New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Simple Cooking Method Flushes Arsenic out of Rice

Preparing rice in a coffee machine can halve levels of the naturally occurring but toxic substance

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Cooking rice by repeatedly flushing it through with fresh hot water can remove much of the grain’s stored arsenic, researchers have found—a tip that could lessen levels of the toxic substance in one of the world’s most popular foods.

Billions of people eat rice daily, but it contributes more arsenic to the human diet than any other food. Conventionally grown in flooded paddies, rice takes up more arsenic (which occurs naturally in water and soil as part of an inorganic compound) than do other grains. High levels of arsenic in food have been linked to different types of cancer, and other health problems.

Andrew Meharg, a plant and soil scientist at Queen’s University Belfast, UK, wondered whether cooking the grain in a different way might help to lessen the health risk. The standard method for making rice—boiling it in a pot until it soaks up all the liquid—binds into place any arsenic contained in the rice and the cooking water.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Percolation is key

On the basis of earlier work, Meharg and his colleagues knew that arsenic levels drop when rice is thoroughly rinsed and then cooked in an excessive amount of water. The method helps even when the cooking water contains arsenic.

Meharg and colleagues found that using this method with increasing proportions of water removed progressively more arsenic—up to a 57 percent reduction with a ratio of 12 parts water to one part rice. That result confirmed that the arsenic is "mobile" in liquid water, and thus can be removed.

The team then cooked rice in an apparatus that continually condenses steam to produce a fresh supply of distilled hot water, and in an ordinary coffee percolator with a filter, which allows cooking water to drip out of the rice. Testing the rice before and after cooking showed that coffee-pot percolation removed about half the arsenic, and that the lab apparatus removed around 60–70 percent.  In some cases, the technique removed as much as 85 percent of the substance, depending on the type of rice used. The findings are reported in PLoS ONE.

Short-term fix

Meharg does not expect people to start cooking rice in their coffee machines. “We just took something that’s in everybody’s kitchen and applied it to show a principle,” he says. He sees the research as a proof of concept that could feed the development of simple, inexpensive rice cookers that lower arsenic concentrations.

The risk of arsenic poisoning is greatest for consumers who eat rice several times a day. In Bangladesh, where rice is a staple and the water is also naturally high in arsenic, people are particularly vulnerable. Parboiling facilities in the country process rice by pre-cooking, drying and husking the grain. These processes offer the opportunity to intervene on a commercial scale with cookers that would reduce arsenic levels—something that Meharg plans to do.

The same technique could also help companies elsewhere to lower arsenic levels in baby cereals and other products that use pre-cooked rice. Rice-based baby foods often contain high levels of arsenic, a double-whammy for small children, who consume proportionately more of the substance for their body size.

In the long term, the best strategies for removing arsenic from rice will come from ongoing efforts to breed low-arsenic strains and alter growing techniques, says Margaret Karagas, an epidemiologist at Dartmouth College in Hanover, N.H. But, she says, “This paper is really interesting because it is offering a short-term solution to the problem. It’s giving people an opportunity to reduce the arsenic burden of their rice.”

This article is reproduced with permission and was first published on July 22, 2015.

Nature News doi: 10.1038/nature.2015.18034

Emily Sohn is a freelance journalist in Minneapolis whose stories have appeared in National Geographic, the New York Times, Nature, and many other publications.

More by Emily Sohn

First published in 1869, Nature is the world's leading multidisciplinary science journal. Nature publishes the finest peer-reviewed research that drives ground-breaking discovery, and is read by thought-leaders and decision-makers around the world.

More by Nature magazine

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe