FDA urged to set new standards for arsenic in rice
11 replies, posted
[URL]http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/sep/19/fda-urged-to-set-standards-for-arsenic-in-rice/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS[/URL]
[QUOTE]
WASHINGTON (AP) - The [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/food-and-drug-administration/"]Food and Drug Administration[/URL] may consider new standards for the levels of arsenic in rice as consumer groups are calling for federal guidance on how much of the carcinogen can be present in food.
So far, [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/food-and-drug-administration/"]FDA[/URL] officials say they have found no evidence that suggests rice is unsafe to eat. The agency has studied the issue for decades but is in the middle of conducting a new study of 1,200 samples of grocery-store rice products _ short and long-grain rice, adult and
baby cereals, drinks and even rice cakes _ to measure arsenic levels.
Rice is thought to have arsenic in higher levels than most other foods because it is grown in water on the ground, optimal conditions for the contaminant to be absorbed in the rice. There are no federal standards for how much arsenic is allowed in food.
Arsenic is naturally present in water, air, food and soil in two forms, organic and inorganic. According to the [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/food-and-drug-administration/"]FDA[/URL], organic arsenic passes through the body quickly and is essentially harmless. Inorganic arsenic _ the type found in some pesticides and insecticides _
can be toxic and may pose a cancer risk if consumed at high levels or over a long period.
How much organic and inorganic arsenic rice eaters are consuming, and whether those levels are dangerous, still remains to be seen.
[URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/food-and-drug-administration/"]
FDA[/URL] Commissioner [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/margaret-a-hamburg/"]Margaret Hamburg[/URL] says consumers shouldn’t stop eating rice, though she does encourage a diverse diet just in case.
“Our advice right now is that consumers should continue to eat a balanced diet that includes a wide variety of grains _ not only for good nutrition but also to minimize any potential consequences from consuming any one particular food,” she said.
The agency on Wednesday released 200 of an expected 1,200 samples after the magazine [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/consumer/"]Consumer[/URL] Reports released its own study and called for federal standards for arsenic in rice. The [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/food-and-drug-administration/"]FDA[/URL] will not complete its study until the end of the year, [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/margaret-a-hamburg/"]Hamburg[/URL] said, and
cannot draw any conclusions from the results until then.
Both studies show relatively similar levels of arsenic in rice. The [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/food-and-drug-administration/"]FDA[/URL]’s analysis, including 200 samples, showed average levels of 3.5 to 6.7 micrograms of inorganic arsenic per serving. [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/consumer/"]Consumer[/URL] Reports, with 223 samples, found levels up to 8.7 micrograms. That
is roughly equivalent to one gram of arsenic in 115,000 servings of rice.
It is almost impossible to say how dangerous these levels are without a benchmark from the [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/federation/"]federal government[/URL]. [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/consumer/"]Consumer[/URL] Reports uses New Jersey’s drinking water standard _ a maximum of 5 micrograms in a liter of water _ as comparison because it is one of
the strictest in the country. But it is unclear how accurate it is to compare arsenic levels in water and arsenic levels in rice _ most people consume more water than rice, so drinking water standards may need to be tougher.
It is because of this uncertainty that consumer groups have urged the [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/food-and-drug-administration/"]FDA[/URL] to set a standard.
Urvashi Rangan of Consumer Reports says the group is not trying to alarm rice eaters and parents feeding their children rice, but to educate them so they can diversify their diets. Consumers should be more protected since arsenic is a known carcinogen and could
build up in the body over time, she said.
“It doesn’t make sense not to have standards for rice,” she said.
The Consumer Reports study found higher levels of arsenic in brown rice than white rice, a result of how the two different types are processed. It also found higher levels in rice produced in Southern U.S. states than in rice from California or Asia.
Rice growers jumped on the report. A statement from the industry group USA Rice Federation said that U.S. rice growers do not use pesticides with arsenic.
[/QUOTE]
More on this in the source
I read this as I eat rice...
Why can't they work on eliminating it all together..
[quote][B]There are no federal standards for how much arsenic is allowed in food[/B][/quote]
You mean to tell me there exists no controls or standards for the [I]most toxic element in existence[/I] in our food?
Way to go, government.
Why? I like the arsenic in my food.
[QUOTE=CabooseRvB;37778523]Why can't they work on eliminating it all together..[/QUOTE]
Arsenic is a common and important component of more than a few pesticides. Much like how there is a federally acceptable level of insect body parts per liter of peanut butter due to the fact that you cannot keep all of the fuckers from getting into the mix, you cannot keep all of the arsenic out of the rice.
"It has come to our attention that we should limit how much poison we allow in your food. This is a new thing for us."
[QUOTE=CabooseRvB;37778523]Why can't they work on eliminating it all together..[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=OP] Arsenic is naturally present in water, air, food and soil in two forms, organic and inorganic. According to the FDA, organic arsenic passes through the body quickly and is essentially harmless. Inorganic arsenic _ the type found in some pesticides and insecticides _
can be toxic and may pose a cancer risk if consumed at high levels or over a long period. [/QUOTE]
Eliminating it all would probably be impossible. The worry here is how the crops are treated for insects, or if the ground water happens to be contaminated. Either way, better farming practices usually clear these things up.
Somehow I interpreted this as people demanding more arsenic in their food.
I'm tired.
Wait, wait, wait, Arsenic in rice? I wonder why I've not died yet.
[editline]24th September 2012[/editline]
I eat a bout of rice every day.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.