3 ms·
Because it isn't a significant source of dietary arsenic.
by delinka 8y ago
Because it isn't a significant source of dietary arsenic.
- DoctorOetker 8y agothe article states: >Billions of people eat rice daily, but it contributes more arsenic to the human diet than any other food. so that is in direct contradiction to your claim, according to you, what are then the more significant sources of dietary arsenic? then we can start comparing levels...
- delinka 8y agoThere's a definition for "significant source" for each type of food component. The food components for which this is a valid statement are fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, dietary fiber, sugars, and various vitamins. My comment is sarcasm and intends to indicate that arsenic comes in such an insignificant quantity as to not even be on FDA's radar for even defining levels for reporting on nutritional labels.
- InitialLastName 8y agoGiven that (as I have to assume) most human diets are optimized to some extent around the parameter "Doesn't contain much arsenic", something could be the largest contributor of arsenic while still providing too little arsenic to have an effect on health.