Re: Mushroom Mis- information from Google scholar:

[Guest guest]

Dear gr. kees braam,

I have reviewed the mushroom article you submitted (from Google?) and have found

a number of extremely unfortunate mistakes. I will list two here, and submit a

more comprehensive review later.

About heavy metals, radioactivity, etc... The references in the article are

based on the testing of wild mushrooms harvested in heavily polluted areas.

However, medicinal mushroom-based dietary supplements sold in the U.S. and

Europe are extracted from cultivated mushrooms grown under very carefully

controlled and clean conditions, not wild harvested mushrooms.

Not a single mushroom supplement on the U.S. market is made from wild mushrooms

harvested where the article cited, and if you think differently, please let us

know.

Even though not necessary, all mushroom supplements extracted from cultivated

mushrooms are always tested for the metals mentioned.

In the supplements we sell, none of these metals are detected.

The industry does this because public perception, even if misinformed, is still

a reality of the marketplace. This concerns us because sellers of worthless,

un-tested, un-extracted mushroom supplements grow what we call junk on organic

grain and then call it organic.

They then quote the research this study did to raise completely ridiculous and

false concerns about heavy metal content.

I would not eat a mushroom growing in a polluted area because mushrooms, like

fruits and vegetables, can be contaminated with toxins from the immediate

environment. Know your source.

The article also includes a stunningly gross misstatement that there are no

large scale epidemiological studies on medicinal mushrooms.

Among others, a large-scale epidemiological study from Japan of impeccable

quality and scholarship is not mentioned.

The article is of exceptionally poor scholarship, so full of mistakes that I

have only covered the first couple of paragraphs here. Being published does not

make it accurate.

I will submit a complete review in a few weeks, since the mistakes are so many

they can not be covered all at once.

Sincerely,

D. Seleen

johnseleen@...

[, remember that this isn't a technical trade magazine. We want quick,

hard, accurate information for people with cancer looking for well-presented,

readable advice. Keep it short and direct -- and keep it readable. Thanks.]