DOCSLIB.ORG

Feeding Arsenic to Poultry Can the FDA Approves Roxarsone Use for a Add to the Arsenic Contamination of Variety of Purposes: Growth Promotion, Other Foods As Well

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Feeding Arsenic to Poultry Can the FDA Approves Roxarsone Use for a Add to the Arsenic Contamination of Variety of Purposes: Growth Promotion, Other Foods As Well Feeding Each year U.S. hospitals and long- roxarsone are combinations that also term care facilities buy poultry, mostly include an antibiotic and an anti-par- Arsenic chicken, worth millions of dollars. At asitic drug called an ionophore. While the same time, U.S. poultry companies chicken producers sometimes claim to Poultry routinely and unnecessarily use arsenic arsenic in poultry feed is used to control in raising their birds. Voluntary arsenic parasites (coccidiosis), roxarsone itself is use in animal feeds imposes an unnec- not FDA-approved as anti-parasitic. Is This Good essary risk to the health of Americans and the environment that sustains us. Risks to human Medicine? The U.S. purchases more commercial arsenic than any other country.1 and ecosystem health Widespread, voluntary use of arsenic Arsenic’s toxicity has been recognized feed additives creates unnecessary for millennia—its name comes from risks: risks for people who eat chicken; the Greek, meaning “potent.”2 Arsenic risks to communities near chicken causes cancer, even at the low levels farms; risks to water and soil quality; currently found in our environment.3,4 and risks to people with infections Arsenic exposure also contributes to requiring treatment with antibiotics. birth defects, declines in intellectual ■■ Meat from chickens fed arsenic function, diabetes and heart disease.5,6,7 can carry arsenic residues, which add to a person’s total risk from Arsenic use in agriculture arsenic-caused disease.12,13 Arsenic The Food and Drug Administration is also approved as a turkey feed approves arsenic’s use as an additive to additive, but we are unaware of poultry feed. This practice has never data confirming its use in turkey been approved as safe in the 25 coun- production or its detection in tries of the European Union. turkey meat. ■■ Up to three-quarters of arsenic in According to estimates,8 at least 70 per- feed will pass through chickens into cent of the broiler chickens raised an- the estimated 26 to 55 billion nually in the U.S. (8.7 billion in 2005) pounds of chicken litter or waste are fed arsenic—typically a compound created in the U.S. annually.14 called roxarsone (3-nitro-4-hydroxyphe- Around 90 percent of chicken nylarsonic acid).* However, no public waste currently is applied to fields authority in the U.S. tracks exactly and cropland as “fertilizer.”15,16,17 how much arsenic is added to chicken Poultry litter containing arsenic feed. Based on the best available data, also is fed as a protein source to however, annual roxarsone use can be beef cattle.18,19 So, the legal practice estimated at 1.7-2.2 million pounds.9,10,11 of feeding arsenic to poultry can The FDA approves roxarsone use for a add to the arsenic contamination of variety of purposes: growth promotion, other foods as well. feed efficiency and improved pigmenta- ■■ Incineration of arsenic-containing tion. Many feed additives containing poultry waste is currently being Organic or Inorganic Arsenic: Does it Matter? Arsenic exists in various forms, both organic and inorganic. Recent science calls into question the presumption that organic arsenics, like roxarsone, necessarily pose fewer risks than inorganic arsenics from the earth’s crust, which contaminate many drinking water systems. Once ingested by animals, roxarsone can be degraded into inorganic forms of arsenic (arsenite and arsenate) within the animal’s digestive tract and in animal waste (Sapkota et al. 2007; Arai et al. 2003; Stolz et al. 2007). Arsen- ite and arsenate are both known to cause cancer in humans.