ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Carolina · 18 April 2009, 12:53 PM

Here is the article on mercury:

http://www.tradeobservatory.org/libr...m?RefID=105025

Lisa · 18 April 2009, 01:28 PM

Thanks for the article, Caroline. They're finding mercury in detectable levels in half of HFCS samples.... I wonder what a detectable level is? Well, there's one more reason to hate the stuff. And to keep reading those labels.

Carolina · 18 April 2009, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisa

Thanks for the article, Caroline. They're finding mercury in detectable levels in half of HFCS samples.... I wonder what a detectable level is? Well, there's one more reason to hate the stuff. And to keep reading those labels.

If I recall, it is 5 ppb. At least it used to be a few years ago.

Lisa · 18 April 2009, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carolina

If I recall, it is 5 ppb. At least it used to be a few years ago.

Is it one of those things, like lead, that stays in the body so that additional exposures accumulate? Guess I'd better do some reading!

Well, here's the first article I found.... hmmmm.... what do you think? Credible or not?

http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/...y-in-hfcs.html

Here's another article - more recent....

http://www.foodproductiondaily.com/O...ry-to-HFCS-CRA

Carolina · 18 April 2009, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisa

Is it one of those things, like lead, that stays in the body so that additional exposures accumulate? Guess I'd better do some reading!

Absolutely. So, even very small but repeated doses can get you in trouble. And while the minimum detection level is very small, the stuff is pretty potent.

I used to do a lot of metals analysis for a while, and it's given me an appreciation for this stuff.

Lisa · 18 April 2009, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carolina

Absolutely. So, even very small but repeated doses can get you in trouble. And while the minimum detection level is very small, the stuff is pretty potent.

I used to do a lot of metals analysis for a while, and it's given me an appreciation for this stuff.

So if you get the chance, see what you think of those links I found above....

Carolina · 18 April 2009, 02:45 PM

Cool - thanks!

Looking at the first blog article, the author stated that the research done (which was a different study than the one I linked to) found results of 0.113 ppm (and the author put the emphasis on "parts per million" I assume to say "look at that teeny number")When in reality, 0.113 ppm is 113 ppb! When your minimum detection level is 5 ppb, 113 ppb is not neccesarily insignificant. Later in her article, she referred to 0.113 ppm and 0.000113 parts per million in the same sentence - which is it? Those are two very different numbers.

And then she goes on to make a point about elemental mercury not being absorbed (or toxic) as methyl mercury is - which is true - but the study I read found results in methyl mercury, I believe. I'm not familiar with the study she was talking about. Also, the author of this blog seems to be an RN. I did not see any credentials relating to science. Not that she isn't an intelligent person, but she seemed to be swinging the pendulum in the opposite direction. A scientist would not be saying "ooooh parts per million, what a teeny number". A scientist would be looking at what is significant. I just didn't see enough actual science in that article to make me comfortable.

In the second article, there was an independent study done to analyze further samples. They found no mercury, which is good news! However, the study was funded by the Corn Refiners Assoc. So when the CRA says all is clear, to me that is not so reassuring. Why didn't the FDA handle the matter? Plus, the article stated these conclusions, but then went on to state the other two studies that did produce mercury positive tests. So what is the final conclusion? Not sure here.

Then, I stumbled upon the lab report for the research I linked to:

http://www.healthobservatory.org/lib...m?RefID=102881

It looks like they are reporting results in pg/g, which is 1000 times smaller than ppb (parts per billion). I've never even used the unit pg/g!!

Incredibly small numbers, so that does beg the question "is this significant?"

OK, I'm so tired now that I need to go to bed!

Lisa · 19 April 2009, 12:00 AM

Spoken like a scientist, Caroline!

Yeah, I noticed the corn growers had funded the study... I wonder if they thought the FDA wasn't acting quickly enough and they needed to get some good PR out there. The general public wouldn't even notice that they had funded the study, eh? I've even seen recent commercials about HFCS - in some kind of juice product or something - where they're trying to dispel that it's harmful. They have two people talking and one says something like, "Oh, doesn't that have hfcs in it?" "Yes, but what's wrong with that?" "Uh.... gee, I don't really know."

I wonder... if you randomly tested foods off the shelves - unsweetened fruit juices, canned vegetables, fresh meat.... what kinds of goodies would turn up? Would there be detectable levels of mercury there, too? And if you buy strictly organic, how much less of that stuff would show up?

