Dr. Mercola January 03 2009 19,708 views
The U.S. FDA is urging the government to amend its advisory that women and children should limit how much fish they eat. They argue that the benefits of seafood outweigh the health risks and that most people should eat more fish, even if it contains mercury.
However, the FDA's recommendations have alarmed scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency, who in internal memos criticized them as "scientifically flawed and inadequate" and said they fell short of the "scientific rigor routinely demonstrated by the EPA."
The FDA sent its draft report as part of an effort to update the existing health advisory. The report argued that nutrients in fish, including omega-3 fatty acids, selenium and other minerals could boost a child's IQ by three points.
The FDA and the EPA both play a role in protecting the public from mercury contamination. The EPA investigates and regulates mercury and other contaminants in recreationally caught fish, while the FDA regulates mercury in seafood sold in markets and restaurants.
The FDA is hard at work again, protecting the health and welfare of big businesses that provide its funding.
Four years ago, the EPA and FDA issued a joint advisory warning women of childbearing age, pregnant women, nursing mothers, and children to stop eating swordfish, shark, tilefish and king mackerel, and to limit their consumption of other mercury-contaminated fish to a maximum of 12 ounces per week.
Now the FDA is trying to backpedal against a raging river, stating the benefits of eating more than 12 ounces a week of fatty fish like tuna outweigh the health hazards of mercury.
Folks, don’t believe this nonsense for even one second.
There are plenty of studies showing that mercury contamination from fish consumption constitutes a health hazard for mothers and their babies, such as the 2007 study published in Environmental Health Perspectives, showing fish consumption is positively associated with premature delivery.
There are also plenty of real-life examples of people who suffered serious health problems from eating too much fish. Actor Jeremy Piven springs to mind, as he abruptly ended his Broadway run last week due to mercury poisoning from his frequent sushi habit.
But how much is too much?
GotMercury.org can help you answer that question with their handy mercury calculator.
For example, if a woman weighing 145 pounds ate 12 ounces (about 2 fillets) of yellowfin tuna per week, her weekly mercury intake would be 240 percent over the current EPA “safe” limit!
Multiply that over the course of a year, and you surely will not be looking at a health benefit from omega-3, but rather a health disaster from mercury poisoning.
In response to the FDA’s plan to rescind the mercury in fish advisories for women and children, the Mercury Policy Project released an expanded case study, documenting 23 people who got sick from eating too much mercury-laden fish.
"Mercury levels in swordfish and tuna sold in the U. S. are sky-high," says Teri Shore, Program Director for the GotMercury Project of Turtle Island Restoration Network in Forest Knolls, CA. "And now the government and tuna companies want to keep mothers and children completely in the dark about it."
"Mercury levels in swordfish and tuna sold in the U. S. are sky-high," says Teri Shore, Program Director for the GotMercury Project of Turtle Island Restoration Network in Forest Knolls, CA.
"And now the government and tuna companies want to keep mothers and children completely in the dark about it."
Dr. Jane Hightower, M.D. of San Francisco has even chronicled the seafood industry's interference in public health policy in her book Diagnosis: Mercury: Money, Politics and Poison.
"We've known for years that mercury is toxic to the brain and other organs in varying amounts depending on the individual's status. For FDA to suddenly change the equation to say that benefits outweigh risks is like once again declaring the earth is flat after discovering it was round. "Patients in my private medical practice, as well as at other doctor's offices around the country, have been diagnosed with mercury toxicity from eating too much fish. Ignoring the presence of a known neurotoxin in one's diet is simply asking for trouble," says Dr. Hightower.
"We've known for years that mercury is toxic to the brain and other organs in varying amounts depending on the individual's status. For FDA to suddenly change the equation to say that benefits outweigh risks is like once again declaring the earth is flat after discovering it was round.
"Patients in my private medical practice, as well as at other doctor's offices around the country, have been diagnosed with mercury toxicity from eating too much fish. Ignoring the presence of a known neurotoxin in one's diet is simply asking for trouble," says Dr. Hightower.
