Bihar Uranium Study Debunked: How Flawed Research Methods and Pay-to-Publish Practices Created Unnecessary Health Panic

New Delhi:

A recent study published in Nature Scientific Reports claiming uranium detection in breast milk of Bihar mothers created widespread alarm. However, experts have now dismissed this as a case where sensationalism has trumped scientific rigor.

The research, which reported uranium levels of 5 micrograms per liter in breast milk samples from 40 women, has been challenged by leading nuclear scientist Dr. Dinesh Kumar Aswal, Member of the National Disaster Management Authority and former Group Director at Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, who called the findings "completely unnecessary" and "over-exaggerated."

Dr. Aswal pointed out that the World Health Organization's safe limit for uranium in drinking water is 30 micrograms per liter, making Bihar's reported value merely one-sixth of the acceptable threshold. For perspective, countries like Finland have documented uranium levels in drinking water ranging from 1000-3000 micrograms per liter with minimal biological consequences.

Scientific improbability further undermines the study's credibility. Dr. Aswal explained that uranium, being a heavy, non-reactive element, primarily exits the body through urine, with only 1-2 percent absorbed by the intestine. It typically accumulates in bones or kidneys over time, not in breast milk, as there is no known biological mechanism for uranium to enter lactation pathways.

The study's methodology has been criticized for significant calibration issues. While the researchers used ICP-MS (Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry) calibrated for 100-2,000 micrograms per liter, they reported a value of just 5 micrograms per liter. Dr. Aswal compared this to "using a measuring tape marked in meters and kilometers to measure millimeters," rendering the results highly questionable.

Additional concerns include the limited sample size of only 40 women, absence of complementary biological data from urine, blood, or bone samples, and lack of correlation between breast milk uranium levels and drinking water concentrations or maternal health indicators.

The journal itself raises questions. Nature Scientific Reports operates on an open-access, pay-to-publish model, charging approximately Rs 2.5 lakhs ($2,690) per paper. This format, sometimes referred to as "predatory publishing," may compromise rigorous peer review processes that would typically identify such methodological flaws.

Uranium naturally occurs in soil and water worldwide, with WHO setting a safe drinking water limit of 30 micrograms per liter. Some countries permit levels up to 100 micrograms per liter, making the reported finding of 5 micrograms per liter in milk—even if accurate—negligible from a health perspective.

The consequences of such flawed research extend beyond scientific discourse. When published under reputable journal branding, these studies can generate unwarranted public fear and erode trust in scientific institutions. Dr. Aswal emphasized that without proper calibration and comprehensive data, such findings should not be sensationalized, concluding that this paper reflects poor scientific judgment.