I'm all for organic, but sometimes I find myself falling into the mindset that it's hard to know what to believe when you hear about food safety issues, and which study truly has credibility, and what's the most recent info. I suppost my best bet is to gather all the info I can, take in to consideration the sources, and draw the best conclusions.

That said, HFCS:

Rockrolex · 19 April 2009, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisa

Dang, Ed - I don't see a picture!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carolina

Ed?! No picture!

Let me know if that worked.

Lisa · 19 April 2009, 12:33 AM

Caroline, if you haven't seen the youtube vid of Paul Potts yet, here's a link to his audition. Susan Boyle is awesome, but this guy appealed to me even a little bit more - maybe because he had such a sweet demeanor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEo5bjnJViA

Jimbits76 · 19 April 2009, 12:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisa

Caroline, if you haven't seen the youtube vid of Paul Potts yet, here's a link to his audition. Susan Boyle is awesome, but this guy appealed to me even a little bit more - maybe because he had such a sweet demeanor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEo5bjnJViA

Lisa look up Faryl (Smith?)...she was a kid from last years BGT. She didn't win and it was a travesty.

Her voice was like the angels calling.

J

Lisa · 19 April 2009, 12:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockrolex

Let me know if that worked.

Oh yes, it worked! Oh yes, oh yes, oh yes......... OH YESSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!

Jimbits76 · 19 April 2009, 12:44 AM

Thye are good looking boys but they aint half as purty as bubba and bitsy.

J

away36 · 19 April 2009, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockrolex

Let me know if that worked.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisa

Oh yes, it worked! Oh yes, oh yes, oh yes......... OH YESSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!

Whooo hooooo!!! Amen to THAT eh!!

Lisa · 19 April 2009, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimbits76

Thye are good looking boys but they aint half as purty as bubba and bitsy.

J

You mean that pic isn't Bubba and Bitsy?

away36 · 19 April 2009, 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimbits76

Thye are good looking boys but they aint half as purty as bubba and bitsy.

J

Yeah, but....remember....we're just reading the menu. You guys are the kinda stuff a girl orders for takeout!

away36 · 19 April 2009, 12:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisa

Caroline, if you haven't seen the youtube vid of Paul Potts yet, here's a link to his audition. Susan Boyle is awesome, but this guy appealed to me even a little bit more - maybe because he had such a sweet demeanor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEo5bjnJViA

I agree. I think I watched the Paul Potts audition about 50 times.

Carolina · 19 April 2009, 03:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisa

Oh yes, it worked! Oh yes, oh yes, oh yes......... OH YESSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!

Carolina · 19 April 2009, 03:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisa

Spoken like a scientist, Caroline!

Yeah, I noticed the corn growers had funded the study... I wonder if they thought the FDA wasn't acting quickly enough and they needed to get some good PR out there. The general public wouldn't even notice that they had funded the study, eh? I've even seen recent commercials about HFCS - in some kind of juice product or something - where they're trying to dispel that it's harmful. They have two people talking and one says something like, "Oh, doesn't that have hfcs in it?" "Yes, but what's wrong with that?" "Uh.... gee, I don't really know."

I wonder... if you randomly tested foods off the shelves - unsweetened fruit juices, canned vegetables, fresh meat.... what kinds of goodies would turn up? Would there be detectable levels of mercury there, too? And if you buy strictly organic, how much less of that stuff would show up?

I'm all for organic, but sometimes I find myself falling into the mindset that it's hard to know what to believe when you hear about food safety issues, and which study truly has credibility, and what's the most recent info. I suppost my best bet is to gather all the info I can, take in to consideration the sources, and draw the best conclusions.

That said, HFCS:

Well, I have avoided HCFS long before I heard these now nebulous finding, so I don't have much of a horse in the race. I really try to stay to non-extremist mindset. Some go too far in either direction - either the sky is falling, or ahhhh, everything's gonna kill you, have a burger.

My take on organic - I generally buy the "dirty dozen" organic only. These are the most heavily pesticide contaminated foods. I don't have them memorized, but a few are apples, onions, potatoes, strawberries, grapes, and spinach. Other foods have the organic label slapped on when it doesn't mean much. For example, I am not terribly worried about my sugar being organic.

When I see that HCFS has possible Hg contamination, well... just one more reason to avoid the junk.