(NAS 1999; NAS 2001) . * Other FDA-approved arsenical additives to poultry feed include arsanilic acid, nitarsone, and carbarsone. This publication is part of Going Green: A Resource Kit for Pollution Prevention in Health in Health Prevention Pollution Kit for A Resource Green: Going is part of This publication Pub 8-06 a to get out how kit, or to find in the included publications this or other of copies For additional Care. at www.noharm.org/goinggreen. Web on the Harm Without Care complete kit, visit Health 19, 2007 June This version: promoted as a “renewable” source of That is, we intentionally and routinely By making arsenic use a criterion in E? energy.20 This questionable practice expose bacteria in food animals to a their purchase of poultry meat, hospi- will contribute to air pollution from variety of things that will promote tals and health care systems can realize toxics and heavy metals such as resistance. important benefits: icin arsenic contained in the waste. ■■ they can help ensure that patients, ■■ 70-90 percent of arsenic in poultry Arsenic: unexplored staff and other clients are eating litter becomes water soluble, chicken with reduced levels of meaning it can readily migrate cumulative risks arsenic; through soils and into underlying Arsenic has been mined from the earth’s ■■ D MED because arsenic use in chicken 21,22 groundwater. Routine roxarsone crust, and then intentionally used for production contributes to the use in chicken feed likely adds to all sorts of commercial reasons. Use OO overall arsenic contamination of the already significant public of arsenic as a pesticide on crops, now the environment, these facilities G health burden from arsenic- banned, has contaminated fertile, food- can help reduce their communities’ contaminated drinking water producing land, and created Superfund risks from arsenic-induced disease 23,24 supplies. According to the EPA, sites where many pesticide manufactur- more generally; his 13 million Americans drink water ing facilities once stood. Wood products ■■ contaminated with arsenic beyond treated with arsenical pesticides—now our current industrial system of T 25 meat production is characterized S the safety standard of 10 ppb. banned—led to children being exposed by many practices that contribute ■■ to hazardous levels as they played on Exposing chickens routinely to to systemic negative impacts on arsenic may spur creation of arsenic-treated playground equipment and wood decks. Disposal hazards from public health and chronic Y: Y: I bacteria in those chickens that are 34,35,36 this longstanding use remain. disease. By opting for chicken resistant to multiple antibiotics, in raised using more sustainable, TR addition to the arsenic. Many foodstuffs, especially seafood, arsenic-free practices, health care facilities can send an important UL contain arsenic derived from its oc- O Arsenic use promotes currence in groundwater or seawater. signal to the marketplace and Survey data also suggest that U.S. rice change food production practices P antibiotic resistance may carry 40 percent to 5-times higher to ones that protect public health. Bacteria live in animal guts, as in arsenic levels than rice from Europe, to ours. From Darwin, we understand Other aspects of poultry production India or Bangladesh, possibly due to that conditions will select for the historic use of arsenical pesticides on besides arsenic use deserve greater at- most resistant bacteria (natural those same fields.31 To the total in- tention. See our Purchaser’s Guide to nic selection) when that trait allows the take of arsenic in the American diet, Sourcing Sustainable Poultry and Poul- E latter to outcompete their non- arsenic-contaminated poultry makes a try Primer, www.HealthyFoodinHealth- significant—and apparently prevent- Care.org, for a comprehensive overview. RS resistant cousins. They can develop resistance to metals, like arsenic, able—contribution.32 A routinely put into animal feed just as Possible next steps they develop resistance to routine Thus, voluntary arsenic use in poultry for your health care only adds to the so-far uncounted cu- antibiotics put there for many of the ING mulative risk from our many exposures institution same reasons.26,27 The individual to arsenic, from both natural and ■■ Ask your GPO to develop contracts genes—pieces of DNA—that confer man-made sources. Similarly, cumula- bacteria with resistance to antibiotics requiring suppliers to supply only FEED tive health risks from the multiple poultry that is raised without and heavy metals, respectively, can be metals legally added to U.S. animal arsenic-containing compounds. physically linked on larger pieces of feeds—including copper, manganese, ■■ DNA that bacteria often swap with magnesium, zinc, and metal amino acid Many food distributors have private label poultry products. Hospitals one