High fructuse corn syrup contains mercury.

  • Thread starter Vid
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Mercury
In summary, the two studies found that nearly half of commercial samples of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) contained mercury, and one in three of 55 brand-name foods contained mercury. Mercury accumulates in the body over time, and there should be no mercury in corn sweetener.
  • #36
Cyrus said:
For god sakes, how many people are drooling retards because of eating fish Edward?

I'm sorry, sometimes these reports read like a crock of bull****.

Your youth is showing.

You apparently think it would be best to wait and see the drooling retards before we act.

BTW Mercury in fish also causes cardiac problems in adults. Mercury is everywhere , but we can keep it out of CoCa Cola.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
edward said:
Your youth is showing.

You apparently think it would be best to wait and see the drooling retards before we act.

BTW Mercury in fish also causes cardiac problems in adults. Mercury is everywhere , but we can keep it out of CoCa Cola.

My point is that you don't see drooling retards anywhere, because it ain't an issue.

Mercury in fish isn't a new phenomenon, it dates to the 70s -ish.

I promise you McDonalds will kill me before the Mercury in fish does.
 
  • #38
edward said:
You apparently think it would be best to wait and see the drooling retards before we act.
We have quite a long history of the toxic effects of mercury and how much you need to cause a problem.
Minamata wasn't caused by ppb levels - it was caused by eating pretty much raw industrial waste.

The new problem is the one that goes:
Scientist with new 2D HPLC-MS can detect Hg at ppt levels
Media needs a scare story so they can win the same prizes as the Thalidomide guys
Wire services trawls journals and notes 'mercury has been found in X'
X is in apple pie - I can spin that into a story to worry America
Film at 11...

Mercury is everywhere , but we can keep it out of CoCa Cola.
Actually I would rather you kept it in Coca Cola - I never touch the stuff.
 
  • #39
Cyrus said:
My point is that you don't see drooling retards anywhere, because it ain't an issue.

Mercury in fish isn't a new phenomenon, it dates to the 70s -ish.

I promise you McDonalds will kill me before the Mercury in fish does.

Nothing is an issue Cyrus. Now eat a couple of packs of peanut butter crackers and have a pleasant night. BTW that ketchup at micky D's has HFCS in it.
 
Last edited:
  • #40
mgb_phys said:
We have quite a long history of the toxic effects of mercury and how much you need to cause a problem.
Minamata wasn't caused by ppb levels - it was caused by eating pretty much raw industrial waste.

The new problem is the one that goes:
Scientist with new 2D HPLC-MS can detect Hg at ppt levels
Media needs a scare story so they can win the same prizes as the Thalidomide guys
Wire services trawls journals and notes 'mercury has been found in X'
X is in apple pie - I can spin that into a story to worry America
Film at 11...


Actually I would rather you kept it in Coca Cola - I never touch the stuff.

We now have two lakes in southern Arizona that are now closed to fishing due to high levels of mercury in the fish. The mercury came from mining operations that were miles away and closed down over 100 years ago.

There are no soft drinks, and very few products that contain a sweetener that do not have HFCS in the USA.
 
  • #41
edward said:
We now have two lakes in southern Arizona that are now closed to fishing due to high levels of mercury in the fish. The mercury came from mining operations that were miles away and closed down over 100 years ago.

There are no soft drinks, and very few products that contain a sweetener that do not have HFCS in the USA.

Key word: very high levels.
 
  • #42
edward said:
Nothing is an issue Cyrus. Now eat a couple of packs of peanut butter crackers and have a pleasant night. BTW that ketchup at micky D's has HFCS in it.
More evidence that you are completely incapable of distinguishing between "significant" and "insignificant" risk. One of those issues is significant and the other is insignificant. Can you guess which one? (hint: the one that killed a bunch of people recently is significant) Bringing up these non sequiturs only serves to highlight your irrationality on this subject. You're opinion is emotion-based, not logic based.
 
Last edited:
  • #43
edward said:
That is what we were told by the government in the 1950's during the atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons. The amount of strontium 90 in cows milk was insignificant. Then they realized that, Oh OH Hey that stuff is accumulative. The tests went underground. The military had flat out lied to the American people.
Now you're arguing conspiracy theory. If the actual safe dose of mercury is 1/10th or 1/100th what the government says it is, that's a big problem -- but then, as cyrus said, we'd see it. Eating fish is not a new thing and the scaremongers aren't making that claim anyway (well - they do mention the "no safe dose" fallacy in passing). It is a complete non sequitur.