There is no doubt in my mind that the benefits you get from eating fish and seafood – especially while pregnant – do NOT outweigh the risk of mercury toxicity to yourself or your developing child. Mercury is a real toxin and brain poison that can and will cause serious damage to your central nervous system.
Sorting Through the Benefits and Risks of Fish
First of all, animal-based omega-3 fats are absolutely vital for the complete development of your baby’s brain during pregnancy and the first two years of life. Of that there’s no doubt, and the FDA are correct in their assertion on that point.
Being deficient in omega-3 has also been shown to increase your risk of premature delivery. BUT, as the study in Environmental Health Perspectives shows, so does being exposed to mercury from fish consumption…
There is really no reason to argue for higher fish consumption, or urge people to choose between two evils. Why?
Because there are SAFE ALTERNATIVES to fish!
Why expose yourself to toxic heavy metals when you can get the goodness of omega-3 from safe, clean sources, other than fish and seafood?
I’m talking about krill oil and fish oil, of course.
It is obvious that the experts responsible for generating this recommendation have a similar appreciation of the amazing benefits that omega-3 fats have for your health. Unfortunately, I believe these experts are in denial and do not have a full appreciation of the serious dangers of heavy metal and chemical contamination, which has migrated into most commercially available seafood.
Additionally, newer research suggests that optimizing your vitamin D levels into therapeutic ranges will upregulate intracellular glutathione production and help detoxify mercury. So make sure you get your vitamin D blood levels checked!
Why You Should NOT Eat Fish
The problem with high fish consumption is that most of your commercially available fish are highly contaminated with mercury, which can cause as much brain damage as omega-3 can bring health benefits.
An alarming 40 tons of mercury are released into the United States alone every year due to burning coal to generate electricity. Mercury pollution from coal-fired power plants moves through the air, is deposited in water, and finds its way into fish, accumulating especially in fish that are higher up the food chain.
Fish like tuna, sea bass, marlin, and halibut show some of the worst contamination, but dozens of species and thousands of water bodies have been seriously polluted.
As a result, if you eat a lot of fish during pregnancy, or even as little as a single serving of a highly contaminated fish, you can expose your developing child to excessive levels of mercury. The toxic metal can cross through your placenta to harm your child’s rapidly developing nervous system, including your baby’s brain.
Some fish are more problematic than others. These are some of the ones you should definitely avoid if you are pregnant or nursing:
Tuna steaks
Canned tuna
Sea bass
Oysters (Gulf of Mexico)
Marlin
Halibut
Pike
Walleye
White croaker
Largemouth bass
Shark
Swordfish
For a more comprehensive report on fish recommendations and dangers, please review my previous report on this topic.
In a perfect world, fish would be a near-perfect food -- high in protein and full of essential nutrients and fats. But our world is not perfect, and, sadly, neither is our fish supply. Therefore, I do not recommend eating any fish -- unless you have lab results in your hand that can attest to its purity.
Safe Alternatives to Fish
I believe supplementing with fish oil and krill oil is a safe and effective way to get all the health benefits of omega-3, without any of the risks of mercury.
Eating smaller fish, like sardines, is also an option, as they are far less likely to be contaminated.
If you insist on eating typical, store-bought fish, however, and want to know more about the extent of your mercury exposure, I urge you, for the sake of your health and that of your family, to check out the online mercury calculator at GotMercury.org.
I believe you hit the nail on the head.
If the FDA/CDC admit that mercury is dangerous, then the anti-vaccine crowd would have a leg to stand on.
Instead of protecting Americans, they once again bow to the pharm industry special interests.
Of the lobbyist, for the lobbyist, by the lobbyist.
And, we continue to go to the polls and vote back in the same people who have been doing this to us.
So, who is truly evil? The government, or the idiots that keep re-enlisting them?
Yes, yes, yes!!! This is EXACTLY what I have been saying for years!!!! How can the FDA tell women not to eat fish when they are pregnant/nursing, but tell them that it is recommended that they and their babies get flu shots which are chock full of more mercury than a fish ever saw?!?!? I believe you are 100% right, bmc.
