1
$\begingroup$

How to reduce the quantity of (carcinogenic) mycotoxins in oatmeal?

I'm surprised by the amount of attention this question has received. Currently, it has a score of +7, many thoughtful comments, and zero close votes. Indeed, the question is well-worded, backed by ample sources, and its content is of practical interest.

However, from my reading, this question is only tangentially related to biology insomuch that mycotoxins are fungal products. The author suggests that they are not interested in interventions to reduce the amount of mycotoxin-producing fungi in oatmeal, which would be on-topic.

even if the customer store the oats in a dry environment, it's too late: the molds have already grown

In other words, the goal (at our consumer level) is not to stop the growth of the mycotoxins (because it's too late, even if stored in a dry environment), but to destroy/reduce them.

Instead, the question focuses on chemical and physical methods to inactivate / degrade mycotoxins (pressure, heat, sodium bicarbonate). If the question was concerned with degradation of protein toxins or other large biomolecules, I could see how it could be answered from a biological perspective (e.g. by addressing the effects of heat and chemical treatments on protein structure). But mycotoxins are relatively small molecules; see aflatoxin below.

enter image description here

Am I missing something, or does this question belong on Chemistry.SE?

$\endgroup$
7
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I agree that I'm a bit puzzled why this question has attracted uniformly positive reactions from the community - I could see it closed as either involving chemistry and not biology, as you suggest, or being personal medical advice. Ultimately probably the best answer to this question is going to be a frame-challenge answer that explains why it's highly unlikely for this approach to work, which is why the real approaches people use are targeting the fungal growth in the first place. I don't have much interest in writing that answer myself, though. $\endgroup$
    – Bryan Krause Mod
    Oct 1 at 18:14
  • $\begingroup$ I don't have much interest in writing that answer myself, though -- same. I'm going to vote to close, then. $\endgroup$
    – acvill
    Oct 1 at 18:27
  • $\begingroup$ @acvill If the question was concerned with degradation of protein toxins or other large biomolecules, I could see how it could be answered from a biological perspective I don't understand: 1) the question is exactly about the degradation of protein toxins 2) I believe it belongs to biology since mycotoxins are produced by an organism 3) since your argumentation is all about size But mycotoxins are relatively small molecules please tell us from what size you think that a molecule belongs or not to biology $\endgroup$
    – JinSnow
    Oct 2 at 7:21
  • $\begingroup$ @acvill 4) if you believe that the question is well-worded, backed by ample sources, and its content is of practical interest and that it belongs to stack chemistry why do you vote to close it instead of proposing to move it? $\endgroup$
    – JinSnow
    Oct 2 at 7:22
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Close votes are the mechanism by which questions can be marked as belonging in another stack exchange community. I’m not a mod, so I can’t migrate a question myself. The biological origin of a molecule does not inherently make questions about that molecule on-topic in a biology forum. Moreover, mycotoxins are not proteins, as your comment implies. Your question is good, it would just be a better fit on a chemistry or even a food science forum. $\endgroup$
    – acvill
    Oct 2 at 17:24
  • $\begingroup$ @acvill Your argumentation sound right. 1) I did not know about that stack "mechanism" 2) since it's not a protein and it's about deactivating the toxicity of a molecule it could/should/might belong to the stack chemistry. I only believe you should not have said "I'm voting to close this question" but "I'm voting to move it to the Chemistry.SE" because they don't mean the same thing (probably for most users). But I thank you for your transparency and for having taken the time to explain it. $\endgroup$
    – JinSnow
    Oct 6 at 7:54
  • $\begingroup$ That said, I confess I'd rather leave the question where it is because, in the chemistry forum, some people will probably ask to close it, simply because there is always a good reason to censor (and I believe a significant proportion of users prefers spending their time censuring the others than answering their questions). $\endgroup$
    – JinSnow
    Oct 6 at 7:58

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .