Rice finding 406
Source evidence and comparison details for the Rice profile.
Raw household rice (form unstated) · Total arsenic (tAs) · 369 household rice samples.
Selected finding and reference
369 household rice samples. Basis: unspecified.
Not described for rice; no non-detect count reported
HMI baseline position
Limited data: The source reports a range, percentile or extreme value; only a mean, median or sample result can be positioned against a reference. Missing evidence never means low contamination.
The source reports a range, percentile or extreme value; only a mean, median or sample result can be positioned against a reference.
Reference version and interpretation
Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.
No admitted reference
The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.
Collection period
2021–2023
No year-by-year sample register is reconstructed from this summary.
Geographic scope
Households in 11 arsenic-exposed
Sampling site within one study.
Sampling, analysis and reporting limits
0.5 g digested with conc. HNO3 overnight, water bath 60 C 2 h, HClO4 on hotplate 160 C; total As by GF-AAS (PerkinElmer PinAAcle 900T).
Not described for rice; no non-detect count reported
Shared samples and study overlap
Subgroup rows, statistics of the same subgroup and the study total share samples; they are not independent results.
Each table row describes a food/analyte result. Repeated rows do not add independent samples or datasets. No cross-study trend is calculated in this comparison mode.
Reported values, conversion and source locator
| Source statistic | Original result | Displayed unit conversion |
|---|---|---|
| max | The highest arsenic content in the rice was 821 µg/Kg | none |
Results 'Rice arsenic concentration', page 8 (Fig. 7B); repeated in Discussion page 12.
No moisture, cooking-yield or species conversion is applied to the original finding above. Any basis conversion used for its HMI comparison is stated separately with the numerical target.