I'll see if I can locate that dirty dozen for you.

redshirt1957 · 19 April 2009, 05:48 AM

Other than the fact I glow at night, I grew up with lead, asbestos, and mercury. Used DDT as a nice garnish.

Lisa · 19 April 2009, 05:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redshirt1957

Other than the fact I glow at night, I grew up with lead, asbestos, and mercury. Used DDT as a nice garnish.

Me, too - I used to play with those little beads of mercury in my dad's dental office. Yikes!

redshirt1957 · 19 April 2009, 06:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisa

Me, too - I used to play with those little beads of mercury in my dad's dental office. Yikes!

Are you hinting that if we get together we might glow together. Take that, Jim, Jim, Ed, Lion, DSJ, and all the other suitors.

linda · 19 April 2009, 03:31 PM

Finally, good news. My grandson is out of the hospital. A very sick little guy, 9 years old. He was in 2 weeks, but sick for longer. Catching up on all the posts I've missed, looks like things are pretty quiet tonight.

On a lighter note. Spent most of the day picking up tomatoes, those upside down thingies, dirt, and something to hang them from. Since I can kill a plastic plant, it'll be a miracle if I keep them alive.

Catch you later.

linda · 19 April 2009, 04:06 PM

Almost did double post. Hey, I'm blond, what do you want.

BonnyLass · 19 April 2009, 08:23 PM

I'm very new here and will hopefully make my first Rolex purchase (WWI era Antique) so just wanted to say 'hello' and to introduce myself. I'm 29, single, and live in DC. So...if you know any great single guys...lol.

Carolina · 20 April 2009, 02:35 AM

Linda. I'm glad to hear that your grandson is doing better!

And glad to see you back here!

Carolina · 20 April 2009, 02:35 AM

Hi Bonny!

Lisa · 20 April 2009, 02:37 AM

Hi, everyone. Linda, I'm glad to hear about your grandchild doing better. You were missed!

Welcome, BonnyLass. I daresay TRF is a good place for a single gal to meet some interesting fellas.

Carolina · 20 April 2009, 02:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisa

Hi, everyone. Linda, I'm glad to hear about your grandchild doing better. You were missed!

Welcome, BonnyLass. I daresay TRF is a good place for a single gal to meet some interesting fellas.

*cough" oh excuse me...

BonnyLass · 20 April 2009, 02:41 AM

Lisa, I haven't been around here that much but I can already tell that the fellas are interesting to say the least.

18 April 2009, 12:53 PM	#5821
Carolina "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: North Carolina Watch: it, Bubba! Posts: 6,271	Here is the article on mercury: http://www.tradeobservatory.org/libr...m?RefID=105025 __________________ . .Member #5380 .

18 April 2009, 02:45 PM	#5827
Carolina "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: North Carolina Watch: it, Bubba! Posts: 6,271	Cool - thanks! Looking at the first blog article, the author stated that the research done (which was a different study than the one I linked to) found results of 0.113 ppm (and the author put the emphasis on "parts per million" I assume to say "look at that teeny number")When in reality, 0.113 ppm is 113 ppb! When your minimum detection level is 5 ppb, 113 ppb is not neccesarily insignificant. Later in her article, she referred to 0.113 ppm and 0.000113 parts per million in the same sentence - which is it? Those are two very different numbers. And then she goes on to make a point about elemental mercury not being absorbed (or toxic) as methyl mercury is - which is true - but the study I read found results in methyl mercury, I believe. I'm not familiar with the study she was talking about. Also, the author of this blog seems to be an RN. I did not see any credentials relating to science. Not that she isn't an intelligent person, but she seemed to be swinging the pendulum in the opposite direction. A scientist would not be saying "ooooh parts per million, what a teeny number". A scientist would be looking at what is significant. I just didn't see enough actual science in that article to make me comfortable. In the second article, there was an independent study done to analyze further samples. They found no mercury, which is good news! However, the study was funded by the Corn Refiners Assoc. So when the CRA says all is clear, to me that is not so reassuring. Why didn't the FDA handle the matter? Plus, the article stated these conclusions, but then went on to state the other two studies that did produce mercury positive tests. So what is the final conclusion? Not sure here. Then, I stumbled upon the lab report for the research I linked to: http://www.healthobservatory.org/lib...m?RefID=102881 It looks like they are reporting results in pg/g, which is 1000 times smaller than ppb (parts per billion). I've never even used the unit pg/g!! Incredibly small numbers, so that does beg the question "is this significant?" OK, I'm so tired now that I need to go to bed! __________________ . .Member #5380 .

