can you please cite your sources? correct me if i'm wrong, but the serving was three protein shakes, not 19.
Yes, that's where I get it from. 105 in a can of tuna divided by 16.9 in three drinks, times 3, gives roughly 19 protein drinks have as much arsenic as one serving of tuna.
A couple of servings of tuna or other fatty fish per week is almost universally recommended as healthy, and experimentally found to be healthy, despite any heavy metal concerns, even for pregnant women.
You would have to drink 38 protein drinks a week to reproduce the amount of arsenic in your recommended two servings of tuna.
As for the source of the amounts in fish and other foods, someone reproduced a table in the previous thread on this issue on RJ. I got it from there.
Then, you should inform yourself of the meaning of the American Pharmacopoeia limits. These are not toxicity limits, in other words, exceeding them does not imply toxicity. Not by a long shot.
In any case, many other foodstuffs have high amounts of arsenic, not just seafood. These are natural ingredients in the human diet since forever.
What I found so stupid about this whole hysteria is that they are not giving the context. If they were honest, they should have indicated how much safer
the protein drinks are than a piece of fish.