another. complexes, as well as arsenic—are not can ask distributors to supply assessed.33 poultry raised without arsenic. What this means is that exposing ■■ bacteria to arsenic in feed can inadver- Some hospitals contract with A role for health care companies to manage their food tently cause an increase in antibiotic It clearly is possible to raise poultry service, such as Sodexho, resistance as well. Infectious disease without arsenic. European officials Morrison, Aramark and others. concerns are heightened by the fact have never allowed its use in poultry Hospitals can ask these that poultry producers routinely use production, and some of the largest management companies to source feed additives that include both anti- U.S. producers now state they have only poultry raised without biotics and arsenic components.28,29,30 ended the practice. arsenic. More broadly, health care 2 food service companies could 14 Nachman KE, Graham JP, Price LB, et al. 2005. 28 Sapkota AR et al. 2006. commit to serving only poultry raised Arsenic: A Roadblock to Potential Animal 29 Summers AO 2002. Waste Management Solutions Environ Health 30 Liu J, Chen H, Miller DS, Saavedra JE, Keefer without antimicrobials, including Perspect 113:1123–1124. antibiotics. LK, Johnson DR, et al. 2001. Overexpression of 15 Weaver T. 1998. Managing poultry manure glutathione S-transferase II and multidrug ■■ For meetings of their professional reduces runoff. Poultry production and product resistance transport proteins is associated with associations, nurses, physicians, safety research.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Playing Chicken: Avoiding Arsenic in Your Meat Around the World Through Research and Education, Science and Technology, and Advocacy
    Playing Chicken Avoiding Arsenic in Your Meat Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy Food and Health Program The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy About this publication promotes resilient family farms, rural communities and ecosystems Playing Chicken: Avoiding Arsenic in Your Meat around the world through research and education, science and technology, and advocacy. Written by David Wallinga, M.D. 2105 First Avenue South We would like to thank Ted Schettler, M.D., Minneapolis, Minnesota 55404 USA Karen Florini and Mardi Mellon for their helpful comments Tel.: (612) 870-0453 on this manuscript. We would especially like to acknowledge Fax: (612) 870-4846 the major contributions of Alise Cappel. We would like [email protected] iatp.org to thank the Quixote Foundation for their support of this work. iatp.org/foodandhealth Published April 2006 © 2006 IATP. All rights reserved. Table of contents Executive summary . 5 I. The modern American chicken: Arsenic use in context . 11 II. Concerns with adding arsenic routinely to chicken feed . 14 II. What we found: Arsenic in chicken meat . 21 Appendix A. FDA-approved feed additives containing arsenic . 26 Appendix B. Testing methodology . 29 References . 31 Playing Chicken: Avoiding Arsenic in Your Meat 3 4 Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy Executive summary Arsenic causes cancer even at the low levels currently feed additive, are given each year to chickens. Arsenic found in our environment. Arsenic also contributes to other is an element—it doesn’t degrade or disappear. Arsenic diseases, including heart disease, diabetes and declines subsequently contaminates much of the 26-55 billion pounds in intellectual function, the evidence suggests.
    [Show full text]
  • Multi-Residue Determination of Organic Arsenical Drugs in Feeds by LC-MS/MS
    Multi-Residue Determination of Organic Arsenical Drugs in Feeds by LC-MS/MS Geneviève Grenier, Melanie Titley & Lise-Anne Prescott AAFCO Laboratory Methods and Services Committee meeting 2016-01-18 Background • Animal Feed Division of CFIA identified a high priority need for the determination of three organic arsenicals (arsanilic acid, roxarsone and nitarsone) at residue levels in animal feed • These are withdrawal drugs and are priority food contaminants • Current test methods are at guarantee levels greater than 10% minimum use rate • Therefore, current methods not well suited for residue or traceback testing • Requested feed residue LOQ of 1 mg/kg for all three organic arsenicals 2 Background • UHPLC-PDA Challenges • Extract were very dirty • Tried sample clean-up using Oasis MAX SPE • Still very dirty • HPLC Challenges • Compounds elute too easily • Analytical column must : retain and separate compounds, and give good peak shape • Analytical column : Phenomenex Onyx Monolithic C18 100 X 3.0mm 3 Background • LC/MS/MS method (positive mode) • Column: Phenomenex Onyx Monolithic C18 100 X 3.0mm • Linearity problems with Internal Standard (IS) • Internal standard – 4-hydroxyphenylarsonic acid • Peak area of the internal standard increased with increasing analyte concentration • Cause • 4-hydroxyphenyl arsanic acid co-elute with Arsanilic acid and have similar m/z 4 New method - summary • Liquid chromatography combined with atomic and molecular mass spectrometry for speciation of arsenic in chicken liver. Peng et. al., Journal of Chromatography
    [Show full text]
  • Advances in Interference Removal for Accurate Arsenic Analysis in Food
    Advances in National Environmental Interference Removal Monitoring Conference 2013 for Accurate Arsenic Austin TX Analysis in Food and Steve Wilbur and Amir Liba Beverages Agilent Technologies Let’s Define the Problem -Medically, legally, analytically Arsenic is toxic (but not all forms are toxic to the same degree) Arsenic is present in drinking waters and many foods (but the form varies) Toxicity depends on the form or species (but species conservation during sample prep is challenging) Arsenic is challenging to determine by ICP-MS because it is monoisotopic, has a high ionization potential, and is subject to many common spectroscopic interferences. Inorganic arsenic-related health effects Inorganic arsenic is a well-characterized Group 1 human carcinogen • Lung, bladder, skin and others • Transplacental carcinogen Noncancer health effects • Cardiovascular disease • Diabetes mellitus • Dermal effects • Neurological effects/deficits • Immunologic effects • Fertility effects • Birth defects • Respiratory effects Acute toxicity • Irritation of lungs, throat, stomach, intestines and skin • Death within hours after ingestion of sufficient dose Arsenic in water – inorganic arsenic As(III) and As(V) British Geological Survey As species* *Analyst. 2004, 129, 373-395 More arsenic species* *Analyst. 2004, 129, 373-395 As Speciation - Toxicity Toxic! Many As species exist – the inorganic As species are known Less-Toxic to be toxic and most organic species are Non-Toxic relatively harmless to humans. The potential toxicity of some species, such
    [Show full text]
  • Pharmaceutical Residues in the Environment • Jolanta Kumirska Pharmaceutical Residues in the Environment
    Pharmaceutical Residues in the Environment the in Residues Pharmaceutical • Jolanta Kumirska Jolanta • Pharmaceutical Residues in the Environment Edited by Jolanta Kumirska Printed Edition of the Special Issue Published in Molecules www.mdpi.com/journal/molecules Pharmaceutical Residues in the Environment Pharmaceutical Residues in the Environment Editor Jolanta Kumirska MDPI • Basel • Beijing • Wuhan • Barcelona • Belgrade • Manchester • Tokyo • Cluj • Tianjin Editor Jolanta Kumirska University of Gdansk, Faculty of Chemistry, Department of Environmental Analysis Poland Editorial Office MDPI St. Alban-Anlage 66 4052 Basel, Switzerland This is a reprint of articles from the Special Issue published online in the open access journal Molecules (ISSN 1420-3049) (available at: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/molecules/special issues/pharmaceutical residues environment). For citation purposes, cite each article independently as indicated on the article page online and as indicated below: LastName, A.A.; LastName, B.B.; LastName, C.C. Article Title. Journal Name Year, Article Number, Page Range. ISBN 978-3-03943-485-5 (Hbk) ISBN 978-3-03943-486-2 (PDF) c 2020 by the authors. Articles in this book are Open Access and distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license, which allows users to download, copy and build upon published articles, as long as the author and publisher are properly credited, which ensures maximum dissemination and a wider impact of our publications. The book as a whole is distributed by MDPI under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND. Contents About the Editor .............................................. vii Jolanta Kumirska Special Issue “Pharmaceutical Residues in the Environment” Reprinted from: Molecules 2020, 25, 2941, doi:10.3390/molecules25122941 .............
