Skip to comments.Studies aim to resolve confusion over mercury risks from fish
Posted on 04/25/2010 5:06:06 PM PDT by neverdem
Research identifies riskier fish and ways to limit potentially harmful exposures
The way it boosts neural development in babies and protects the hearts and minds of adults, fish could be considered a health food. Yet the methylmercury pollution that taints fish worldwide can erase these advantages and even trigger profound mental and cardiovascular harm. Several new papers now suggest strategies by which American diners can negotiate the mercury minefield to tap dietary benefits in fish.
Their authors also call for reform of federal guidelines that can confuse consumers on mercury risks from fish.
Mercury is a global pollutant. Some comes from local industrial sources, such as smelters or coal-fired power plants. Some falls out of the atmosphere from distant polluters. There are natural sources, such as erupting volcanoes. And some just remains as a pervasive legacy of historical releases.
Once elemental mercury gets into water, certain bacteria methylate it into its most toxic form, which explains how fish become such a rich dietary source of the toxic metal. The amount of methylmercury that a fish accumulates will rise with mercury contamination in its home waters and also with how high its species resides in the food web with top predators like shark, swordfish and tuna at the apex. Two of the new studies focused on tuna, the most widely consumed top predator fish.
At least in the United States, groceries and restaurants do not typically identify fresh tuna by species. Yet mercury contamination can vary dramatically within a family like tuna, often owing to each tuna species average size. So Jacob Lowenstein of Columbia University and his colleagues used genetic analyses to identify by species the fish in 100 samples of sushi tuna. These came from high-quality fresh steaks and were purchased at 54 local restaurants and 15 supermarkets...
(Excerpt) Read more at sciencenews.org ...
Ranking the contributions of commercial fish and shellfish varieties to mercury exposure in the United States: Implications for risk communication
DNA barcodes reveal species-specific mercury levels in tuna sushi that pose a health risk to consumers FReebie
I only eat Pacific Salmon that glow in the dark...
Excellent! No need for lighting or those nasty, polluting candles. I commend you on the exemplary management of your carbon footprint!
Oh goody, another study, but then we need a study on the study, etc., etc..
Deadly New Fungus Emerging in Oregon Expected to Spread
Test shows once-a-day malaria treatment highly effective
Chokeberry extract found to regulate weight gain, blood glucose, and inflammation in rats
FReepmail me if you want on or off my health and science ping list.
This is really good solid info that a consumer can use for their buying decisions. It is interesting that some of the cheapest, and most convenient fish, are the ones lowest in mercury. Of course, there are really good reasons to eat fish (lowered inflammation, low fat, etc.), not to mention that the stuff just tastes good. The neat thing about tuna is that the canned stuff is the lowest in mercury. I tend to purchase lots of canned tuna when it hits $.50/can. What’s more, canned salmon is one of the lowest in mercury, very convenient when canned, and the kids love it as well. It isn’t as high in Omega-3 as the fresh stuff is, but it doesn’t cost nearly as much. It’s nice that I can get it cheap at Walmart. It’s lovely to have for a quick after school snack for the kids, or when we’re just to lazy to cook.
The researchers are correct, we don’t eat nearly enough fish (and McD’s fish sandwiches with a slice of cheese don’t count!!). ;-)
Sorry, I should have said that canned tuna is the lowest in mercury among he various types of tuna. It’s still well above fish like Catfish and Salmon.
Humboldt Bay had the first commercial nuclear power plant and our fish have the brighter deeper glow of any other
If it weren't for the enviro-nazis, could probably make some really nice chandeliers out of them.
I should say so!
Mercury is a REAL pollutant, the last Greenpeace stooge I talked to had no idea what Mercury was, but he was concerned about the CO2 levels.
If Greenpeace was doing the job they would be working on solving issue with the REAL pollutants and stop harrassing people about the imaginary ones.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.