PDA

View Full Version : Rice Bran and Arsenic?



HoofHeartSoul
May. 25, 2009, 09:21 AM
to those of you who feed their horse rice bran, and know about how in august of 2008, they found alarmingly high amounts of INorganic arsenic in rice bran.

and went as far as to say rice bran contains the highest inorganic arsenic content of all widely available commercial rice products.


do you still feed it?

i'm looking for something to give my horse a little extra something (and NO its not arsenic LOL :D), and was thinking about the rice bran but have been debating this since august of 2008 lol

LINK: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14592-superfood-rice-bran-contains-arsenic.html

you can also googe rice bran + arsenic it A LOT of articles will come up.

HoofHeartSoul
May. 25, 2009, 01:25 PM
nobody?

Evalee Hunter
May. 25, 2009, 01:29 PM
Been discussed before. Conclusion was this was a non-issue. Don't remember exactly why ... maybe the only rice bran that was high in arsenic was grown in China & the rice bran fed here is grown here or something like that? I just remember the conclusion was that this was NOT something to bother worrying about.

dwblover
May. 25, 2009, 01:30 PM
I actually stopped feeding a product I was using that contained rice bran when those studies came out. I'm now using corn oil and flax seed for the coat and extra calories.

deltawave
May. 25, 2009, 01:33 PM
in august of 2008, they found alarmingly high amounts of INorganic arsenic in rice bran

Who are "they", in this case? I've heard fourth-hand of this but have never bothered to track down the actual data and draw conclusions.

Been feeding rice bran and flax seed for years, without a problem. Not on my "worry radar".

rcloisonne
May. 25, 2009, 02:43 PM
I actually stopped feeding a product I was using that contained rice bran when those studies came out. I'm now using corn oil and flax seed for the coat and extra calories.
Well flax seed does contain quite a bit of a cyanide like compound so not totally harmless either . ;)

evans36
May. 25, 2009, 03:53 PM
Rice bran contains both of the elements that can mix to make arsenic. It doesn't actually contain the arsenic. That's why it's not good to soak the bran first, because that does actually create arsenic. But even then if you're feeding less than 2 lbs per day it shouldn't be an issue because the amount would be a trace amount. Some folks boil the bran first, and this takes the arsenic ingredients out, but it also makes the arsenic first and then it catches you in the face when you breathe the steam, so not great. Basically feeding rice bran either fresh or stabilized is perfectly fine as long as you're keeping it <2lbs per day. There are trace amounts of arsenic in an awful lot of stuff out there - including our water. And some folks actually feed horses small amounts of arsenic to whet appetite. And because of the chemistry, arsenic doesn't build up in tissue, so if the animal doesn't die immediately then it's not going to die because of arsenic (unless it gets a lethal dose at one time in the future).

kahjul
May. 25, 2009, 04:15 PM
After discovering that flax is a highly no-no food for my girl I switched to rice bran. She has been on it for almost 2 years. This is the first I've heard of the arsenic thing, so I'll just put my head right back in the sand, thank you.

Evalee Hunter
May. 25, 2009, 06:16 PM
Rice bran contains both of the elements that can mix to make arsenic. It doesn't actually contain the arsenic. That's why it's not good to soak the bran first, because that does actually create arsenic. . . .

Well, aresenic IS AN ELEMENT. No way that two elements can mix to make arsenic. Not possible chemically.


Some folks boil the bran first, and this takes the arsenic ingredients out, but it also makes the arsenic first and then it catches you in the face when you breathe the steam, so not great. . . .

There are no aresenic ingredients. Arsenic is an element. It is either there or it is not there. Whether or not arsenic can evaporate with the water (steam) so you could breathe it, I do not know but I would think that arsenic, a metalic element, would be a whole lot less volatile than water.


And because of the chemistry, arsenic doesn't build up in tissue, so if the animal doesn't die immediately then it's not going to die because of arsenic (unless it gets a lethal dose at one time in the future).

I find it a little hard to believe that arsenic doesn't "build up" in the body. In fact, that is supposedly what killed Phar Lap (because, yes, the one thing in your post that was correct is that arsenic is an old remedy for a poor appetite).

superD
May. 25, 2009, 06:26 PM
There are soooo many feding options out there why not just try something else instead of worrying? My horse gets ultium and beet pulp he does great with that and he is a hard keeper.

Evalee Hunter
May. 25, 2009, 09:46 PM
There are soooo many feding options out there why not just try something else instead of worrying? My horse gets ultium and beet pulp he does great with that and he is a hard keeper.

BUT the fifth item on the ingredients list for Ultium is RICE BRAN. Thus, you do NOT avoid feeding rice bran by feeding Ultium because Ultium is a rice bran based horse food. Now what?

Spiritpaws
May. 26, 2009, 06:11 AM
The samples of rice tested last year were from the US, China, and the EU.