    [Show full text]
  • Alfa Laval Black and Grey List, Rev 14.Pdf 2021-02-17 1678 Kb
    Alfa Laval Group Black and Grey List M-0710-075E (Revision 14) Black and Grey list – Chemical substances which are subject to restrictions First edition date. 2007-10-29 Revision date 2021-02-10 1. Introduction The Alfa Laval Black and Grey List is divided into three different categories: Banned, Restricted and Substances of Concern. It provides information about restrictions on the use of Chemical substances in Alfa Laval Group’s production processes, materials and parts of our products as well as packaging. Unless stated otherwise, the restrictions on a substance in this list affect the use of the substance in pure form, mixtures and purchased articles. - Banned substances are substances which are prohibited1. - Restricted substances are prohibited in certain applications relevant to the Alfa Laval group. A restricted substance may be used if the application is unmistakably outside the scope of the legislation in question. - Substances of Concern are substances of which the use shall be monitored. This includes substances currently being evaluated for regulations applicable to the Banned or Restricted categories, or substances with legal demands for monitoring. Product owners shall be aware of the risks associated with the continued use of a Substance of Concern. 2. Legislation in the Black and Grey List Alfa Laval Group’s Black and Grey list is based on EU legislations and global agreements. The black and grey list does not correspond to national laws. For more information about chemical regulation please visit: • REACH Candidate list, Substances of Very High Concern (SVHC) • REACH Authorisation list, SVHCs subject to authorization • Protocol on persistent organic pollutants (POPs) o Aarhus protocol o Stockholm convention • Euratom • IMO adopted 2015 GUIDELINES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INVENTORY OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS” (MEPC 269 (68)) • The Hong Kong Convention • Conflict minerals: Dodd-Frank Act 1 Prohibited to use, or put on the market, regardless of application.
    [Show full text]
  • (12) Patent Application Publication (10) Pub. No.: US 2010/0304998 A1 Sem (43) Pub
    US 20100304998A1 (19) United States (12) Patent Application Publication (10) Pub. No.: US 2010/0304998 A1 Sem (43) Pub. Date: Dec. 2, 2010 (54) CHEMICAL PROTEOMIC ASSAY FOR Related U.S. Application Data OPTIMIZING DRUG BINDING TO TARGET (60) Provisional application No. 61/217,585, filed on Jun. PROTEINS 2, 2009. (75) Inventor: Daniel S. Sem, New Berlin, WI Publication Classification (US) (51) Int. C. GOIN 33/545 (2006.01) Correspondence Address: GOIN 27/26 (2006.01) ANDRUS, SCEALES, STARKE & SAWALL, LLP C40B 30/04 (2006.01) 100 EAST WISCONSINAVENUE, SUITE 1100 (52) U.S. Cl. ............... 506/9: 436/531; 204/456; 435/7.1 MILWAUKEE, WI 53202 (US) (57) ABSTRACT (73) Assignee: MARQUETTE UNIVERSITY, Disclosed herein are methods related to drug development. Milwaukee, WI (US) The methods typically include steps whereby an existing drug is modified to obtain a derivative form or whereby an analog (21) Appl. No.: 12/792,398 of an existing drug is identified in order to obtain a new therapeutic agent that preferably has a higher efficacy and (22) Filed: Jun. 2, 2010 fewer side effects than the existing drug. Patent Application Publication Dec. 2, 2010 Sheet 1 of 22 US 2010/0304998 A1 augavpop, Patent Application Publication Dec. 2, 2010 Sheet 2 of 22 US 2010/0304998 A1 g Patent Application Publication Dec. 2, 2010 Sheet 3 of 22 US 2010/0304998 A1 Patent Application Publication Dec. 2, 2010 Sheet 4 of 22 US 2010/0304998 A1 tg & Patent Application Publication Dec. 2, 2010 Sheet 5 of 22 US 2010/0304998 A1 Patent Application Publication Dec.
