Why we raised an alarm on apple juice
Apparently we touched a nerve. Some conversations are difficult to have, especially when they challenge conventional thinking. Last week I did a show that revealed the test results for total arsenic in store-bought apple juice. Our show hired an independent lab, which found total arsenic levels in apple juice to be above the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's arsenic limit for drinking water in 10 out of 36 samples.
In the show I drew attention to the fact that our regulatory process for juice should be clearer. I did this because I wanted parents to know where their apple juice comes from, what's in it and how it's monitored for safety. Opinions came from all directions. Let mine be clear: We need more stringent restrictions on arsenic in fruit juice.
Right now the standard the EPA sets for arsenic in drinking water is 10 parts per billion. Some have argued for even lower levels due to evolving insights into the toxic nature of arsenic. The Food and Drug Administration picked the same 10-ppb limit for bottled water but recently set a "level of concern" for apple juice at 23 ppb. This is based on the assumption that people consume less juice than water.
But is this a safe assumption? Many young children drink more juice than water. Why not err on the side of caution and offer parents the peace of mind that the arsenic content of the apple juice and the water they purchase is the same?
Part of the discussion this week centered around the difference between inorganic versus organic arsenic. Inorganic arsenic is the more toxic kind, and the FDA claims it is only concerned about this form since organic arsenic is safe. I challenge this assumption. There simply isn't consensus about whether organic arsenic is safe enough for unregulated consumption.
The FDA certainly shared this concern when it removed organic arsenic from a poultry feed additive in June. Roxarsone, a form of organic arsenic, had been used for decades to fatten up chickens in the weeks leading to slaughter. Although we had believed that chickens would flush it out of their systems before being processed and making it into consumers' ovens, the FDA found that some chicken livers were converting the organic form of arsenic to the harmful inorganic form. In the interest of public safety, FDA officials removed it from the market.
Why not extend the same concern to arsenic levels in apple juice? Granted, we are not chickens and the conversion process in humans isn't known, but as a parent, I would rather be safe than sorry.
Right now we import approximately 60 percent of our apple concentrate from China and other countries. What was once a shining symbol of American agricultural prominence has been outsourced to other countries that can undersell our farmers, in part because we strictly regulate the arsenic pesticides and safety of our apples, and other countries do not. By accepting this reality, we are relinquishing control over the safety of our food supply.
Why work so hard to protect our domestic food supply with wise regulations if the same dangers can be imported without regulation?
As a heart surgeon, I have seen many changes in medical practices that challenge the status quo. When I sit through grand rounds with other doctors, the purpose is to self-correct our methods, to do better and learn progressively from each other's experiences. We need to have the same approach to food-safety regulations. At the very least, we need to be receptive to having the discussion. There needs to be accountability by regulatory agencies and industry trade groups to parents who are doing their best to raise healthy children.
When I request an explanation of guidelines on arsenic in apple juice for our show and am told to file a Freedom of Information Act request by the FDA, we have lost perspective. We have a right to know and need to ask the hard questions. Exercising that right isn't fear-mongering; it's acting in the public interest.
Dr. Mehmet Oz is host of the nationally syndicated "The Dr. Oz Show."
But is this a safe assumption? Many young children drink more juice than water. Why not err on the side of caution and offer parents the peace of mind that the arsenic content of the apple juice and the water they purchase is the same?
Part of the discussion this week centered around the difference between inorganic versus organic arsenic. Inorganic arsenic is the more toxic kind, and the FDA claims it is only concerned about this form since organic arsenic is safe. I challenge this assumption. There simply isn't consensus about whether organic arsenic is safe enough for unregulated consumption.
The FDA certainly shared this concern when it removed organic arsenic from a poultry feed additive in June. Roxarsone, a form of organic arsenic, had been used for decades to fatten up chickens in the weeks leading to slaughter. Although we had believed that chickens would flush it out of their systems before being processed and making it into consumers' ovens, the FDA found that some chicken livers were converting the organic form of arsenic to the harmful inorganic form. In the interest of public safety, FDA officials removed it from the market.
Why not extend the same concern to arsenic levels in apple juice? Granted, we are not chickens and the conversion process in humans isn't known, but as a parent, I would rather be safe than sorry.
Right now we import approximately 60 percent of our apple concentrate from China and other countries. What was once a shining symbol of American agricultural prominence has been outsourced to other countries that can undersell our farmers, in part because we strictly regulate the arsenic pesticides and safety of our apples, and other countries do not. By accepting this reality, we are relinquishing control over the safety of our food supply.
Why work so hard to protect our domestic food supply with wise regulations if the same dangers can be imported without regulation?
As a heart surgeon, I have seen many changes in medical practices that challenge the status quo. When I sit through grand rounds with other doctors, the purpose is to self-correct our methods, to do better and learn progressively from each other's experiences. We need to have the same approach to food-safety regulations. At the very least, we need to be receptive to having the discussion. There needs to be accountability by regulatory agencies and industry trade groups to parents who are doing their best to raise healthy children.
When I request an explanation of guidelines on arsenic in apple juice for our show and am told to file a Freedom of Information Act request by the FDA, we have lost perspective. We have a right to know and need to ask the hard questions. Exercising that right isn't fear-mongering; it's acting in the public interest.
Dr. Mehmet Oz is host of the nationally syndicated "The Dr. Oz Show."
