, and other items containing Pb are disposed of incorrectly in informal landfills and auto wrecking businesses[14].

URBAN SOURCES OF MERCURY

1. Atmospheric deposition from fossil fuel combustion and industry:- The production of cement, non-ferrous metals (such as smelting), waste incineration, and coal-fired power plants are the main human-caused sources of mercury emissions, which greatly increase air loading in cities[17].
2. Urban air contamination and dry/wet deposition:-Higher levels of particulate-bound mercury are commonly found in urban air, which promotes deposition onto impermeable urban surfaces such as building roofs and roadways. Deposited mercury is carried into nearby water bodies and soils by maintenance runoff[18].
3. Street dust and urban soils:- Elevated mercury concentrations (e.g., 0.16 ± 0.14 mg/kg in Huainan City) are frequently found in soil and street dust close to industrial areas or coal plant vicinities, suggesting increased accumulation of fine particles that present exposure hazards[19].
4. Non-point, legacy, and recirculating sources:- Mercury can re-enter the atmosphere by re-emission from things like water, soil, and vegetation. About 60% of emissions in coastal cities may be attributed to legacy mercury from the ocean[20].
5. Localized point sources and waste-related Hg:- Urban sources of mercury contamination in soil and air include trash incineration, municipal solid waste dumps, medical equipment disposal, and waste from fluorescent lamps and batteries[21].
6. Aquatic pathways:- Storm runoff mobilizes mercury that has been accumulated on impermeable urban surfaces into urban rivers. Methylmercury (MeHg) may occur in some urban wetlands or retention ponds under anaerobic circumstances, which could lead to bioaccumulation[22].
7. Health impacts:- Urban exposure pathways include ingestion and inhalation of contaminated dust, soil, water, or fish from urban streams. Mercury exposure, even at low levels, impairs brain development (particularly in fetuses and children), endocrine, and cardiovascular systems[23].

MECHANISM OF LEAD TOXICITY

1. Mimicry of essential metals (Ca²⁺, Zn²⁺, Fe²⁺):- Lead disrupts several metabolic pathways by competing with physiologically significant metal ions such as calcium, zinc, and iron at cellular binding sites and transporters[24,25].
2. Induction of Oxidative Stress:- Lipid peroxidation and cellular damage result from lead's induction of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and depletion of antioxidants like glutathione and superoxide dismutase[24,26].
3. Neurotoxicity – Calcium signaling interference:- By inhibiting voltage-gated calcium channels, lead disrupts calcium-dependent communication in neurons, reducing neurotransmitter release and synaptic plasticity, which has a special impact on children's neurodevelopment[27,28].
4. Enzyme inhibition – Especially heme biosynthesis: Lead causes a buildup of neurotoxic precursors and anemia by inhibiting enzymes such as ferrochelatase and delta-aminolevulinic acid dehydratase (ALAD)[24,26].
5. Disruption of the blood–brain barrier (BBB): Lead contributes to inflammation and neurodegeneration by changing the BBB's permeability, which increases the penetration of neurotoxins[27,29].
6. Epigenetic modifications:- Lead causes long-term alterations in gene expression that may affect a person's susceptibility to disease later in life by changing histone acetylation and DNA methylation patterns[26,29].
7. Renal toxicity:- Prolonged exposure causes progressive nephropathy, renal cell mitochondrial damage, and proximal tubular dysfunction[25,26].
8. Immune system modulation:- Immune dysregulation results from lead's alteration of cytokine production and impairment of both innate and adaptive immune responses[24,26].

MECHANISM OF MERCURY TOXICITY

Chemical Forms & Tissue Distribution:- Elemental mercury (Hg⁰, vapor) is easily absorbed through inhalation (~80%), travels easily over the placenta and blood-brain barrier, and builds up in the brain and nervous system[30,31]. Absorbable by food or skin contact, inorganic mercury salts (Hg²⁺) mostly build up in the kidneys and liver and have limited BBB crossing[31]. Methylmercury, or MeHg, is an example of an organic mercury that is highly absorbable (~95%) from the stomach, readily crosses the blood-brain barrier and the placenta, bioaccumulates in neural tissue, and has a half-life of around 70 days[30,32].