19 April 2009, 08:23 PM	#5845
BonnyLass Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Washington DC Posts: 63	Hi Everyone! I'm very new here and will hopefully make my first Rolex purchase (WWI era Antique) so just wanted to say 'hello' and to introduce myself. I'm 29, single, and live in DC. So...if you know any great single guys...lol.

20 April 2009, 02:35 AM	#5846
Carolina "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: North Carolina Watch: it, Bubba! Posts: 6,271	Linda. I'm glad to hear that your grandson is doing better! And glad to see you back here! __________________ . .Member #5380 .

20 April 2009, 02:35 AM	#5847
Carolina "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: North Carolina Watch: it, Bubba! Posts: 6,271	Hi Bonny! __________________ . .Member #5380 .

18 April 2009, 01:28 PM	#5822
Lisa "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: oklahoma city Posts: 15,741	Thanks for the article, Caroline. They're finding mercury in detectable levels in half of HFCS samples.... I wonder what a detectable level is? Well, there's one more reason to hate the stuff. And to keep reading those labels.

19 April 2009, 12:00 AM	#5828
Lisa "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: oklahoma city Posts: 15,741	Spoken like a scientist, Caroline! Yeah, I noticed the corn growers had funded the study... I wonder if they thought the FDA wasn't acting quickly enough and they needed to get some good PR out there. The general public wouldn't even notice that they had funded the study, eh? I've even seen recent commercials about HFCS - in some kind of juice product or something - where they're trying to dispel that it's harmful. They have two people talking and one says something like, "Oh, doesn't that have hfcs in it?" "Yes, but what's wrong with that?" "Uh.... gee, I don't really know." I wonder... if you randomly tested foods off the shelves - unsweetened fruit juices, canned vegetables, fresh meat.... what kinds of goodies would turn up? Would there be detectable levels of mercury there, too? And if you buy strictly organic, how much less of that stuff would show up? I'm all for organic, but sometimes I find myself falling into the mindset that it's hard to know what to believe when you hear about food safety issues, and which study truly has credibility, and what's the most recent info. I suppost my best bet is to gather all the info I can, take in to consideration the sources, and draw the best conclusions. That said, HFCS:

19 April 2009, 12:33 AM	#5830
Lisa "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: oklahoma city Posts: 15,741	Caroline, if you haven't seen the youtube vid of Paul Potts yet, here's a link to his audition. Susan Boyle is awesome, but this guy appealed to me even a little bit more - maybe because he had such a sweet demeanor. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEo5bjnJViA

19 April 2009, 12:44 AM	#5833
Jimbits76 "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: UK Posts: 9,407	Thye are good looking boys but they aint half as purty as bubba and bitsy. J

19 April 2009, 05:48 AM	#5840
redshirt1957 "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Real Name: Bubba Location: Bitsyville! Watch: Blue YM today! Posts: 10,053	Other than the fact I glow at night, I grew up with lead, asbestos, and mercury. Used DDT as a nice garnish.

19 April 2009, 03:31 PM	#5843
linda Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Real Name: Linda Location: California Watch: Rolex Datejust Posts: 48	Finally, good news. My grandson is out of the hospital. A very sick little guy, 9 years old. He was in 2 weeks, but sick for longer. Catching up on all the posts I've missed, looks like things are pretty quiet tonight. On a lighter note. Spent most of the day picking up tomatoes, those upside down thingies, dirt, and something to hang them from. Since I can kill a plastic plant, it'll be a miracle if I keep them alive. Catch you later.

19 April 2009, 04:06 PM	#5844
linda Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Real Name: Linda Location: California Watch: Rolex Datejust Posts: 48	Almost did double post. Hey, I'm blond, what do you want.

20 April 2009, 02:37 AM	#5848
Lisa "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: oklahoma city Posts: 15,741	Hi, everyone. Linda, I'm glad to hear about your grandchild doing better. You were missed! Welcome, BonnyLass. I daresay TRF is a good place for a single gal to meet some interesting fellas.

20 April 2009, 02:41 AM	#5850
BonnyLass Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Washington DC Posts: 63	Lisa, I haven't been around here that much but I can already tell that the fellas are interesting to say the least.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 7 (0 members and 7 guests)