The Scam of Fish and Mercury

[Kelsea]

An interesting read I stumbled upon today... I pulled it off of a Doctor's Facebook page profile.

http://www.fishscam.com/

Its a site dedicated to busting the myths and hype about mercury levels in fish. They even challenge the claims made by famous dietary health care professionals and notable scientists.

I have not had a chance to research all of their claims, but it was interesting to read a completely different perspective, in light of all of the scary things we are told about heavy metals in our fish.

I'm not saying they are wrong or right, however they raise a number of interesting arguments and it explains the science in very accessible language.


"So is there a level of mercury that's harmful to humans or not?
Yes, but it's so high that Americans aren't likely to ever reach it -- even by eating frequent, generous portions of fish. Our bodies contain trace amounts of hundreds of chemical compounds that would be fatal in higher doses. Even Vitamin C can cause death in large enough amounts. Concentrated chlorine gas can be fatal, but we swim in pools of chlorinated water. And our brains require a tiny amount of arsenic in order to function properly. In higher doses, of course, arsenic is rat poison. The important thing to remember, as known for centuries, is that "the dose makes the poison."
In Iraq from 1971 to 1972, grain treated with a mercury-containing fungicide led to 6,000 hospitalizations and 500 deaths. The mercury levels measured in the hair of mothers from this region were as high as 674 parts-per-million. By comparison, the highest hair-mercury concentrations measured in American women of childbearing age are only 1.4 parts-per-million. That's a difference of over 48,000 percent.

And in the case of Japan's Minamata Bay, 111 people living near this body of water during the 1950s ate large amounts of fish that were artificially contaminated when a plastic factory dumped mercury-laden waste into the Bay. These fish had mercury concentrations as high as 40 parts-per-million, which is more than 20 times higher than the average found in the most mercury-heavy U.S. fish. And besides, the Japanese were undoubtedly eating more fish than Americans are accustomed to. A similar case ten years later involved 120 residents of Niigata, Japan who ate industrially contaminated fish. According to the University of Rochester's Dr. Thomas Clarkson, these Japanese poisonings are the only clinical cases anywhere in the scientific literature that document mercury poisoning from fish."

Its worth a read, if only to get your mind thinking in the habit of thinking about evaluating the science we are spoon fed as gospel truth and arming you with the ability to ask questions to make up your own mind. Evaluating claims critically is so important in today's world.

[Bulit7]

Read bout what happened to Jeremy Piven. He decided to stop eatin meat and went on a fish eating crusade. Search him up!

[los mentirosos]

I have eaten kingfish a couple times a week during the summer for longer than I can remember. It doesn't freeze well. A couple years ago I had the lab test me and was told I was within normal limits. What constitutes out of limits I wonder?
This link was provided during a previous discussion of the subject.
http://www.mercuryfacts.org/mercuryMyths.cfm

[the bodj]

i had to give a speech on the subject last semester. the amount of mercury is not really harmful to humans. the whole thing has been blown way out of proportion. what people do not know is that fish has a high level of selenium, which is EXTREMELY good for us. the benefits of selenium outweigh any negative effects of the mercury. the selenium also helps reduce depression. island nations that eat fish for 2 or more meals a day tend to live happier, less depressed lives, and show no signs of negative effects from mercury (their levels were a little higher than average, but no problems).

[ocean_314]

Its not death that is the issue but the slow mental retardation that mercury causes in small amounts.

This is the concern with mercury in fish.

[fishkilla]

i've heard that when they test a fish for mercury they grind up the entire fish not just the filets. is this true?

[SEATUX]

I have been eating fish 5 nights a week for the last 5 or 6 years. I’ve noticed a reduction of feeling in my fingers and toes, told the Doctor about it during my yearly physical; it alerted him to possible mercury issues so he added mercury to my blood test. Results showed that I am at more than twice the max allowed level. I have been given many sites discussing mercury issues, and read allot about it. It can be serious; however, you can reduce the level by reducing the fish intake, or watching which fish you eat. Some are much higher in mercury than others.
Take it for what it’s worth.

