# Be carefull where you get your rice from!



## RoadRash (Sep 29, 2010)

FYI 
2-3 portions a week seems to be OK from what I have read.Arsenic is naturally present in water, air, food and soil, in organic and inorganic forms. Inorganic arsenic may pose a cancer risk if consumed excessively.

The US Food and Drug Administration said that it planned to collect data on 1,200 food samples by the end of 2012 to make its own recommendation on arsenic intake. FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg added that consumers should not stop eating rice but encouraged a diverse diet.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19663082

http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/09/arsenic-in-rice-stirs-us-action-2.html


----------



## LincTex (Apr 1, 2011)

Interesting! First I heard of this.


----------



## pmabma (Dec 4, 2008)

I saw this on the news last night.


----------



## Sentry18 (Aug 5, 2012)

I read the other day that the avg age for a woman in Asia to develop breast cancer is 40-50, while in Western countries it is 60-70. I wonder if that has anything to do with rice consumption.


----------



## DKRinAK (Nov 21, 2011)

THis battle was fought back in 2006 over public water supplies.

After years of debate, delay and litigation, the EPA decreed ON on Jan. 1 that drinking water cannot have an arsenic concentration greater than 10 parts per billion (ppb). The previous standard, established in 1942, was 50 ppb.

According to EPA and U.S. Geological Society data compiled by the Natural Resources Defense Council, at least 52,000 Utahns drink water with arsenic levels between 8 ppb and 25 ppb. About 211,000 Utahns drink water with an arsenic concentration above 3 ppb, which the Washington, D.C.-based environmental group believes should be the standard.

A naturally occurring element, arsenic leaches into groundwater from some volcanic deposits and mining operations. The geology of the West makes this area particularly vulnerable to arsenic contamination.

In large doses, the compound can cause instant death. It also is known to cause cancer and harm neurological, immune, endocrine and cardiovascular systems.

Studies of large populations in Taiwan and Chile showed exposure to elevated levels of arsenic in the drinking water was associated with high incidences of cancer of the skin, bladder, kidney, liver and lungs.

But its health effects in smaller doses are less known.

The only arsenic study in the United States was conducted in Millard County, Utah. That study showed an association between arsenic, which ranged from 12 ppb to 120 ppb in the drinking water, and high rates of some diseases.

The study found male death rates from "hypertensive heart disease" were 220 percent higher than expected for Millard County residents. The rate of prostate cancer was 45 percent higher than expected.

In Fallon, Nev., where the childhood leukemia rate is 40 times the national average, health officials are investigating the possible role of arsenic. For years, Fallon has refused to treat its water, which has an arsenic concentration above 100 ppb.
Still, Scanlan said ongoing studies of the health effects of low-level arsenic concentrations should have been completed before EPA lowered the health standard.

Oddly the government could find a direct correlation to arsenic in the water and 'higher than expected' cancer rates - yet the same Governement cannot find a relation between the masses of radioactivity dumped in the same areas from open air testing and cancer rates.

So, now we are to believe it's the water and not the radiation? Please...

The same skewing - that of new residents - is ignored in one study and is the cause of the low numbers in the latter (radiation). Just like a child with a new hammer, the EPA looks for the latest "cause/hazard" to hammer - rice would seem to be the latest in a long line of victims of their help.

Full water article here
http://www.waterindustry.org/Water-Facts/arsenic-7.htm

Another spanking of EPA "Science"
http://nj.npri.org/nj99/03/facts.htm


----------