Just out of curiosity, edward - do you eat fish?
 
  • #44
Evo said:
Actually some kids and adults will eat a whole 5-6 ounce can a day. I know people that eat a can every day as part of a "healthy" diet. In the US tuna fish sandwiches are very popular. And tuna casseroles are very popular.
Tuna is a staple for body builders too.
 
  • #45
Chi Meson said:
That's one. Have you met the other three?

My mother, my brother and most of my friends you mean (I have more than one friend btw).

They also sell Brazil nuts covered in chocolate as well, which is really nice.

There's a simple solution here, if you believe the propaganda don't eat corn syrup.
 
  • #46
russ_watters said:
More evidence that you are completely incapable of distinguishing between "significant" and "insignificant" risk.

Perhaps you are the one who is incapable Russ. Sprinkle some chlordane on your garden vegetables and enjoy. Chlordane was once also considered to be an insignificant risk before it was banned.

Feeding any level of a heavy metal to children is inexcusable. The safe level of mercury is determined by the FDA. They even have a safe level for lead yet the scientific/medical community says there is no safe level for lead in children.

Any heavy metal in a widely used food product is significant. It simply should not be there. Heavy metals are accumulative in the human body. If it was arsenic in the sweetener would you feel the same way about insignificant amounts?

The corn industry started changing to a non mercury process shortly after the study was done. Why would they do so if the mercury levels are so insignificant?
 
Last edited:
  • #47
Oh noy! Now we have to ban Brazil nuts for kids!

Oh and we can't eat almonds any more because they have cyanide in. It sounds to me the diabetes and other health problems associated with obesity are more of a concern than the insignificant amount of mercury, but there you go.

Is anyone thinking of the children!
 
  • #48
Well fresh fruit might have pesticides and remember bananas an apples don't have lists of ingredients printed on them. Safest to just stick to packaged foods endorsed by a major cartoon character.
 
  • #49
The Dagda said:
Is anyone thinking of the children!

Apparently not on this forum.
 
  • #50
russ_watters said:
Now you're arguing conspiracy theory.

There was a military cover up of radiation exposure. I know because I was an unwilling part of it Russ. You have not seen what I have seen.


If the actual safe dose of mercury is 1/10th or 1/100th what the government says it is, that's a big problem -- but then, as cyrus said, we'd see it. Eating fish is not a new thing and the scaremongers aren't making that claim anyway.

Again, do we really want to wait until we see it?? Apparently you do. That is where we differ.


Just out of curiosity, edward - do you eat fish?

Very cautiously. Do you?

Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) ongoing National Study of Chemical Residues in Lake Fish Tissue, and found that in Pennsylvania, all 52 fish tested were contaminated with mercury, and 45 percent of all composite samples and 83 percent of predator fish composite samples were contaminated with mercury levels that exceed EPA’s “safe” consumption limit for women (0.13 parts per million). Fish species tested in Pennsylvania included largemouth bass, yellow perch, carp, brown bullhead and bluegill. Additional studies have found that mercury exposure in fish can result in embryo mortality in lake trout eggs; adverse effects on growth and development in early life stages; decreased spawning success; altered schooling movements; and acute toxicity (leading to death).


http://www.pennenvironment.org/legislature/testimony/clean-air/clean-air/testimony-for-pennsylvania-state-house-environmental-resources--energy-committee-hearing-regarding-mercury-pollution
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #51
edward said:
There was a military cover up of radiation exposure. I know because I was an unwilling part of it Russ. You have not seen what I have seen.
So an alleged cover up during the cold war = all things are cover ups/conspiracies? Sure. I follow that. I am amazed that you can survive because there is nothing on this planet that would be pure enough for you to ingest.

I also happen to think that there shouldn't be any "Insect Filth" and "Mamalian Excretions" in my food, but there are acceptable levels for everything.

NOTE: You may want to read after eating dinner...
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/dalbook.html#CHPTA
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #52
FredGarvin said:
So an alleged cover up during the cold war = all things are cover ups/conspiracies?
You just have to get your cover-ups straight.

The FDA wants the government to advise people to eat contaminated food because it's in the pay of big pharma/the oil companies/the international conspiracy of mime-artists, and they want people will think that pollution is OK.

