In article >,
Mark Thorson > wrote:

> Emma Thackery wrote:

> > Arsenic In Chicken Feed May Pose Health Risks To Humans, C&EN
> > Reports [excerpt]
>
> > Pets may not be the only organisms endangered by some food
> > additives. An arsenic-based additive used in chicken feed may pose
> > health risks to humans who eat meat from chickens that are raised
> > on the feed, according to an article in the April 9 issue of
> > Chemical & Engineering News, the weekly news magazine of the
> > American Chemical Society.

> > Roxarsone, the most common arsenic-based additive used in chicken
> > feed, is used to promote growth, kill parasites and improve
> > pigmentation of chicken meat. In its original form, roxarsone is
> > relatively benign. But under certain anaerobic conditions, within
> > live chickens and on farm land, the compound is converted into more
> > toxic forms of inorganic arsenic. Arsenic has been linked to
> > bladder, lung, skin, kidney and colon cancer, while low-level
> > exposures can lead to partial paralysis and diabetes, the article
> > notes......
>
> That last sentence would be true as a stand-alone
> sentence, but in context it implies something which
> is not even remotely true -- that arsenic from
> chicken feed additives has actually caused any
> of the listed dread diseases in people.

That's a stretch. I don't think it implies that. It references
arsenic, not arsenic in chicken feed. The concern here is that Federal
agencies responsible for food safety clearly do not know (1) what
comprises a safe level of such compounds in foods consumed by either
humans or chickens; or (2) how much of the toxic forms of inorganic
arsenic are actually making it into the chicken feed. Personally, I'd
like to know the answer to those questions. Ignorance is not bliss.

> In the U.S., the FDA tolerance level for arsenic
> from roxarsone in chicken muscle meat is 0.5 ppm.
> Wild-caught crabs, oysters, and clams from the ocean
> would never be able to meet an arsenic level that low.
> The tolerance limit is 76 ppm in crabs, 86 ppm
> in clams and oysters.

I guess you didn't read the rest of the Chemical and Engineering News
article (which was based on a news release from the American Chemical
Society:

"Complicating the issue is the fact that no one knows the exact amount
of arsenic found in chicken meat or ingested by consumers who frequently
eat chicken. "Neither the Food and Drug Administration nor the
Department of Agriculture has actually measured the level of arsenic in
the poultry meat that most people consume,"...."

Emma