1. Affinity for Thiol/Selenol Groups: Mercury disrupts important physiological functions like antioxidant defense and detoxification pathways by forming a strong bond with the cysteine (-SH) and selenol (-SeH) functional groups found in proteins and enzymes. Thioredoxin reductase, enzymes linked to glutathione, and other substances reliant on the chemistry of sulfur or selenium are harmed by this[31].
2. Disruption of Calcium Homeostasis & Cytoskeleton:- MeHg causes cytoskeletal instability, changes in neurotransmitter release, and network dysregulation in neuronal cells by interfering with calcium signaling and microtubule assembly[33].
3. Neurotoxicity Outcomes:- MeHg exposure during pregnancy or chronic illness causes neurodevelopmental delay, motor dysfunction, sensory deficiencies, and Cognitive impairments. Neuropathology in animal research, such as Minamata disease models, comprises gliosis, cerebellar and cortical degeneration, and persistent behavioral abnormalities[31].
4. Genetic & Epigenetic Alterations:- Exposure to mercury changes gene expression pathways that are important in cell survival, differentiation, proliferation, and apoptosis, such as Nrf2, NF-κB, MAPK p38, and Notch. Additionally, it causes chromosome breakage, DNA damage, and dysregulated gene control[32].
5. Immune & Endocrine Disruption:- Mercury impairs PMN cell function, autoantibody generation, and cytokine production, all of which inhibit immunological function. Endocrine disruption, autoimmune-like tissue destruction, and reproductive toxicity, including infertility and birth abnormalities, can all be brought on by it[32].
6. Enzymatic Inhibition in Metabolic Pathways:- Anemia, decreased cellular energetics, and renal dysfunction result from mercury's inhibition of essential enzymes involved in heme production and general metabolism, including ALA-D and Na-/K- ATPase[33,34].

Fig:- MECHANISM OF TOXICITY OF HEAVY METALS[34].

URBAN CASE STUDIES

Case Study No. 1:- NFHS-Based Population Study: Delhi and Mumbai Children.

A National Family Health Survey–II (1998–99) was conducted in Delhi and Mumbai to evaluate the blood lead levels (BLLs) of 1,081 children under the age of three using portable LeadCare analyzers, and the findings revealed a concerning extent of lead exposure among urban children. The results showed that approximately 76% of the children had BLLs within the range of 5–20 µg/dL, indicating widespread exposure even at levels known to affect neurological development. Children between 12 and 23 months of age were found to have BLLs that were 146% higher than those of infants aged three months or younger, suggesting that increasing age and mobility lead to greater environmental contact and ingestion of contaminated dust or particles through normal mouthing behavior. Socioeconomic status was also found to be a strong determinant, with children from low-income families showing 32% higher BLLs compared to those from better-off households, a difference likely stemming from poor living conditions, substandard housing materials, inadequate sanitation, and residence in highly polluted neighborhoods. Interestingly, overweight children, defined as those whose weight-for-height exceeded the 95th percentile, exhibited BLLs 31% higher than underweight peers, hinting at a potential physiological or nutritional relationship affecting lead absorption and retention. These observations together underscore the multifactorial nature of lead exposure in young children, driven by environmental contamination, poverty, and nutritional differences. The age-related rise in lead levels clearly implies that increased mobility and exploratory behavior heighten the risk of exposure, while the pronounced effect of socioeconomic status reflects systemic inequities in environmental health and safety. This study highlights an urgent need for targeted interventions, including stricter pollution control, improved housing infrastructure, community education on lead hazards, and regular screening of vulnerable populations to mitigate the long-term neurological and developmental damage caused by early-life lead exposure.[35].

Case Study No. 2:- Minamata Disease – Mercury Toxicity (Japan).

