17 replies to this topic

[NuMystic]

Long time lurker and first time posting to get some feedback and thoughts about the story making the rounds now about significant amounts of organic and inorganic arsenic in rice, with brown rice and brown rice products being particularly high. This was noted even in some organic varieties.

Shockingly 365 Whole Foods Long Grain Brown was one of the worst offenders amongst numerous other recognizable "healthy" brands like Lundberg and Arrowhead Mills making the list with inorganic arsenic levels (per serving) exceeding the New Jersey drinking water limit (allowable per liter).

CR is calling for much more study, but found the levels to be high enough and pervasive enough that they are recommending that people limit their total rice consumption (including products made predominantly from rice like cereal, rice milk etc) to no more than 3 servings per week for adults and only 1 serving per week for children.

They specifically noted that those who regularly consume more rice than average had much higher levels of detectable arsenic in their urine. Those reporting consumption of one rice product in the prior 24 hours showed 44% more than those who had not. Those reporting eating two rice products had levels 70% higher than those who had no rice.

Would love to hear views and thoughts from those that have taken a serious look at the subject.

ABC News - Arsenic in Rice: New Report finds "Worrisome Levels":
http://abcnews.go.co...72#.UHK_wGjGVNE

LA Times - Rice Contains Worrisome Arsenic Levels, Says Consumer Reports:
http://www.latimes.c...,0,396689.story

Reuters - US Needs Arsenic Limits in Rice: Consumer Reports:
http://www.reuters.c...E88I0RR20120919

Arsenic in Brown Rice: Asians and Hispanic Affected More Than Average American
http://www.foodworld...ge-american.htm

[NuMystic]

Wow, no one has any thoughts or comments on this at all?

[Hebbeh]

I don't eat rice. Simply empty calories. And this is a good reason not to start.

[niner]

Like Hebbeh, I tend to avoid rice anyway, though I do eat it occasionally. Reuters quoted some "expert" who said "There is no such thing as a safe level of arsenic". I beg to differ. Now that we can measure infinitesimally small amounts of substances, down to single molecules in some cases, we are discovering that there is a little bit of everything in everything. The real question isn't whether or not you can detect it, it's what level is actually a danger.

So which is worse, a bowl of brown rice or the same number of calories in the form of Twinkies and Ho Hos?

[NuMystic]

I hear you Niner, but the basis for the "worrisome" designation doesn't come from the "expert" you're quoting. it's a chart presenting dozens upon dozens of rices and rice products on the shelves that tested with levels HIGHER than the current legal limits for NJ drinking water.

In almost all cases I have found municipal regulations to be on the low if not VERY low side when it comes to contaminants, a feeling shared by countless members right here on Longecity who choose to filter their tap water for this very reason. So we're talking about arsenic levels far above the infinitesimally small amounts you're suggesting.

When we get into a range of toxicity that even some city regulators have deemed unsafe we've moved well beyond the twinkie and ho ho parallel.

Edited by NuMystic, 12 October 2012 - 08:41 PM.

[niner]

I hear you Niner, but the basis for the "worrisome" designation doesn't come from the "expert" you're quoting. it's a chart presenting dozens upon dozens of rices and rice products on the shelves that tested with levels HIGHER than the current legal limits for NJ drinking water.

In almost all cases I have found municipal regulations to be on the low if not VERY low side when it comes to contaminants, a feeling shared by countless members right here on Longecity who choose to filter their tap water for this very reason. So we're talking about arsenic levels far above the infinitesimally small amounts you're suggesting.

When we get into a range of toxicity that even some city regulators have deemed unsafe we've moved well beyond the twinkie and ho ho parallel.

I was mostly responding to the "no such thing as a safe level" comment. Sure there is- there's a safe level of everything, if you define 'safe' as 'indistinguishable from control'. Whether or not the arsenic levels in rice, or in NJ water are safe or not is a separate question. It's possible that NJ went overboard, although I'd be inclined to believe them until I saw the data, at least. Modern society has quite a history of making irrational risk/benefit calculations regarding low concentrations of substances that are a problem in high concentration.

[NuMystic]

I agree fully with what you're saying but am trying to steer focus back to the Consumer Reports study itself which was exceptionally grounded from what I could see rather than the single quote from an unrelated pundit that was trotted out by Reuters in it's coverage of it.

Unfortunately CR is subscription only so there is no way for me to link to the article itself, which is the only reason I included links to some of the mainstream media pieces.

Edited by NuMystic, 13 October 2012 - 02:15 AM.

[Luminosity]

Thanks for writing about this. I want to know where the arsenic comes from and what they are going to do about it. Apparently nothing? Thanks again, FDA.

[Hebbeh]

Thanks for writing about this. I want to know where the arsenic comes from and what they are going to do about it. Apparently nothing? Thanks again, FDA.

It's in the soil and water the rice is grown in. What do you suggest?

http://www.fda.gov/F...s/ucm319827.htm

[NuMystic]

Yes there is naturally occurring arsenic in the soil, but the study shows that the predominant form of arsenic found in the 223 products sampled is actually Inorganic Arsenic (also the most toxic) which finds it's way into food from the use of arsenic laden manure as fertilizer, the feeding of arsenic containing drugs and animal byproducts to animals, soil residue from prior use or pesticides along with the continued use of pesticides containing arsenic in the US.

An excerpt from the article:

Inorganic Arsenic, the predominant form of arsenic in most of the 65 rice products we analyzed, is ranked by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as one of the more than 100 substances that are Group 1 carcinogens. It is known to cause bladder, lung, and skin cancer in humans, with the liver, kidney, and prostate now considered potential targets of arsenic induced cancers.

Though arsenic can enter soil or water due to weathering of arsenic-containing minerals in the earth, humans are more to blame than Mother Nature for arsenic contamination in the U.S. today, according to the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. The U.S. is the worlds leading user of arsenic, and since 1910 about 1.6 million tons have been used for agricultural and industrial purposes, about half of it only since the mid 1960's. Residues from the decades of use of lead-arsenate insecticides linger in agricultural soil today, even though their use was banned in the 1980's. Other arsenical ingredients in animal feed to prevent disease and promote growth are still permitted. Moreover, fertilizer made from poultry waste can contaminate crops with inorganic arsenic.

[Hebbeh]

Yes there is naturally occurring arsenic in the soil, but the study shows that the predominant form of arsenic found in the 223 products sampled is actually Inorganic Arsenic (also the most toxic) which finds it's way into food from the use of arsenic laden manure as fertilizer, the feeding of arsenic containing drugs and animal byproducts to animals, soil residue from prior use or pesticides along with the continued use of pesticides containing arsenic in the US.

An excerpt from the article:

Inorganic Arsenic, the predominant form of arsenic in most of the 65 rice products we analyzed, is ranked by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as one of the more than 100 substances that are Group 1 carcinogens. It is known to cause bladder, lung, and skin cancer in humans, with the liver, kidney, and prostate now considered potential targets of arsenic induced cancers.

Though arsenic can enter soil or water due to weathering of arsenic-containing minerals in the earth, humans are more to blame than Mother Nature for arsenic contamination in the U.S. today, according to the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. The U.S. is the worlds leading user of arsenic, and since 1910 about 1.6 million tons have been used for agricultural and industrial purposes, about half of it only since the mid 1960's. Residues from the decades of use of lead-arsenate insecticides linger in agricultural soil today, even though their use was banned in the 1980's. Other arsenical ingredients in animal feed to prevent disease and promote growth are still permitted. Moreover, fertilizer made from poultry waste can contaminate crops with inorganic arsenic.

Whether it's naturally occurring or from 100 years of fertilizer contamination, it's in the soil and isn't going away. Obviously, as stated, this is from 100 years of agriculture and virtually all rice crop land is contaminated (because of the way rice is grown). So regardless, it is in the soil and obviously isn't going away and you can't take a do over on the last 100 years. Most sources of arsenic have been banned for the last 25 years but obviously the contamination isn't going to just go away. So what would you suggest? Frankly, rice is a cheap garbage food anyway and just another reason not to eat it.

Edited by Hebbeh, 13 October 2012 - 08:53 PM.

[NuMystic]

My suggestions are irrelevant. I'm not here to make suggestions, I'm simply sharing information.

You're also completely ignoring what was also stated about arsenic containing drugs being given to livestock, arsenic laden feed, and the ongoing use of arsenic contaminated fertilizers.

Rice only ranks 3rd as the source of dietary exposure to arsenic. It's only being singled out as it is one of the most concentrated and isolated single food sources. The EPA estimates that rice contributes 17 percent of dietary exposure to inorganic arsenic, with fruit and fruit juices at 18 percent, and vegetables at 24 percent. A more complete study by the European Food Safety Authority found cereal products could account for more than half of the dietary exposure to inorganic arsenic, mainly because of rice. So yet one more reason to steer clear of what you consider "garbage" food.