When will the majority of Americans including politicians in this country realize that the FDA is just one letter short of NAZI. This corrupt and dangerous organization needs to be brought down hard by any means necessary.
cocabc I agree with you but I think they are not only nazi they are mostly alien influenzed organization ; they goal is to cripple us
Don't you think we should focus on WHY mercury levels are rising in fish and what we can do to reverse that and clean up our environment, instead of simply cutting fish out our food chain without addressing the underlying issue?
What, and stop corporate America from dumping pollutants into the oceans? Don't you realize that would cut into their bottom line? Taxpayers - er, sorry, stockholders would never hold still for that! What were you thinking?
[Pulls tongue out of cheek]
Good one islander, but very much yes Gabrielle. We should be looking for ways to end mercury pollution
I wish more people would help stop coal-fired power plants whose pathway is being cleared by the Bush Administration to be sited throughout the country, even outside the national parks. No matter where coal fired power plants are sited or enlarged, the mercurious vapors escape the pollution controls and go into the air. The precipitation carries them back to earth where they are methylated from bacteria in plants and soils and become the more toxic methylmercury. Methylmercury accumulates and concentrates each step of the way in the environment beginning with the plants and animals eaten by small fish, which in turn are eaten by larger fish. Hence, methylmercury is increasing in the fish.
To lay the groundwork for more and expanded coal fired power plants, the Bush Administration eliminated all scientists that did not subscribe the their science (science from the fossil fuel industry). They then took all studies from the US EPA libraries, and closed the libraries. The studies were placed in an undisclosed location where EPA and other regulatory officials and the public could not obtain them. VP Cheney then attacked and delisted the listed Endangered Species, but was often slowed by environmentalists and conservationists in the court of appeals. Now, top predators around Yellowstone National Park and other areas which are opened to industrial devastation, are repeatedly delisted and murdered to make way for the power plants, clear cutting of their habitat and other damage compliments of the Bush Administration.
For the last 8 years, I've been one of the funders for Earth Justice to stop coal fired power plants, and protect our environment from the Greedy Opportunistic Predators. That's how I know this.
I do agree. It is so sad that we cannot eat one of natures most healthful and delicious foods because man has contaminated it so badly. I do still indulge in wild caught salmon from time to time, but not nearly as much as I would if I weren't concerned about the mercury. I have alot of chemical sensitivities, and just don't seem to be able to tolerate the fish oil or krill out capsules. So I sure wish I could get my omega-3s naturally - from FISH - what God gave us to eat in the first place.
When you talk about mercury toxicity in humans, you need to also address 'mercury' amalgam fillings.
Note this recent publication:
www.nj.com/.../index.ssf
End era of mercury fillings
December 31, 2008
BY CHARLES G. BROWN
The biggest change in the history of American dentistry is about to occur. The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is on the verge of limiting the use of dentistry's 19th-century foundation-stone, amalgam fillings. Though promoted as "silver fillings," this material is 50 percent mercury and only 25 percent silver.
Mercury is, of course, highly toxic; it can cause permanent harm to a fetus, to a child's developing brain or an adult's kidneys. The World Health Organization says no safe level of mercury exists. Unlike lead, whose risk becomes acute when the child licks it, mercury is notoriously volatile (it is the only metal in liquid form at room temperature), so its vapors alone can cause neurological or fetal damage. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control warns that mercury from amalgam is "a major source" of mercury exposure to our bodies.
In dentistry's early days, no alternative existed, except expensive gold. That excuse is over. Composite, a white resin-like material, is interchangeable with mercury amalgam, albeit it takes a few moments longer to implant. That means, for upper-middle-class adults who go to modern dentists, composite is the norm. For children, working Americans, soldiers and sailors, prisoners and others receiving assembly-line dentistry, however, it is still mercury, mercury, mercury. Emmitt Carlton, a Washington lawyer testifying on behalf of the NAACP before the U.S. House Subcommittee on Wellness and Human Rights in 2003, summarized American dentistry as providing "choice for the rich, mercury for the poor."
Dental mercury is an environmental hazard. A report by the Mercury Policy Project shows that dental offices are the largest source of mercury in the nation's wastewater. Hence, dentistry puts an unnecessary burden on taxpayers to clean it up. Prudently, the Corzine administration ordered all dentists, effective Oct. 1, 2007, to install and maintain amalgam separators to catch mercury before it enters New Jersey's water supply.