The Minamata disease outbreak in Japan stands as one of the most tragic examples of industrial mercury poisoning in human history. Between 1932 and 1968, the Chisso Corporation, a chemical manufacturing company, discharged large quantities of methylmercury (MeHg) into Minamata Bay as an industrial byproduct. Over time, this highly toxic compound bioaccumulated in fish and shellfish, which served as a major source of food for local residents. Consequently, the population of Minamata and surrounding areas became chronically exposed to mercury through their diet, leading to a devastating public health crisis. Affected individuals began exhibiting severe neurological symptoms such as numbness of the extremities, tremors, ataxia, difficulty walking, slurred speech, visual and auditory impairment, and in advanced cases, convulsions and coma. In addition to adult cases, congenital Minamata disease emerged in children born to mothers exposed to methylmercury during pregnancy; these infants suffered from severe developmental disorders resembling cerebral palsy, including microcephaly, mental retardation, and muscle rigidity. Autopsies revealed extensive damage to the nervous system, including cortical neuron loss, cerebellar degeneration, and long-term mercury deposition in the brain and kidneys, highlighting the irreversible nature of mercury toxicity. Official records recognized 2,265 certified patients, but it is widely believed that thousands more suffered without formal acknowledgment due to social, legal, and political challenges. The catastrophe sparked national outrage and led to sweeping environmental reforms in Japan, compelling the government to strengthen pollution control laws, regulate industrial waste disposal, and establish compensation frameworks for victims. Beyond Japan, the Minamata tragedy became a turning point in global environmental awareness, emphasizing the dangers of unchecked industrial pollution, the necessity for corporate accountability, and the importance of sustainable industrial practices to prevent similar toxic disasters in the future[36,37].

HEALTH IMPACTS OF LEAD EXPOSURE

Lead exposure affects multiple organ systems through complex inflammatory and oxidative mechanisms, posing a significant global health threat. It impacts the respiratory, neurological, digestive, cardiovascular, and urinary systems, with chronic inflammation being one of the primary pathways of lead toxicity. Lead induces oxidative stress, cellular injury, and the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as TNF-α and IL-6, resulting in progressive tissue damage and multi-system dysfunction over time [38]. Among the most concerning consequences are the neurological and developmental effects observed in children, as numerous studies have consistently shown that lead exposure severely hampers cognitive development. A meta-analysis involving 6,979 children established a clear negative correlation between blood lead levels and cognitive performance, confirming the detrimental impact of even low-level exposure on intelligence and learning ability [39]. Moreover, evidence continues to demonstrate that there is no safe threshold for lead exposure. A 2022 evaluation concluded that even minimal exposure, particularly during early life and pregnancy, can cause irreversible harm, leading to lifelong consequences such as reduced academic achievement, behavioral disorders, and increased risk of chronic diseases in adulthood [40]. In adults, lead exposure is strongly associated with cardiovascular conditions including hypertension, coronary artery disease, and stroke. A 2022 study estimated that declining blood lead levels in the United States have contributed to a reduction of 34,000–99,000 cardiovascular-related deaths, emphasizing the major role of lead control in improving public health outcomes [41]. Despite these advancements, lead toxicity remains a persistent global burden, disproportionately affecting low- and middle-income countries where environmental and occupational exposure remains widespread. The most vulnerable populations continue to be children aged 0–6 years and older adults above 60 years, with South Asia and North Africa experiencing the highest rates of lead-related disease and mortality [42].

HEALTH IMPACTS OF MERCURY EXPOSURE

Mercury exposure is linked to a remarkably wide range of toxic effects, with more than 250 reported symptoms that can impact nearly every organ system, making diagnosis complex and challenging. While the neurological system is the primary target, mercury toxicity also affects the cardiovascular, pulmonary, renal, digestive, and hematological systems. At the cellular level, mercury binds to sulfhydryl groups in proteins, leading to oxidative stress, DNA damage, mitochondrial dysfunction, and disruption of cell membranes, all of which contribute to its widespread and multifaceted toxicity [32]. The neurological and developmental effects of mercury are particularly severe in children and fetuses, with organic mercury (methylmercury) posing the greatest threat. Even at low concentrations, methylmercury can impair central nervous system development, causing cognitive deficits, motor dysfunction, and behavioral abnormalities. Common routes of exposure include consumption of fish contaminated with methylmercury, inhalation of elemental mercury vapor from sources such as dental amalgams or traditional teething powders, and dermal absorption from inorganic mercury-containing creams or lotions [43,44] Mercury also exerts significant cardiovascular and systemic toxicity through multiple interconnected mechanisms, including increased oxidative stress and lipid peroxidation, endothelial dysfunction due to impaired nitric oxide signaling and disrupted calcium homeostasis, altered renin-angiotensin system activity, platelet hyperactivity leading to coagulation disturbances, and systemic inflammation marked by elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) level.[44] On a global scale, mercury contamination continues to be a major environmental health burden. A comprehensive burden-of-disease assessment estimated that in 2015, foodborne exposure to methylmercury—along with other toxic metals such as lead and arsenic—was responsible for more than 1 million illnesses, over 56,000 deaths, and approximately 9 million disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) worldwide, underscoring the urgent need for stricter environmental regulations and safer food practices to mitigate mercury-related health risks [45].

EPIDEMIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE OF LEAD & MERCURY

1. Lead (Pb)
   • Review on Multi-System Effects via Inflammation:-

A thorough review paper looked at epidemiological data showing that exposure to lead causes inflammatory cascades that impact the urinary, digestive, cardiovascular, neurological, and respiratory systems. It emphasizes that exposure to lead is associated with illnesses in all of these systems, with inflammation serving as a major underlying cause[38].

• • Cohort Study on Fetal Lead Exposure and Infant Development :-

Fetal lead exposure at various stages of pregnancy was found to predict newborn mental development abnormalities in a study based on the Normative Aging Study. This demonstrates that early neurodevelopmental outcomes are significantly predicted by prenatal lead exposure[46].

• • Bone Lead as a Marker for Chronic Exposure:-

A more stable metric than blood lead levels for evaluating long-term exposure, bone lead was suggested as a reliable biomarker in epidemiologic studies evaluating chronic lead damage in another important study published in Environmental Health Perspectives[46].

2. Mercury (Hg)
   • Critical Review of Human Mercury Exposure and Health Outcomes:-

Epidemiologic studies, including significant instances like Minamata (Japan) and Iraq, were critically assessed in a review paper. It verified that both adults and infants (in utero) suffered from significant neurological abnormalities as a result of high-dose methylmercury exposure. Furthermore, it evaluated exposure to elemental and Inorganic mercury in the workplace and environment has been studied across hundreds of investigations, determining that more than 29 occupational and 20 environmental studies provided suggestive evidence of negative effects[47].

• • Systematic Review on Hematological Effects of Mercury:-

To evaluate the hematotoxic effects of mercury exposure, this systematic review examined 80 observational studies (case reports, cross-sectional studies, and cohorts) with a total of 9,284 participants. In a significant percentage of cases, anemia, lymphopenia, neutrophilia, and basophilia were found; some of these conditions were severe or lethal[48].

• • Systematic Review on Mercury and Cardiovascular Risk:-

The relationship between mercury exposure and cardiovascular disease, including dose-response relationships and mortality risk, was examined in a more recent systematic review and meta-analysis. This provides strong epidemiological support for mercury-related cardiovascular consequences[49].

CURRENT MITIGATION STRATEGIES FOR LEAD AND MERCURY EXPOSURE

1. Lead (Pb) :
   1. Lead in Drinking Water
      • Corrosion Control & Flushing Practice -

In order to minimize lead leaching and provide protective coatings inside pipes, utilities frequently employ corrosion inhibitors based on orthophosphate. However, typical orthophosphate dosages might not be enough when water demand is low. In these situations, lowering tap water lead levels can be achieved by combining corrosion control with strategic flushing procedures, particularly automated or timed flushing. The only long-term fix, however, is to replace the lead service lines throughout the entire system[50].

1. 2. Community Engagement and Education
      • Parenting and Community-Based Educational Programs –

Using a community-academic partnership model, instructors received training in emotional support and a peer-delivered "Lead101" program. Parental knowledge, self-efficacy, and the adoption of lead mitigation practices in households were all markedly raised by this strategy[51].

• • • Citizen Science and Predictive Screening Tools –

Using two straightforward variables—household age and peeling paint—the "DustSafe" community science project created a logistic regression model that forecasts elevated levels of dust lead in homes. This technology improved screening and awareness at the community level when it was integrated into a mobile app[52].