Only China has published acceptable levels of arsenic for rice (whether they follow those guidelines is another matter).

The UK just issued a warning against rice milk for infants and toddlers due to the cyanide content.

The question that comes to mind is why is the cyanide concentration in rice higher now than it was 30 years ago?

Evalee Hunter
May. 26, 2009, 07:06 AM
. . . . Only China has published acceptable levels of arsenic for rice (whether they follow those guidelines is another matter).

The UK just issued a warning against rice milk for infants and toddlers due to the cyanide content.

The question that comes to mind is why is the cyanide concentration in rice higher now than it was 30 years ago?

The question that comes to my mind is: are BOTH arsenic AND cyanide found in rice?? They are NOT the same. We have been discussing arsenic & you start discussing arsenic, then you change to cyanide. Please clarify.

And what makes you think the cyanide concentration in rice is higher than it was 30 years ago? Do you have any evidence of that? How about comparisons for arsenic concentrations in rice?

deltawave
May. 26, 2009, 08:25 AM
Rice bran contains both of the elements that can mix to make arsenic. It doesn't actually contain the arsenic. That's why it's not good to soak the bran first, because that does actually create arsenic. . . .

Cool. Alchemy! After all these centuries, those evil feed companies have figured out how to do it! Next step: base metal into gold. :p

monstrpony
May. 26, 2009, 08:42 AM
Cool. Alchemy! After all these centuries, those evil feed companies have figured out how to do it! Next step: base metal into gold. :p


Mere alchemy? I was thinking maybe nucular fushin.

What IS safe to feed anymore? :confused:

deltawave
May. 26, 2009, 08:44 AM
Cap'n Crunch! :D

HoofHeartSoul
May. 26, 2009, 01:27 PM
The samples of rice tested last year were from the US, China, and the EU.

Only China has published acceptable levels of arsenic for rice (whether they follow those guidelines is another matter).

The UK just issued a warning against rice milk for infants and toddlers due to the cyanide content.

The question that comes to mind is why is the cyanide concentration in rice higher now than it was 30 years ago?


yep there were actually a couple samples from diffrent states/companies in the study. including a sample from ohio (where i live) ...which is what concerned me.

Ibex
May. 26, 2009, 03:06 PM
Cap'n Crunch! :D

Dear lord, don't tell my mare that. She'll start demanding it. :rolleyes:

Melyni
May. 26, 2009, 03:15 PM
The samples of rice tested last year were from the US, China, and the EU.

Only China has published acceptable levels of arsenic for rice (whether they follow those guidelines is another matter).

The UK just issued a warning against rice milk for infants and toddlers due to the cyanide content.

The question that comes to mind is why is the cyanide concentration in rice higher now than it was 30 years ago?

Arsenic and cyanide are not the same thing, so this is a bit confusing!

And higher levels can just mean that we have better ways of detecting and measuring them now.

Arsenic was used in the old days as a horse tonic. Low chronic arsenic supplementation produces a very glossy shiny coat (and hair in humans), if you are on a low chronic arsenic intake it's stopping it cold turkey that will kill you! and has done before.
Very low levels are not usually a problem

Neither is low levels of cyanide in fact. Cyanide is commonly found in many plants (look at the levels in alfalfa or clover) the liver is well set up to deal with cyanide. It's only if the levels get too high that problem start to occur.


Yours
MW

Seal Harbor
May. 26, 2009, 03:25 PM
Rice bran contains both of the elements that can mix to make arsenic. It doesn't actually contain the arsenic. That's why it's not good to soak the bran first, because that does actually create arsenic. But even then if you're feeding less than 2 lbs per day it shouldn't be an issue because the amount would be a trace amount. Some folks boil the bran first, and this takes the arsenic ingredients out, but it also makes the arsenic first and then it catches you in the face when you breathe the steam, so not great. Basically feeding rice bran either fresh or stabilized is perfectly fine as long as you're keeping it <2lbs per day. There are trace amounts of arsenic in an awful lot of stuff out there - including our water. And some folks actually feed horses small amounts of arsenic to whet appetite. And because of the chemistry, arsenic doesn't build up in tissue, so if the animal doesn't die immediately then it's not going to die because of arsenic (unless it gets a lethal dose at one time in the future).

You mean FLAX SEED has both things necessary to make CYANIDE - the seed when wet or heated the two components join and form CYANIDE. Which is why it is boiled or cooked prior to giving it to a horse, however the horses stomach acid will start breaking the components down before they make cyanide if the seed is fed. I've never heard of anyone boiling rice bran.

There is cyanide in the air we breathe.

Spiritpaws
May. 27, 2009, 06:34 AM
My appologies on the cyanide/arsenic. Have to remember to drink full cup of coffee in the am before posting.

My question about arsenic levels is based on the amount of data coming out on plants that are subjected to our chemical farming arsenals: for instance weeds that are now round up resistant. Is the rice now grown on factory farms merely producing more arsenic as the plants' means of survival.