[fishkilla]

what kind of fish have you mostly been eating? fish only from the Gulf?

[Nerka]

Hmm Scam implies that someone is profiting. Who is profiting in this scenario? Could the issue be blown out of proportion by the media, most certainly. Is mercury and issue, yes, particularly for women of childbearing age.

[Bill McIntyre]

A friend of mine ate lots of albacore and started feeling funky. He got tested for mercury, and it was very high.


Another guy I met leaned off the bow of a boat and shot a swordfish (yes, I know it was illegal). He ate it every night until it was gone and then got tested. His mercury levels were off the page.

Yes, I know that isn't scientific, but it was enough to impress both guys.

[Kelsea]

I take everything I read with a grain of salt - you could say, I'm ever the skeptic. I eat a wide variety of fish. I think variety is important for upper food chain levels animals such as humans. If we were forced to eat the same kinds of fish all the time... its very reasonable to assume that there would be an imbalance at some point that can be harmful. Even though this site downplays the importance of mercury, I do still think that moderation is always important. Especially if you are consuming the meat of top level predatory fish. Bioaccumulation is no myth: when you eat top predators such as shark, swords, tuna, etc - there is more than just mercury in their meat.

My big question is: Even if mercury levels accumulate to a high level in an individual, and lets assume that it causes them neurological problems - is that damage permanent?


The article also addresses Japanese populations and their high consumption of fish. Could it be that certain ethnic groups of people can tolerate a higher fish diet than others?

What I found interesting about this site is that they put things into perspective for you. When ever a body of scientists come forward and make claims that will influence your freedom or your own decision to do something - its worth seeing where they come from? Who do they represent? Who are they funded by? I am not trying to drive conspiracy and I'm not saying you should not believe them, but keeping them at arms distance is not an unwise idea....

[SEATUX]

Originally Posted by Kelsea

. My big question is: Even if mercury levels accumulate to a high level in an individual, and lets assume that it causes them neurological problems - is that damage permanent?
.

It can be permanent, but usually will improve with the reduction/elimination of mercury

Originally Posted by fishkilla

what kind of fish have you mostly been eating? fish only from the Gulf?

Yes, almost entirely Gulf Fish, and a wide variety;
Groupers; Black(Carbo) / Gag / Red / Scamp
Amberjack
Hogfish
Snappers, Grey, Red, Mango, yellow tail
Trigger
Shark
African Pompano
Permit
Almaco Jack
Lobster
And on occasion I purchase;
Snowy, yellow edge Grouper
Tuna
Shrimp
Lobster
Crab
Salomon
Parrot
Mahi
Triple Tail

There is a list that breaks the fish into three groups of mercury concentration highest, medium, and lowest.

I have the feeling that the USA’s sewer line, that dumps into the Gulf (AKA Mississippi River, and all the tributaries that feed it with polluted run off) has allot to do with the mercury levels in our fish. Interestingly, with the exception of sharks, some Tuna and bill fish, California fish doesn’t seem to be as affected as Gulf fish!

Forgot to add Cobia and Barracuda
(memory loss is one of the symptoms you know, I can't remember the other ones right now)

[SEATUX]