1. 3. Multifaceted Intervention Model
      • Integrated Home Hazard Mitigation –   

One-on-one parent education with individualized home screening and low-cost/no-cost mitigation measures, an interdisciplinary team (public health, environmental screening, and education), and continuous child blood lead level (BLL) monitoring using ICP-MS were all part of a well-coordinated strategy.

Adapted to the needs of the family, this model reduced lead exposure over the short and long terms[53].

1. 4. Environmental & Agricultural Controls
      • Reducing Lead Along Highways –

To reduce lead exposure from vehicular emissions in grazing areas, strategies include: Leaded gasoline phase-outPutting up green barriers, like ferns or city trees, to capture lead in the air, routine removal of dust from the roadside, regulations for water quality close to highways and Public awareness campaigns regarding hazards and alternatives aimed at farmers and consumers[54].

• • • Microbial Bioremediation in Soil –

According to certain research, bacteria like Rhodobacter sphaeroides and Leclercia adecarboxylata have the ability to change lead into less accessible forms. An inventive and environmentally friendly method of reducing soil lead pollution is microbial bioaugmentation[55].

2. Mercury (Hg)
   1. Workplace, Consumer, and Agricultural Intervention
      • Alternatives to Mercury-Based Products -

The evidence review highlights the importance of gradually replacing dental amalgams with composite materials. Prohibiting fungicides and cosmetics that contain mercury. By switching to mercury-free equipment (such as thermometers and gauges) and providing training to industry employees, these modifications lower the dangers of mercury exposure in both consumer and professional settings[56].

1. 2. Soil and Crop Mitigation
      • Soil Immobilization Using Biochar & Selenium –

The bioavailability of methylmercury can be momentarily decreased by applying charcoal or selenium (Se) to soils contaminated with mercury. Inert HgSe compounds can be formed by Se. But there are hazards associated with these methods: Under different circumstances, biochar may improve methylation, and high Se levels may surpass acceptable limits.

For stable, environmentally beneficial mercury mitigation in agricultural contexts, more research is required[57].

CONCLUSION

Lead (Pb) and mercury (Hg) are among the most hazardous heavy metals due to their widespread environmental presence, ability to bioaccumulate, and significant toxicological impacts on human health. Urbanization and industrialization have drastically increased human exposure to these metals through contaminated air, water, soil, food, and consumer products. Lead exposure is especially dangerous for children, leading to irreversible neurological damage, developmental delays, and increased risk of cardiovascular and renal disorders. Mercury, particularly in its organic form (methylmercury), poses serious neurotoxic risks, especially during fetal development, and is also linked to cardiovascular, endocrine, and immune dysfunction.

Both metals exert their toxicity through similar biological mechanisms such as oxidative stress, disruption of essential metal mimicry, enzyme inhibition, and epigenetic modifications. The epidemiological evidence, including large-scale population studies and historic poisoning incidents like Minamata disease, strongly supports their association with chronic disease burden, particularly in vulnerable populations.

While complete elimination of lead and mercury from the environment is unfeasible, current mitigation strategies—ranging from policy-level interventions (like the Minamata Convention), technological solutions (e.g., corrosion control, biochar application), and behavioral changes (community education, consumer product substitution)—demonstrate significant potential to reduce exposure. However, continued surveillance, stricter regulation, and investment in green remediation technologies are essential for protecting public health, especially in low- and middle-income countries where regulatory infrastructure may be limited.