As for suggestions, I'll just quote the article again:

Consumers Union believes a standard for arsenic should be set for rice, and industry should accelerate efforts to reduce arsenic levels in rice. They should also develop types of rice that take up less arsenic, and use rice with the lowest possible arsenic in products for young children, such as infant rice cereal.

Our scientists are also asking regulators to prohibit practices that may lead to increases in arsenic rice:

- The EPA should phase out use of pesticides containing arsenic. (as there are still some in use even today)

- The USDA and the EPA should end the use of arsenic-laden manure as fertilizer.

- The FDA should ban the feeding of arsenic containing drugs and animal byproducts to animals.

To find out more about what Consumers Union is doing on the subject and to get involved, go to ConsumersUnion.org/arsenic. On the international stage, a group advising the World Health Organization is meeting in 2014 to consider proposed arsenic standards in rice. Limits of 200 ppb (inorganic) for white rice and 300 ppb (total or inorganic) for brown rice are under discussion.

The FDA also says it is studying arsenic in rice and rice products to determine the level and types of arsenic typically found and to identify ways to reduce it.

Being that one of the largest dietary sources for inorganic arsenic is actually fruit and vegetables I would think that strong support for the proposed bullet points above seem worthy of consideration even if you could care less about "garbage food" like rice.

[Shepard]

I don't have much to add other than I eat rice. I eat white, not brown. Looks like white came out better in the arsenic arena. I soak mine for quite a while and cook with plenty of water, so I feel okay about continuing to eat rice.

[Hebbeh]

My suggestions are irrelevant. I'm not here to make suggestions, I'm simply sharing information.

You are not simply sharing information. You are attempting to create debate....from your second post...and continuing on from there.

Wow, no one has any thoughts or comments on this at all?

You're also completely ignoring what was also stated about arsenic containing drugs being given to livestock, arsenic laden feed, and the ongoing use of arsenic contaminated fertilizers.

I wasn't ignoring anything. How did you come to that conclusion?

[niner]

Residues from the decades of use of lead-arsenate insecticides linger in agricultural soil today

Hey. A two-fer!

Just for the record, although I'm not alarmed by the 10 micrograms of arsenic I had for dinner tonight, I'd still be in favor of better practices in the food industry. If we tested food, and labeled it for arsenic content, I guarantee you that arsenic levels would plummet, just like trans fat levels did when we finally labeled those. And food costs would probably rise by some amount.

[NuMystic]

You are not simply sharing information. You are attempting to create debate....from your second post...and continuing on from there.

So your quoting my soliciting thoughts and commentary demonstrates my "attempting to create debate"? Interesting interpretation that.

I wasn't ignoring anything. How did you come to that conclusion?

I came to that conclusion based on your implying that this is all down to practices abandoned 25 years ago, when in fact there is still a significant amount of inorganic arsenic entering the food supply through a variety of agricultural methods in practice today.


Furthermore, your suggestion that virtually all soil is contaminated and beyond help isn't supported by the significantly varied test results from source to source, nor does it address how soil health can be improved and how concentrations of residue can be significantly reduced once sustainable agricultural methods are adopted which are free of the contaminants in question.

I don't have much to add other than I eat rice. I eat white, not brown. Looks like white came out better in the arsenic arena. I soak mine for quite a while and cook with plenty of water, so I feel okay about continuing to eat rice.

Shepard, sounds like you're already adhering to what is being suggested as a best practice for those who choose to continue preparing rice themselves.

The article specifically talks about being able to cut exposure by rinsing raw rice before cooking, and using a ratio of 6 to 1 then draining excess water afterward, which is a traditional method in Asia that most have abandoned more recently as other methods were promoted to retain more nutrients and vitamins. Research is showing that rinsing and cooking with more water removes about 30% of the inorganic arsenic content.

Edited by NuMystic, 13 October 2012 - 11:36 PM.

[Luminosity]

Thanks for the info, NuMystic. I appreciate it. All your points seem valid to me. We need to stop adding arsenic to the food supply in any way. If this wasn't manmade, it would have been a huge problem long before this, giving how popular rice has always been. This sucks because I eat a lot of rice.

[NuMystic]

Looks as though the article is available in it's entirety even to non-subscribers now:
http://www.consumerr...-food/index.htm