SPECIAL FEATURES:
Email
Consumer Reports confirms arsenic in apple juice worries
New investigation finds high levels of inorganic arsenic in many top brands of apple juice.
Thu, Dec 01 2011 at 8:24 AM
Related Topics:
Photo: foilman/Flickr
It's been more than a year since I posed the question, Is there arsenic in your apple juice? Since that time, it's become clear that there is, in fact, arsenic in most brands of apple juice, and lots of it. But what no one seems to agree on is just how worried we should be about it.
The story made headlines again this fall as Dr. Oz (host of the "Dr. Oz Show") commissioned an independent study and found that 10 of three dozen apple juice samples had total arsenic levels exceeding 10 parts per billion (ppb). The limit for arsenic in bottled and public water is 10 ppb. The problem is that unlike drinking water, there are no current standards or regulations on the amount of arsenic that is allowed in apple juice.
For its part, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) went to great lengths to dispute Dr. Oz's findings, claiming that the apple juice on store shelves is safe because most arsenic in juices and other foods is of the organic type that is “essentially harmless.”
But a new investigation by Consumer Reports shows otherwise. Consumer Reports tested apple and grape juice, looked at federal health data, polled consumers, and interviewed health experts. According to their report, "roughly 10 percent of our juice samples, from five brands, had total arsenic levels that exceeded federal drinking-water standards. Most of that arsenic was inorganic arsenic, a known carcinogen."
Inorganic arsenic. Known carcinogen.
"Essentially harmless"? Not by a long shot. Sounds like the FDA has some 'splaining to do.
Will this new information change the type of juice that your family drinks in the morning?
The opinions expressed by MNN Bloggers and those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not reflect the opinions of MNN.com. While we have reviewed their content to make sure it complies with our Terms and Conditions, MNN is not responsible for the accuracy of any of their information.
You might also like:
Sign in with one of these accounts to add your comment.
EDITORS' PICKS
Advertisement
TODAY'S MOST POPULAR ON
- Student science experiment finds plants won't grow near Wi-Fi router
- 15 famous people who mysteriously disappeared
- The 9 nastiest things in your supermarket
- Archaeologists unearth 5,000-year-old 'third-gender' caveman
- 10 false facts most people think are true
- Jon Stewart explains the ‘Monsanto Protection Act’
- 13 natural remedies for the ant invasion
- Is that snake venomous?
- Bras don't actually work, says French study
- Is there a risk in becoming a 'bagel head'?
From our sponsor
NEWSLETTER
ABOUT Jenn Savedge
Green parenting author on raising eco-friendly kids.
Advertisement
Arsenic is quite a dangerous carcinogen. Surprisingly, chicken has 10 times more arsenic than apple juice. Check out this non commercial, science based website that goes into detail.
http://nutritionfacts.org/blog/2011/09/19/dr-oz-apple-juice-and-arsenic-...
I still want to know how much is in the apples prior to juicing. If there is an extreme quantity of arsenic in the juice, where is it coming from? If I juice my own apples, which I do now and then, am I still going to be consuming high levels of arsenic? Are the organic juices also showing such high levels of arsenic? There's just not really enough information here.
How much arsenic is found in wine? Wine is made from grape juice. Arsenic is found in grape juice. So, is the arsenic in wine higher than that in water? Which wines have more arsenic. I've always suspected that people who drink wine get cancer more often than those who don't drink alcohol.
You are literally comparing apples to water here. Of course a naturally occurring by-product of fruit will have more arsenic (and sugars and loads of other things) than water does. Furthermore, I'm a bit suspicious of the claim that 'most' was inorganic. Consumer Reports have measured the arsenic content down to the 10th yet they don't provide a lick of data on the content of the important inorganic arsenic? That's either lazy reporting or dishonest reporting, both being equally useless.