REFERENCES

1. Duffus JH: ‘Heavy metals’ a meaningless term? (IUPAC Technical Report). Pure Appl Chem. 2002, 74:793–807. 10.1351/pac200274050793
2. Li F, Qiu Z, Zhang J, Liu W, Liu C, Zeng G: Investigation, Pollution Mapping and Simulative Leakage Health Risk Assessment for Heavy Metals and Metalloids in Groundwater from a Typical Brownfield, Middle China. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017, 14:768. 10.3390/ijerph14070768
3. Tchounwou PB, Yedjou CG, Patlolla AK, Sutton DJ: Heavy Metal Toxicity and the Environment. In: Luch A, ed. Molecular, Clinical and Environmental Toxicology. Springer Basel: Basel; 2012. 133–64.10.1007/978-3-7643-8340-4_6
4. Gorini F, Muratori F, Morales MA: The Role of Heavy Metal Pollution in Neurobehavioral Disorders: a Focus on Autism. Rev J Autism Dev Disord. 2014, 1:354–72. 10.1007/s40489-014-0028-3
5. Jaishankar M, Tseten T, Anbalagan N, Mathew BB, Beeregowda KN: Toxicity, mechanism and health effects of some heavy metals. Interdiscip Toxicol. 2014, 7:60–72. 10.2478/intox-2014-0009
6. Ohiagu FO, Lele KC, Chikezie PC, Verla AW, Enyoh CE: Bioaccumulation and health risk assessment of heavy metals in Musa paradisiaca, Zea mays, Cucumeropsis manii and Manihot esculenta cultivated in Onne, Rivers State, Nigeria. Environ Anal Health Toxicol. 2020, 35:e2020011. 10.5620/eaht.e2020011
7. Singh R, Gautam N, Mishra A, Gupta R: Heavy metals and living systems: An overview. Indian J Pharmacol. 2011, 43:246–53. 10.4103/0253-7613.81505
8. Lee M-Y, Jung B-I, Chung S-M, et al.: Arsenic-induced dysfunction in relaxation of blood vessels. Environ Health Perspect. 2003, 111:513–7. 10.1289/ehp.5916
9. Yoshida T: Chronic health effects in people exposed to arsenic via the drinking water: dose?response relationships in review. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2004, 198:243–52. 10.1016/j.taap.2003.10.022
10. Kaste JM, Friedland AJ, Stürup S: Using Stable and Radioactive Isotopes To Trace Atmospherically Deposited Pb in Montane Forest Soils. Environ Sci Technol. 2003, 37:3560–7. 10.1021/es026372k
11. Tokuomi H, Kinoshita Y, Teramoto J, Imanishi K: [Hunter-Russell syndrome]. Nihon Rinsho Jpn J Clin Med. 1977, 35 Suppl 1:518–9.
12. Clark JJ, Knudsen AC: Extent, Characterization, and Sources of Soil Lead Contamination in Small-Urban Residential Neighborhoods. J Environ Qual. 2013, 42:1498–506. 10.2134/jeq2013.03.0100
13. Mahaffey KR: Sources of lead in the urban environment. Am J Public Health. 1983, 73:1357–8. 10.2105/AJPH.73.12.1357
14. Levin R, Vieira CZ, Brown M: The urban lead burden in humans, animals, and the natural world. ISEE Conf Abstr. 2021, 2021:. 10.1289/isee.2021.P-032
15. Lanphear BP, Roghmann KJ: Pathways of Lead Exposure in Urban Children. Environ Res. 1997, 74:67–73. 10.1006/enrs.1997.3726
16. Filippelli GM, Adamic J, Nichols D, Shukle J, Frix E: Mapping the Urban Lead Exposome: A Detailed Analysis of Soil Metal Concentrations at the Household Scale Using Citizen Science. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018, 15:1531. 10.3390/ijerph15071531
17. Gworek B, Dmuchowski W, Baczewska-Dąbrowska AH: Mercury in the terrestrial environment: a review. Environ Sci Eur. 2020, 32:128. 10.1186/s12302-020-00401-x
18. Alok Chandra Samal, Sumalya Chakraborty, Anusaya Mallick, Subhas Chandra Santra: Mercury contamination in urban ecosystem -a case study in and around Kolkata metropolis, West Bengal, India. Int J Exp Res Rev IJERR. 2017, 13:38–43.
19. Zheng L, Tang Q, Fan J, Huang X, Jiang C, Cheng H: Distribution and health risk assessment of mercury in urban street dust from coal energy dominant Huainan City, China. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2015, 22:9316–22. 10.1007/s11356-015-4089-3