Meanwhile EPA as part of their campaign for complete control of the outdoors (and a budget to match the FDAs) want people to be afraid of all forms of food and have their towns covered by large glass domes.
 
  • #53
The real question is, does Hg bioaccumulate? A couple of ppms here and there could add up over a long period of time. If Hg is metabolized into some organometallic compound it could be soluble in fats,which then it would most likely stick around for a very long time. I really don't know the ADME properties of mercury. The info is probably out there somewhere.
 
  • #54
gravenewworld said:
The real question is, does Hg bioaccumulate?
Metalic mercury not very much, it's pretty insoluble.
It was even used as a laxative, if you pour a few pounds of metal down you throat it's coming out of the other end pushing anything else that was in the way! Not exactly healthy but patients didn't die.

If Hg is metabolized into some organometallic compound it could be soluble in fats,
There are a bunch of organomercury compounds that can get into your body and are much more dangerous. I think the danger comes more from continual exposure than bio-acumulation in humans. It does accumulate in fish at the top of the food chain because most mercury gets into the food chain by filter feeders - that's why tuna is the danger, there aren't that many carnivores we eat.
 
  • #55
edward said:
There was a military cover up of radiation exposure. I know because I was an unwilling part of it Russ. You have not seen what I have seen.
You're arguing that since there once was one conspiracy to cover up a completely different issue that there must be a conspiracy here to cover up that mercury poisoning a significant issue. That's paranoia, edward. Seriously, you should do something about that, it's got to be adversely affecting your life.
Again, do we really want to wait until we see it?? Apparently you do. That is where we differ.
Yes, we do differ on that. I don't want to spend unnecessary money and take unnecessary action to mitigate risks that are not believed to be significant. Doing so gets in the way of living a happy, healthy, and productive life. I'm not going to spend my whole life in a bomb shelter for fear of a thousand things that have no proven risk. That's insane.
Very cautiously. Do you?
I eat fish, but how exactly do you eat fish cautiously? (besides being sure not to eat a bone...)
 
  • #56
Mercury entering the digestive system is disposed of by the body in two ways. Organic methyl mercury is processed by the liver and is excreted in the feces vial the bile.

Metallic mercury is excreted in the urine.

Consume mercury in either form and in just a short two months half will be excreted.

Regardless of the form of mercury, approximately one half of that absorbed from a single dose will be eliminated from the body every 2 months.

Obviously eating too much too frequently is going to result in an accumulation that will be increasing. Do you really want to wait 5 or 10 years to find out how long it will take to become a neuro toxin in adults??

If you do that is fine with me, but we do have an obligation to protect our children born or unborn. I will never sway from that.

What remains in the body primarily effects the central nervous system. Pregnant women and children are exceptionally at risk because the neurological system is developing.

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/cabs/mercury/index.html

The excreted mercury ends up going back into the streams, rivers and oceans where it is added to the mercury coming in from industrial sources.

Mercury does not simply go away. It is obvious that eventually it will end up being even more concentrated in fish. Adding even more mercury to our bodies via a corn sweetener will only make it worse.

The study on the HFCS was done by a FDA researcher for the FDA, yet the FDA did not release that information even though this was a source of mercury in the food supply that had not been previously considered.

The study was published in a peer reviewed journal. A second study done last year came to the same conclusion. I'll try to find a link to the second study. Below is the link to the recent study.

http://healthobservatory.org/library.cfm?refid=105026

We have had high level political appointees making scientific decisions in recent years.
Call it a conspiracy theory or call it just plain stupid. I really don't care. It happened and that can not be denied.
 
Last edited:
  • #57
russ_watters said:
You're arguing that since there once was one conspiracy to cover up a completely different issue that there must be a conspiracy here to cover up that mercury poisoning a significant issue.

Read the posts, I never used the word conspiracy until my last post as the term related to how others were using it. On the other hand you used it. I did relate my experience with the military cover up of radiation hazards. Even then I didn't use the word conspiracy that word is your baby and your presumption.

It appears that you are trying to drag this away from the real issue. You jumped on the conspiracy bandwagon, go ahead enjoy.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • Biology and Medical
Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
5
Views
9K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • Art, Music, History, and Linguistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Chemistry
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
42
Views
6K
  • General Discussion
Replies
5
Views
2K
Back
Top