Fish Species MercuryLevel
TILEFISH (Gulf of Mexico) 1.45
SWORDFISH 0.995
SHARK 0.979
MACKEREL KING 0.73
TUNA (FRESH/FROZEN, BIGEYE) 0.689
ORANGE ROUGHY 0.571
MARLIN * 0.485
MACKEREL SPANISH (Gulf of Mexico) 0.454
GROUPER (ALL SPECIES) 0.448
TUNA (FRESH/FROZEN, Species Unknown) 0.415
TUNA(FRESH/FROZEN, ALL) 0.391
BLUEFISH 0.368
SABLEFISH 0.361
TUNA (FRESH/FROZEN, ALBACORE) 0.358
BASS CHILEAN 0.354
TUNA (FRESH/FROZEN, YELLOWFIN) 0.354
TUNA (CANNED, ALBACORE) 0.35
CROAKER WHITE (Pacific) 0.287
HALIBUT 0.241
WEAKFISH (SEA TROUT) 0.235
SCORPIONFISH 0.233
MACKEREL SPANISH (S. Atlantic) 0.182
MONKFISH 0.181
LOBSTER (Species Unknown) 0.166
SNAPPER 0.166
BASS (SALTWATER, BLACK, STRIPED)3 0.152
PERCH (Freshwater) 0.15
TILEFISH (Atlantic) 0.144
TUNA (FRESH/FROZEN, SKIPJACK) 0.144
BUFFALOFISH 0.137
SKATE 0.137
TUNA (CANNED, LIGHT) 0.128
PERCH OCEAN * 0.121
COD 0.111
CARP 0.11
LOBSTER (NORTHERN / AMERICAN) 0.107
LOBSTER (Spiny) 0.093
SHEEPSHEAD 0.093
WHITEFISH 0.089
MACKEREL CHUB (Pacific) 0.088
HERRING 0.084
JACKSMELT 0.081
HAKE 0.079
TROUT (FRESHWATER) 0.071
CRAB 1 0.065
CROAKER ATLANTIC (Atlantic) 0.065
BUTTERFISH 0.058
FLATFISH 2* 0.056
HADDOCK (Atlantic) 0.055
WHITING 0.051
MACKEREL ATLANTIC (N.Atlantic) 0.05
MULLET 0.05
SHAD AMERICAN 0.045
CRAWFISH 0.033
POLLOCK 0.031
CATFISH 0.025
SQUID 0.023
SALMON (FRESH/FROZEN) * 0.022
ANCHOVIES 0.017
SARDINE 0.013
TILAPIA * 0.013
OYSTER 0.012
CLAM * 0.009
SHRIMP * 0.009
SALMON (CANNED) * 0.008
SCALLOP 0.003

[Kelsea]

Thank you Seatux - where did you pull this source of info from?

[ocean_314]

Originally Posted by Kelsea

I take everything I read with a grain of salt - you could say, I'm ever the skeptic. I eat a wide variety of fish. I think variety is important for upper food chain levels animals such as humans. If we were forced to eat the same kinds of fish all the time... its very reasonable to assume that there would be an imbalance at some point that can be harmful. Even though this site downplays the importance of mercury, I do still think that moderation is always important. Especially if you are consuming the meat of top level predatory fish. Bioaccumulation is no myth: when you eat top predators such as shark, swords, tuna, etc - there is more than just mercury in their meat.

My big question is: Even if mercury levels accumulate to a high level in an individual, and lets assume that it causes them neurological problems - is that damage permanent?


The article also addresses Japanese populations and their high consumption of fish. Could it be that certain ethnic groups of people can tolerate a higher fish diet than others?

What I found interesting about this site is that they put things into perspective for you. When ever a body of scientists come forward and make claims that will influence your freedom or your own decision to do something - its worth seeing where they come from? Who do they represent? Who are they funded by? I am not trying to drive conspiracy and I'm not saying you should not believe them, but keeping them at arms distance is not an unwise idea....

Mercury is a neurotoxin and too much Mercury makes one crazy, not retarded. I just asked my wife...was close but...

The term Mad Hatter came from the workers that made hats in the 1800's and earlier. Mercury was used in the manufacturing of the hats and the workers went crazy over time.

The Japanese had a big problem several decades ago when Mercury was dumped into the ocean got concentrated in the fish and then was consumed the fish. From 1932 to 1968 the Chisso Corp dumped mercury in Minamaka Bay. The Mercury got so concentrated that the whole population around that bay went crazy.

Mercury is very nasty stuff and not to be messed with.

Nothing like living with one of the top epidemiologists in the country.