This rule, written by the state Department of Environmental Protection, took another step to reduce pollution, directing dentists, "where appropriate," to use alternatives to amalgam. Many dentists don't need to be encouraged to quit; to their credit, between one-third and one-half of U.S. dentists have stopped using amalgam.
With the pollution, the health controversy and the social-justice disparities, the question isn't why so many dentists have switched -- it's why so many hang onto this anachronism.
Taking an active interest in the issue is Sen. Ronald Rice, D-Newark, sponsor of a bill directing the state Department of Health and Senior Services to investigate mercury use in dental fillings and to study its health and occupational effects. Also, New Jersey Attorney General Anne Milgram led the states, with New Jersey as the lead plaintiff, to compel the Bush administration to enforce the laws against mercury pollution.
To protect their babies, pregnant women are warned not to get any unnecessary exposure to mercury, such as to avoid eating tuna. Several years ago, a report by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency showed that one in eight women of childbearing age is already so mercury toxic she is at risk of having a brain-damaged baby. Imagine if a dentist, instead of using the misnomer "silver fillings," told a pregnant patient to prepare to receive "mercury fillings." It is safe to assume she would vacate the dental chair immediately.
So mired in mercury is New Jersey that it seeks to ship it out. The state is battling obstacles to send tons of mercury sitting in Somerset County to Nevada. Congress has, however, closed off the option of shipping New Jersey's mercury overseas; the Mercury Export Ban Act of 2008 bans mercury exports. The law's lead sponsor: Sen., now president-elect, Barack Obama. Such strong action by our next president forecasts an administration that may be tough on mercury products and mercury users.
Mercury-free dentistry is more than a health and environment issue -- it is a workplace safety issue. Largely female and of childbearing age, dental workers are the very persons who should be the most vigilant to avoid exposure to mercury vapors -- which happens, sadly, each time a dental worker opens the amalgam capsule.
In New Jersey, private-sector workplace safety is enforced by the U.S. Occupational Health & Safety Administration (OSHA), while the public sector workplace is handled by the New Jersey Public Employees Occupational Safety & Health program ("PEOSH").
Fortunately, New Jersey PEOSH is ahead of the nation in the arena of protecting employees from mercury; its standard is for employers to "substitute safer chemicals" for mercury. But PEOSH has not acted on our request to apply its standard to dental clinics at UMDNJ and the state prisons, choosing, to date, not even to issue an alert (an advisory about the law).
The contrast between the Corzine administration's vigorous environmental policy against mercury and its indifference toward workplace mercury is startling. In its environmental policies, New Jersey is positioned to be the cutting-edge state in the transition to mercury-free dentistry. But unwillingness to enforce its own workplace safety policies means New Jersey is putting young female workers at risk not only for themselves, but for their present and future babies.
Charles G. Brown is national counsel for Consumers for Dental Choice. More information on the FDA settlement is on the group's website, www.toxicteeth.org
The FDA are morons who prostitute themselves to the highest bidder. Anyone with half a brain knows that mercury is always dangerous.
I was so surprised when I went to see my doctor about my pregnancy. I am pregnant with twins... yeah!!! Well in the little bag they give you there is a pamphlet on mercury. I was excited thinking wow their getting with the program. However I was greatly disappointed when they stated that pregnant women shouldn't eat too much tuna but that a couple times a week was acceptable. I just thought idiots. I am not eating fish at all and doing all I can to keep myself from ingesting any major toxins. I have cleaned up my diet even more. This has been a good thing. However I still feel like I am fighting a battle that is not meant to be won. Why does it seem like the European nations are much more concerned about the health of their people than we are our own? Places like Russia have gone to such extremes as to state that women should have no mercury filling in their teeth at all before getting pregnant. Plus their doing EMP scans in the homes to insure that the children and mother are not being over exposed. Stating there is a greater risk for autism. Why don't we care enough to take care of our own? Maybe there is just more money in addressing the symptoms these things cause with drugs and "studies". I don't want to be anyone guinea pig!!!!!!!!!