Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39489716›Full record

ReviewNutrition bulletin2025

Radium levels in Brazil nuts: A review of the literature.

Christian Koeder, Markus Keller

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nutrition bulletin, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Radium - from discovery to the present day - narrative review.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Christian KoederInstitute for Prevention and Cancer Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3761-4220
Markus KellerResearch Institute for Plant-Based Nutrition (IFPE), Biebertal, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Brazil nuts are well known for their extraordinarily high selenium content. For this reason, they are frequently recommended as a kind of natural selenium 'supplement', particularly for certain population groups such as vegetarians and vegans in regions with low soil selenium levels. Typically, an intake of one or two Brazil nuts per day is recommended. Brazil nuts, however, also stand out from other nuts in terms of their high (albeit highly variable) radium content. The radium isotopes Ra-226 and Ra-228 emit alpha- and beta-radiation, with this type of radiation being particularly harmful when ingested. Consequently, it is important to consider radium levels in Brazil nuts before formulating recommendations for a long-term, daily intake of these nuts. To date, however, no comprehensive overview of radium levels in Brazil nuts has been published. Therefore, a literature review without time or language restrictions was conducted, including unpublished original data from Germany. The literature review (including the German data) indicated mean Ra-226 and Ra-228 levels of 49 (range: 17-205) mBq/g and 67 (range: 12-235) mBq/g, respectively. Assuming a consistent daily intake of one or two Brazil nuts, this would result in an effective dose of ~88-220 μSv/year. This level of exposure appears to be neither clearly harmful nor clearly harmless. As increased radioactivity exposure (at least at higher doses) is associated with increased cancer risk, randomised controlled trials assessing the effect of Brazil nuts on cancer risk biomarkers are needed.

Indexed as

BertholletiaNutsRadiumHumansRadiumRadium-226Bertholletia excelsaBrazil nutscancerradiationradioactivityvegetarian

Identifiers

PMID39489716
PMCPMC11815606

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.