    [Show full text]
  • Arsenical Timeline Final Proofed
    Backgrounder: FDA and Pfizer’s Collusion to Downplay Effects of Arsenicals in the U.S. Chicken Supply This document summarizes the FDA’s actions after learning that inorganic arsenic, a human carcinogen, was potentially present in the U.S. chicken supply and the FDA’s eventual decision to conduct its own study. It then discusses FDA’s relationship with Pfizer throughout this process and after the study results were made available. It details how the extremely close working relationship led to considerable collusion between the FDA and Pfizer in delaying the public release of the FDA’s study and in creating a coordinated media strategy, which included Pfizer supplying the actual content of the FDA’s media statements in order to minimize the impact of the announcement. The FDA has approved arsenical drugs for use in chickens, turkeys and pigs. These drugs have been approved for multiple purposes, including growth promotion, improved pigmentation and to treat, control and prevent animal diseases, such as coccidiosis, a parasitic infection of the intestinal track in poultry that can lead to death.1 The FDA has recognized organic arsenic as safe, while inorganic arsenic is considered a carcinogen. Chronic exposure to inorganic arsenic may lead to the development of lung, bladder or skin cancer, and is also associated with 1 Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Questions and Answers Regarding 3-Nitro (Roxarsone) (2011). Available at http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/SafetyHealth/ProductSafetyInformation/ucm2583 13.htm. cardiovascular disease.2 Inorganic arsenic exposure may also lead to diabetes, neurological problems in children and adverse pregnancy outcomes.3 Because there are a variety of sources of inorganic arsenic in food (including rice and apple juice), the FDA attempts to monitor these sources.4 Alpharma Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Risk Assessment Report Arsenic in Foods (Chemicals and Contaminants)
    [Tentative translation] Risk Assessment Report Arsenic in foods (Chemicals and Contaminants) Food Safety Commission Japan (FSCJ) October 2013 0 [Tentative translation] Contents Page Chronology of Discussions .................................................................................................... 3 List of members of the Food Safety Commission .................................................................. 3 List of members of the EPCC, the Food Safety Commission ................................................ 4 Executive summary ................................................................................................................ 6 I. Background ......................................................................................................................... 9 II. Outline of the Substances under Assessment .................................................................... 9 1. Physiochemical properties ......................................................................................... 9 (1) Metallic arsenic ................................................................................................... 9 (2) Inorganic arsenic compounds ........................................................................... 10 (3) Organic arsenic compounds .............................................................................. 12 (4) Analytical methods for arsenic ......................................................................... 16 2. Major use and production .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Study 318.41 Executive Summary Organic-Based Arsenical
    Study 318.41 Executive Summary Organic-based arsenical compounds have been used in chickens since March 21, 1944, when the drug 3-Nitro® was approved. The active ingredient in 3-Nitro® is a chemical called roxarsone. Roxarsone and other organic arsenicals (nitarsone, arsanilic acid, and carbarsone) were approved for use in chickens for growth promotion, feed efficiency and improved pigmentation. The organic arsenicals, especially roxarsone, were approved in combination with other drugs such as narasin or salinomycin to prevent coccidiosis, a parasitic disease infecting the intestinal tracts in chickens which can lead to death. When 3-Nitro® (roxarsone) and the other organic arsenicals were approved, it was assumed that only organic arsenic and not inorganic arsenic would be excreted from the chickens. Organic arsenic compounds are much less toxic than inorganic arsenic, which is a known human carcinogen. Inorganic arsenic exists in two forms, arsenic (III) and arsenic (V) (pronounced arsenic-3, or trivalent arsenic, and arsenic 5, or pentavalent arsenic, respectively). The number refers to the number of electrons that elemental arsenic can donate to form other compounds. Humans (and other animals) can convert arsenic (V) to arsenic (III), which increases arsenic’s toxicity and retention by the body. In response to scientific reports that organic arsenicals could be transformed by the body into inorganic arsenic, scientists in FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine, in collaboration with scientists from FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition undertook a study to address this question; can an approved organic arsenical (3-Nitro®; roxarsone) when incorporated into chicken feed and fed to chickens according to approved label directions, result in the presence of inorganic arsenic in edible tissues? Using state-of-the art technology, FDA scientists were able to develop and validate a new analytical method that had the necessary sensitivity and specificity to detect and quantify the low levels of inorganic arsenic that were expected to be in edible tissues.
