Measurement / residue studyindependent cross-checkabstract checked I-CHK-127 standard review

Arsenic feed additives raised arsenic in Chinese market chicken

Public Health Risk of Arsenic Species in Chicken Tissues from Live Poultry Markets of Guangdong Province, China.

Overview

Hu Y et al.. Environ Sci Technol 2017 · PMID 28219238 · DOI 10.1021/acs.est.6b06258

Where roxarsone was used, chicken and especially liver contained more arsenic; estimated cancer risk was above priority levels for many adults.

Does the study support the specific claim? Yes · Methodological quality: moderate

Original publication

Plain-language summary

Study explained simply
What did the researchers want to find out?

What arsenic species are in chicken tissues and feeds in Guangdong, and what is the cancer risk?

How was the study done?

Exposure measurement of feeds and chicken tissues from live poultry markets

How many people, animals or samples were studied?

not stated in abstract

What was actually found?

Feeds with ROX had inorganic arsenic 0.19-9.7 mg/kg. Livers had much higher total arsenic than muscle; urban-market muscle higher than rural. Incremental lifetime cancer risk above the 10^-4 priority level for 70% (Guangzhou) and 30% (Lianzhou) of adults.

How large was the observed effect?

Feeds with ROX had inorganic arsenic 0.19-9.7 mg/kg. Livers had much higher total arsenic than muscle; urban-market muscle higher than rural. Incremental lifetime cancer risk above the 10^-4 priority level for 70% (Guangzhou) and 30% (Lianzhou) of adults.

What do the results mean in everyday life?

Where arsenic drugs are allowed, chicken can be a relevant arsenic source.

What are the study's limitations?

Regional; Risk model assumptions; sample size not in abstract

What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

Supports the mechanism; region-specific.

Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

Not applicable to EU production.

What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

Does not show actual cancer cases.

Scientific in-depth review

1. Full reference

Authors
Hu Y et al.
Journal
Environ Sci Technol
Year
2017
Identifier
PMID 28219238 DOI 10.1021/acs.est.6b06258
Verification
verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-26; Crossref 2026-10-26
Retracted
no
Corrections
none
Extent checked
abstract only
Conflicts of interest and funding

not stated in abstract

2. Research question

What arsenic species are in chicken tissues and feeds in Guangdong, and what is the cancer risk?

3. Study design and population

Study design
Measurement / residue study – Exposure measurement of feeds and chicken tissues from live poultry markets
Population

Chicken tissues (liver, breast, drumstick) and commercial feeds

Country

China

Period

not stated

Sample size

not stated in abstract

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

as described in the abstract

4. Methods and endpoints

Exposure / intervention

Roxarsone-containing feeds

Comparator

Feeds without ROX

Endpoints

Arsenic species; incremental lifetime cancer risk

Statistical methods

as reported in the abstract

5. Actual results

Results

Feeds with ROX had inorganic arsenic 0.19-9.7 mg/kg. Livers had much higher total arsenic than muscle; urban-market muscle higher than rural. Incremental lifetime cancer risk above the 10^-4 priority level for 70% (Guangzhou) and 30% (Lianzhou) of adults.

Absolute risks

not reported

Authors' conclusion

There is a significant need to phase out arsenic-based feed additives in China.

6. Strengths

  • Feed and tissue measured

7. Weaknesses

  • Regional
  • Risk model assumptions; sample size not in abstract

8. Risk of bias

Orienting tool
none applicable
Type of assessment
simplified assessment (abstract only)
Full formal assessment
no
Overall risk of bias
some concerns
Rationale

Exposure study.

9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation

Higher risk estimate than US/other Chinese data; depends on intake assumptions.

10. Relevance to the specific claim

Shows that where roxarsone is used, risk estimates can exceed priority thresholds.

11. Independent contrary findings

12. Transferability to Germany and Europe

13. Overall methodological judgement

Where roxarsone was used, chicken and especially liver contained more arsenic; estimated cancer risk was above priority levels for many adults.

Multidimensional assessment
Multidimensional assessment
Authenticity of the sourceverified
Methodological qualitymoderate
Risk of biassome concerns
Precision of resultslow
Directnessdirect
Reproducibilitypartly replicated
Consistency with the overall evidencemixed
Regional transferabilitylow
Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)not applicable

14. Open questions

15. Linked fact checks