problem of water pollution with arsenic is maximum in which state of india
Arsenic contamination of groundwater In West Bengal, India, water is mostly supplied from rivers. Groundwater comes from deep tubewells, which are few in number. Because of the low quantity of deep tubewells, the risk of arsenic poisoning in West Bengal is comparatively less.[16] According to the World Health Organisation, "In Bangladesh, West Bengal (India), and some other areas most drinking-water used to be collected from open dug wells and ponds with little or no arsenic, but with contaminated water transmitting diseases such as diarrhoea, dysentery, typhoid, cholera, and hepatitis. Programmes to provide 'safe' drinking-water over the past 30 years have helped to control these diseases, but in some areas they have had the unexpected side-effect of exposing the population to another health problem—arsenic."[17] The acceptable level as defined by WHO for maximum concentrations of arsenic in safe drinking water is 0.01 mg/L. The Bangladesh government's standard is a fivefold greater rate, with 0.05 mg/L being considered safe. WHO has defined the areas under threat: Seven of the twenty districts of West Bengal have been reported to have ground water arsenic concentrations above 0.05 mg/L. The total population in these seven districts is over 34 million while the number using arsenic-rich water is more than 1 million (above 0.05 mg/L). That number increases to 1.3 million when the concentration is above 0.01 mg/L. According to a British Geological Survey study in 1998 on shallow tube-wells in 61 of the 64 districts in Bangladesh, 46 percent of the samples were above 0.01 mg/L and 27 percent were above 0.050 mg/L. When combined with the estimated 1999 population, it was estimated that the number of people exposed to arsenic concentrations above 0.05 mg/L is 28-35 million and the number of those exposed to more than 0.01 mg/L is 46-57 million (BGS, 2000).[17]
Supreme Court of India Judges used to be appointed by the president on the advice of the union cabinet. After 1993 (the Second Judges' Case), no minister, or even the executive collectively, can suggest any names to the president,[27][28] who ultimately decides on appointing them from a list of names recommended only by the collegium of the judiciary. Simultaneously, as held in that judgment, the executive was given the power to reject a recommended name. However, according to some,[who?] the executive has not been diligent in using this power to reject the names of bad candidates recommended by the judiciary.[29][30][31]
Swallowing 5) Closure of the nasopharynx
Vietnam War North Vietnamese victory