20. Wang Z, Zhang Y, Wang L, et al.: Characteristics and Risk Assessments of Mercury Pollution Levels at Domestic Garbage Collection Points Distributed within the Main Urban Areas of Changchun City. Toxics. 2021, 9:309. 10.3390/toxics9110309
21. Rodrigues SM, Coelho C, Cruz N, et al.: Oral bioaccessibility and human exposure to anthropogenic and geogenic mercury in urban, industrial and mining areas. Sci Total Environ. 2014, 496:649–61. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.06.115
22. Wang Q, Kim D, Dionysiou DD, Sorial GA, Timberlake D: Sources and remediation for mercury contamination in aquatic systems--a literature review. Environ Pollut Barking Essex 1987. 2004, 131:323–36. 10.1016/j.envpol.2004.01.010
23. Filippelli GM, Risch M, Laidlaw MAS, Nichols DE, Crewe J: Geochemical legacies and the future health of cities: A tale of two neurotoxins in urban soils. Elem Sci Anthr. 2015, 3:000059. 10.12952/journal.elementa.000059
24. Flora G, Gupta D, Tiwari A: Toxicity of lead: A review with recent updates. Interdiscip Toxicol. 2012, 5:47–58. 10.2478/v10102-012-0009-2
25. Patrick L: Lead toxicity, a review of the literature. Part 1: Exposure, evaluation, and treatment. Altern Med Rev J Clin Ther. 2006, 11:2–22.
26. García-Lestón J, Méndez J, Pásaro E, Laffon B: Genotoxic effects of lead: an updated review. Environ Int. 2010, 36:623–36. 10.1016/j.envint.2010.04.011
27. Bressler JP, Goldstein GW: Mechanisms of lead neurotoxicity. Biochem Pharmacol. 1991, 41:479–84. 10.1016/0006-2952(91)90617-e
28. Sanders T, Liu Y, Buchner V, Tchounwou PB: Neurotoxic effects and biomarkers of lead exposure: a review. Rev Environ Health. 2009, 24:15–45. 10.1515/reveh.2009.24.1.15
29. Needleman H: Lead poisoning. Annu Rev Med. 2004, 55:209–22. 10.1146/annurev.med.55.091902.103653
30. Bernhoft RA: Mercury toxicity and treatment: a review of the literature. J Environ Public Health. 2012, 2012:460508. 10.1155/2012/460508
31. Kang B, Wang J, Guo S, Yang L: Mercury-induced toxicity: Mechanisms, molecular pathways, and gene regulation. Sci Total Environ. 2024, 943:173577. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.173577
32. Rice KM, Walker EM, Wu M, Gillette C, Blough ER: Environmental mercury and its toxic effects. J Prev Med Public Health Yebang Uihakhoe Chi. 2014, 47:74–83. 10.3961/jpmph.2014.47.2.74
33. Kade IJ: Mercury toxicity on sodium pump and organoseleniums intervention: a paradox. J Biomed Biotechnol. 2012, 2012:924549. 10.1155/2012/924549
34. Harischandra DS, Ghaisas S, Zenitsky G, Jin H, Kanthasamy A, Anantharam V, Kanthasamy AG: Manganese-Induced Neurotoxicity: New Insights Into the Triad of Protein Misfolding, Mitochondrial Impairment, and Neuroinflammation. Front Neurosci. 2019, 13:654. 10.3389/fnins.2019.00654
35. Jain NB, Hu H: Childhood correlates of blood lead levels in Mumbai and Delhi. Environ Health Perspect. 2006, 114:466–70. 10.1289/ehp.8399
36. Igata A: Epidemiological and clinical features of Minamata disease. Environ Res. 1993, 63:157–69. 10.1006/enrs.1993.1137
37. Eto K: Pathology of Minamata disease. Toxicol Pathol. 1997, 25:614–23. 10.1177/019262339702500612
38. Boskabady M, Marefati N, Farkhondeh T, Shakeri F, Farshbaf A, Boskabady MH: The effect of environmental lead exposure on human health and the contribution of inflammatory mechanisms, a review. Environ Int. 2018, 120:404–20. 10.1016/j.envint.2018.08.013
39. Heidari S, Mostafaei S, Razazian N, Rajati M, Saeedi A, Rajati F: Correlation between lead exposure and cognitive function in 12-year-old children: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2021, 28:43064–73. 10.1007/s11356-021-14712-w
