ARSENIC in RICE

[wgdanson]

Did anyone watch 'Trust Me I'm a Doctor' on BBC last night, or read the article on BBC News website. Apparently there is so much arsenic in white rice it is dangerous, carcinogenic, and can cause developmental problems, especially in children. Does this explain a lot in LOS?

The expert suggested soaking the rice overnight, then cooking in 5 times as much water and draining it. Will a rice cooker cope with that?

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38910848

[FritsSikkink]

Does this explain a lot in LOS? Yeah that there are foreigners that don't listen very well and look for an excuse to talk BS about Thai people. Thailand isn't mentioned in the article, Bangladesh is. rice isn't much of a problem rice milk can be.

[wgdanson]

Isn't Thailand one of the world's biggest producers of white rice, and is given to babies from day one?

The research showed that soaking the rice and cooking in 5 times water reduced the arsenic to 20%, or did I not listen, or read, very well.

[rak sa_ngop]

There is a major problem with arsenic occurring naturally in Bangladesh groundwater. Maybe this is an explanation for the problem with Bangladeshi rice (I did not watch the programme).

[Kwasaki]

33 minutes ago, wgdanson said:

The research showed that soaking the rice and cooking in 5 times water reduced the arsenic to 20%, or did I not listen, or read, very well.

 

This is a good read. 

https://authoritynutrition.com/arsenic-in-rice/

[FritsSikkink]

32 minutes ago, wgdanson said:

Isn't Thailand one of the world's biggest producers of white rice, and is given to babies from day one?

The research showed that soaking the rice and cooking in 5 times water reduced the arsenic to 20%, or did I not listen, or read, very well.

Cooking in more water reduces the risk, you understood that very well. Your statement:

"Apparently there is so much arsenic in white rice it is dangerous, carcinogenic, and can cause developmental problems, especially in children. Does this explain a lot in LOS?" is BS 

 

[wgdanson]

FritsSikkink knows better than the experts.

 

[lopburi3]

Actually this is not something new - Consumer Reports has reported on it for years now - it does vary by where grown and white rice is normally less of a problem than brown:

Quote

Brown rice has 80 percent more inorganic arsenic on average than white rice of the same type.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2015/01/how-much-arsenic-is-in-your-rice/index.htm

[wgdanson]

it's on Jeremy Vine on Radio 2 as we speak.

 

 

 

[wgdanson]

And here i was using Rice Bran Oil thinking it was healthier. However, rice cannot be SO poisonous as ther are billions of Chinese, Indians etc who's staple diet is rice. Hmmmmmm!

 

 

I blame Uncle Ben !

[robblok]

1 hour ago, wgdanson said:

And here i was using Rice Bran Oil thinking it was healthier. However, rice cannot be SO poisonous as ther are billions of Chinese, Indians etc who's staple diet is rice. Hmmmmmm!

 

 

I blame Uncle Ben !

The clue was where its grown.. a few people commented about that already. In Bangladesh there is a lot of natural occurring arsenic (according to one poster) that would explain it

[lopburi3]

Yes location is a major factor but almost all of Asia and USA, Europe and many other places have such issues.  It is not just Bangladesh.

[Ahab]

I do not trust articles that make statements such as "This is why rice contains about 10-20 times more arsenic than other cereal crops. But are these levels high enough to do us any real harm? " but do not provide any information on specific amounts of AS found in the rice, OR what levels are considered harmful. A quick google search found this http://arsenic.tamu.edu/pub/pubpres/DHAKA/dhaka3.pdf

 

Maybe someone smarter than me can tell me exactly what it means, but it appears that there is little to no issue with naturally occurring As in rice unless (possibly) the majority of your diet consists of rice.  It would appear it is not an issue for the majority of people that eat rice occasionally a few times a week, and not something I would worry about even if I ate rice every day (I don't eat rice currently due to dieting). My  father-in-law in Thailand lived to a ripe old age of 96 years, and my wife's grandmother lived to over 100 years old (in rural Buriram, eating rice a couple of times a day, every single day of their lives). Worry about getting in a car crash, hit by a truck, or something more likely to actually affect your health such as being struck by lightning. There are way more important things to worry about.