    [Show full text]
  • Vol. 79 Thursday, No. 39 February 27, 2014 Pages 10951–11294
    Vol. 79 Thursday, No. 39 February 27, 2014 Pages 10951–11294 OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER VerDate Mar 15 2010 21:02 Feb 26, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\27FEWS.LOC 27FEWS mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGWS II Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 39 / Thursday, February 27, 2014 The FEDERAL REGISTER (ISSN 0097–6326) is published daily, SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Monday through Friday, except official holidays, by the Office PUBLIC of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Subscriptions: Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Committee of the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Assistance with public subscriptions 202–512–1806 Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 edition. Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, DC. Single copies/back copies: The FEDERAL REGISTER provides a uniform system for making Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Assistance with public single copies 1–866–512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and (Toll-Free) Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general FEDERAL AGENCIES applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published Subscriptions: by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Paper or fiche 202–741–6005 Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions 202–741–6005 Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the issuing agency requests earlier filing.
    [Show full text]
  • Arsenic Speciation in Broiler Chickens
    Final Report on Study 275.30 Study title: Provide data on various arsenic species present in broilers treated with roxarsone: Comparison with untreated birds. Study Director: JC Kawalek Other Contributors: M Carson, S Conklin, Vicki Lancaster, K Howard, J Ward, Dorothy Farrell, Michael Myers, Heidi Swain, Peter Jeanettes, S Frobish, S Matthews, and M McDonald NAME AND ADDRESS OF FACILITIES PERFORMING STUDY: Division of Animal Research Division of Residue Chemistry Office of Research Center for Veterinary Medicine Food and Drug Administration MOD2 Bldgs. A (Rms G604, 2409, 2504, 2506), and Bldg E 8401 Muirkirk Road Laurel, MD 20708 Division of Scientific Support Office of New Animal Drug Evaluation Center for Veterinary Medicine Food and Drug Administration 7500 Standish Place Rockville, MD 20855 Division of Bioanalytical Chemistry Office of Regulatory Science FDA/CFSAN Wiley Bldg. College Park, MD Initiation Date: 21 September 2009 Est’d Completion Date: 28 January 2011 Study 275.30 10 February 2011 Page 1 of 39 INTRODUCTION CVM has been questioned about the safety of edible tissues from chickens treated with organic arsenicals, particularly roxarsone. The questions have arisen from (1) recent research indicating uncertainty about the identity and composition of incurred residues in edible tissues of chickens after roxarsone treatment (especially whether inorganic arsenic (iAs) increases in tissues of treated birds) and (2) law suits in the Midwest that contend arsenic in litter has caused ill effects in humans. This research study was intended to compare arsenic speciation data in birds treated with roxarsone for six (6) weeks, and sacrificed at 0, 3 and 5 days of withdrawal, with that from control chicken tissues (muscle, liver, kidney, blood, bile, gizzard and crop and their contents, and excreta).
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison of Physicochemical Methods to Remove Arsenic from Landfill Leachate and Gas Condensate
    Comparison of Physicochemical Methods to Remove Arsenic from Landfill Leachate and Gas Condensate Surbhi Malik A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Civil Engineering University of Washington 2020 Committee: Gregory Korshin Michael Dodd Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Civil and Environmental Engineering © Copyright 2020 Surbhi Malik University of Washington Abstract Comparison of Physicochemical Methods to Remove Arsenic from Landfill Leachate and Gas Condensate Surbhi Malik Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Gregory Korshin Civil and Environmental Engineering Arsenic is an important contaminant widely found in municipal solid waste (MSW). It has been accumulating in landfills and its concentrations in the landfill leachate have been observed to increase in several sites, notably at the Cedar Hills Regional Landfill Facility (CHRLF) located in the State of Washington. The chemistry and mobility of arsenic are unusual since it involves an array of solutes, gaseous arsines, and solids whose formation is greatly affected by landfill conditions that are dependent on MSW composition, hydrology, and other site-specific factors. The reducing conditions in a landfill result in intense microbial activity that generates landfill gas (LFG), LFG condensates, and leachate all of which can contain arsenic. The biological activity also results in the formation of methylated and sulfur-containing arsenic complexes that tend to be resistant to the conventional methods of removal. This thesis evaluated the effectiveness of conventional and emerging technology particularly micro-electrolysis (ME) in the removal of arsenic from landfill leachate and LFG condensate. ME uses a combination of adsorption and zero-valent iron (ZVI) driven reduction that results in the immobilization of arsenic.
    [Show full text]