Evalee Hunter
May. 27, 2009, 07:26 AM
. . . . The question that comes to mind is why is the cyanide concentration in rice higher now than it was 30 years ago?


. . . . My question about arsenic levels is based on the amount of data coming out on plants that are subjected to our chemical farming arsenals: for instance weeds that are now round up resistant. Is the rice now grown on factory farms merely producing more arsenic as the plants' means of survival.

The real questions are:

IS RICE HIGHER IN ARSENIC THAN IT WAS 30 YEARS AGO?

WHAT EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE THAT RICE IS HIGHER IN ARSENIC NOW?

No one, including you, Spiritpaws, has posted any evidence that rice is higher in arsenic now than previously.

What advantage would a plant "producing more arsenic" have over another plant that is producing less arsenic? IF a plant that has higher levels of arsenic has an advantage that advantage can only be perpetuated to the next generation if the seed of the plant with more arsenic is used to grow the next generation.

It is POSSIBLE (not necessarily the case, but possible) that humans have developed new seed varieties of rice that have higher levels of arsenic & since arsenic levels were not considered (tested for) during the development of the seed, we inadvertently (unintended consequence) ended up with rice with more arsenic. Than, again, this may not be true at all.

I still go back to my first question: IS rice today higher in arsenic?

Melyni
May. 27, 2009, 03:15 PM
My appologies on the cyanide/arsenic. Have to remember to drink full cup of coffee in the am before posting.

My question about arsenic levels is based on the amount of data coming out on plants that are subjected to our chemical farming arsenals: for instance weeds that are now round up resistant. Is the rice now grown on factory farms merely producing more arsenic as the plants' means of survival.

If that is in fact the case, that the various cereal grains are testing higher for arsenic than they used to, if could be due to several things:

More sensitive detection methods, the old chemical tests were pretty rude and crude and it took a good bit of the the stuff to test positive, the modern spectrophotometric methods are far more sensitive.

Use of arsenic salts as pesticides, use of the modern pesticides has done away with a lot of the old mercury and arsenic salts as pesticides, but in some parts of the world they are still used.


Contamination of the soil by residues containing arsenic.

BTW just a small point, plants can't 'produce' arsenic they have to accumulate it, as it is an element and was produced during the early stages of earths formation, it can only be combined and recombined, it can't be created (outside of a nuclear laboratory).

The arsenic they accumulate comes from the earth, literally the soil. Most of the arsenic contamination we get comes form mine runoffs or from old metal workings.

Yours
MW

HoofHeartSoul
May. 28, 2009, 12:04 AM
you have to remember that organic arsenic has LESS chance of killing you than INorganic.

the article is talking about INorganic arsenic in rice bran. from the stuff they use to spray the plants with to get rid of parasites. it has a MUCH better change of killing you than the natural form produced by some plants. low amounts of ORGANIC arsenic do indeed have some health benefits....but no INorganic.

if this was ORGANIC arsenic i wouldn't be worried so much.

but alas it is not. :(

Spiritpaws
May. 28, 2009, 06:54 AM
Interesting article from Dartmouth College (toxic metals research) on the increase of arsenic in ground water from pesticides sprayed against the gypsy mouth and the boll wevil in the 1950's.

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~toxmetal/research/projects/plants.html

chancellor2
May. 28, 2009, 09:33 AM
I live in an area where arsenic is high in ground water because of spraying of fruit trees. Our water is 10 times the limit set by whomever sets that limit.
My former boss is an expert on arsenic. When we bought the house, we consulted with her about it.
Apparently, ingestion of arsenic by shorter lived animals is not really a big problem. Even occasionally drinking our water that has not be through the reverse osmosis system is not really a big deal.
For longer lived animals, the arsenic builds in the system and causes nasty skin cancers.

BornToRide
May. 28, 2009, 10:54 AM
And this would be another reason why I feed as unprocessed and natural /organic as possible. The recent article in the Horse Journal on horse feeds was also not really warm and fuzzy and considering the issues we have had with other pet foods in the recent past I want to know what exactly I am feeding and where it comes from.

chancellor2
May. 28, 2009, 10:56 AM
And this would be another reason why I feed as unprocessed and natural /organic as possible. The recent article in the Horse Journal on horse feeds was also not really warm and fuzzy and considering the issues we have had with other pet foods in the recent past I want to know what exactly I am feeding and where it comes from.

So you grow your own foods then?

El Tovar
May. 28, 2009, 01:19 PM
This is from a credible source, Dartmouth.

It explains WHY rice has arsenic-scientifically.

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~toxmetal/research/projects/plants.html

JB
May. 28, 2009, 02:36 PM
ET, thanks, that was REALLY fascinating!!

BornToRide
May. 28, 2009, 07:20 PM
ET, thanks, that was REALLY fascinating!!Yes, I agree. Thank you for posting the link. Very informative!:)