40. Olufemi AC, Mji A, Mukhola MS: Potential Health Risks of Lead Exposure from Early Life through Later Life: Implications for Public Health Education. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022, 19:16006. 10.3390/ijerph192316006
41. Brown L, Lynch M, Belova A, Klein R, Chiger A: Developing a Health Impact Model for Adult Lead Exposure and Cardiovascular Disease Mortality. Environ Health Perspect. 2020, 128:97005. 10.1289/EHP6552
42. Xu T, Lin K, Cao M, et al.: Patterns of global burden of 13 diseases attributable to lead exposure, 1990-2019. BMC Public Health. 2023, 23:1121. 10.1186/s12889-023-15874-7
43. Counter SA, Buchanan LH: Mercury exposure in children: a review. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2004, 198:209–30. 10.1016/j.taap.2003.11.032
44. Bose-O’Reilly S, McCarty KM, Steckling N, Lettmeier B: Mercury exposure and children’s health. Curr Probl Pediatr Adolesc Health Care. 2010, 40:186–215. 10.1016/j.cppeds.2010.07.002
45. Gibb HJ, Barchowsky A, Bellinger D, et al.: Estimates of the 2015 global and regional disease burden from four foodborne metals - arsenic, cadmium, lead and methylmercury. Environ Res. 2019, 174:188–94. 10.1016/j.envres.2018.12.062
46. Hu H, Shih R, Rothenberg S, Schwartz BS: The epidemiology of lead toxicity in adults: measuring dose and consideration of other methodologic issues. Environ Health Perspect. 2007, 115:455–62. 10.1289/ehp.9783
47. Ratcliffe HE, Swanson GM, Fischer LJ: Human exposure to mercury: a critical assessment of the evidence of adverse health effects. J Toxicol Environ Health. 1996, 49:221–70. 10.1080/713851079
48. Vianna ADS, Matos EP de, Jesus IM de, Asmus CIRF, Câmara V de M: Human exposure to mercury and its hematological effects: a systematic review. Cad Saude Publica. 2019, 35:e00091618. 10.1590/0102-311X00091618
49. Hu XF, Lowe M, Chan HM: Mercury exposure, cardiovascular disease, and mortality: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis. Environ Res. 2021, 193:110538. 10.1016/j.envres.2020.110538
50. Hatam F, Blokker M, Prevost M: Integrated Flushing and Corrosion Control Measures to Reduce Lead Exposure in Households with Lead Service Lines. Water. 2025, 17:2297. 10.3390/w17152297
51. Miller AL, Varisco R, Charles S, et al.: Parenting and Lead Mitigation at Home: A Multifaceted Community Partnership Model Promoting Parent Engagement in Lead Exposure Prevention. Health Promot Pract. 2023, 24:911–20. 10.1177/15248399221092998
52. Dietrich M, Shukle JT, Krekeler MPS, Wood LR, Filippelli GM: Using Community Science to Better Understand Lead Exposure Risks. GeoHealth. 2022, 6:e2021GH000525. 10.1029/2021GH000525
53. Del Rio M, Obeng A, Galkaduwa B, et al.: An interdisciplinary team-based approach for significantly reducing lower-level lead poisoning in U.S. children. Toxicol Rep. 2023, 10:76–86. 10.1016/j.toxrep.2022.12.004
54. Al-Sabbagh TA, Shreaz S: Impact of Lead Pollution from Vehicular Traffic on Highway-Side Grazing Areas: Challenges and Mitigation Policies. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2025, 22:311. 10.3390/ijerph22020311
55. Alasmary Z: Lead (Pb) Contamination in Soil and Plants at Military Shooting Ranges and Its Mitigation Strategies: A Comprehensive Review. Processes. 2025, 13:345. 10.3390/pr13020345
56. Balali-Mood M, Eizadi-Mood N, Hassanian-Moghaddam H, Etemad L, Moshiri M, Vahabzadeh M, Sadeghi M: Recent advances in the clinical management of intoxication by five heavy metals: Mercury, lead, chromium, cadmium and arsenic. Heliyon. 2025, 11:e42696. 10.1016/j.heliyon.2025.e42696
57. Tang W, Zhong H: Developing Methylmercury-Targeted Strategies to Safeguard Rice Consumers. Environ Health. 2025, 3:213–7. 10.1021/envhealth.4c00257