[Oxx]

9 hours ago, lopburi3 said:

Yes location is a major factor but almost all of Asia and USA, Europe and many other places have such issues.  It is not just Bangladesh.

 

Not really.  The situation in Bangladesh and parts of India is extreme.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arsenic_contamination_of_groundwater#India_and_Bangladesh

[lopburi3]

Having lived in Bangladesh and India am quite aware both places are extreme for a lot more than just arsenic.  The point is for a lot of the world rice is what is eaten so any reasonable steps to limit the amount of carcinogen intake should be considered and such discussion is justified.  

 

I suffer from skin cancer and recently lost bladder to cancer myself - probably nothing to do with arsenic but would not rule it out as a factor (especially as there is no family history of bladder cancer) but the obvious smoking gun will be my smoking life (which stopped 32 years ago).

 

There are factors that we can help control if we are made aware of them.

[FritsSikkink]

15 hours ago, wgdanson said:

FritsSikkink knows better than the experts.

 

No, I understand what the experts say

[rhythmworx]

Simple answer to the OP

No it doesn't explain anything about LOS

If your worried about carcinogens wear a mask that is rated against the fumes you breath on the street.

Nordstrom are a reputable manufacturer, just get the right filter and your safe, from fumes at least.

[Oxx]

From the BBC article:

 

"Rice however, is different from other crops, because it's grown under flooded conditions. This makes the arsenic locked in the soil more readily available, meaning that more can be absorbed into the rice grains"

 

This is clearly an inaccurate statement, since "dry rice" cultivation (also know as "upland" cultivation), which is widely practised in SE Asia, on average, doesn't involve the flooding of the rice field.  Thailand is a major producer of upland rice.  One might expect such rice typically to have lower arsenic levels.

[lopburi3]

Where exactly have you been living in Thailand that flooded paddy is not the normal method for rice growing?  Only a small amount is grown in the hills of Thailand; or anywhere else in South-East Asia.   

 

That being said in the USA the highest levels of arsenic seem to be found in Texas which (AFAIK) is not known for being a paddy area.

[Kwasaki]

14 minutes ago, Oxx said:

This is clearly an inaccurate statement,

Not really as it refers to flooded rice fields which there is the greater number of in Thailand.

 

Don't blame America it's the Russians fault ya know. 

[Oxx]

38 minutes ago, lopburi3 said:

Where exactly have you been living in Thailand that flooded paddy is not the normal method for rice growing?  Only a small amount is grown in the hills of Thailand; or anywhere else in South-East Asia.   

 

Actually, roughly 40% of Thailand's rice is grown as dry rice - almost all of it in Isaan.  So whilst you do see a lot of flooded fields in the central plain, they are not typical of the whole country.

 

From a Wikipedia's article:

 

"Of the region's [Isaan's] 155,400 km2, only 92,204 km2 is cultivated, and only 7,770 km2 of that is irrigated."

 

So, very little irrigation in Isaan.

[Odysseus123]

11 hours ago, lopburi3 said:

Having lived in Bangladesh and India am quite aware both places are extreme for a lot more than just arsenic.  The point is for a lot of the world rice is what is eaten so any reasonable steps to limit the amount of carcinogen intake should be considered and such discussion is justified.  

 

I suffer from skin cancer and recently lost bladder to cancer myself - probably nothing to do with arsenic but would not rule it out as a factor (especially as there is no family history of bladder cancer) but the obvious smoking gun will be my smoking life (which stopped 32 years ago).

 

There are factors that we can help control if we are made aware of them.

Your post is most curious as I thought that I would be the only one to get such a double whammy.Bladder cancer first then malignant melanoma second.Chemo..radiation...amputation..goodness me!.

 

Keep on truckin' and all the best to you.

[Craig krup]

Jesus. I eat 250g (dry weight) at a time, and I use just enough water and eat it all without dra...........................................