Are Fish Unsafe to Eat?

[Guest guest]

I've had to re-think a lot of things I believed were true when I wrote about

them, and fish is one of those issues. I am realizing more and more how much

fear and false information is being spread about eating all kinds of " real "

foods, including fish.

The " claim " is that many fish are unsafe to eat because they contain high levels

of mercury and toxins. While I agree there may be some fish that are sick due to

toxins, however if you look at the fish you can see whether it is actually sick

and unfit to eat. If the fish were sick the fish industry wouldn't be allowed to

put them on the market, and they wouldn't want to since it would make a bad name

for them.

I've also learned that fish are very capable of detoxifying mercury and other

toxins, just like all animal bodies, including Humans. All animals' cells are

protected because toxins make the cell membranes rigid/stiff so they are less

able to get inside. In addition to the fact that cells are not programmed to

select toxins for their construction since they are programmed to select

nutrients, water, etc.

While some people may disagree with a reference from a Fishing Association, I

believe such organizations have more knowledge, research and evidence about

fish, and they have the right to protect their industry from wild claims and

false information, just like farmers should - see the references on this site:

http://www.americanalbacore.com/mercury-info

Here's some quotes from Health Benefits and Risks in Seafood Consumption:

Special Emphasis on Albacore Tuna, by sey, Director of Oregon

State University Seafood Laboratory and the Food Innovation Center:

" There is a disparity about what we read in the popular press and what research

is discovering about seafood consumption and this is caused mainly by issues

surrounding mercury (Hg).

Mercury is a ubiquitous [found everywhere] compound that is in the natural

environment through both natural events (volcanoes) and anthropogenic [impact on

the environment] activities including emissions from coal-fired plants. Once in

the environment Hg can be transformed to the more harmful organic form of methyl

mercury (MeHg) which in high concentrations can have devastating effect on the

nervous system especially the fetus.

More than fifty years ago, by direct contamination of Minimata Bay, Japan with

Hg, the world witnessed these effects and named it Minimata disease. Because of

this and other outbreaks in Iraq the FDA and other world health organizations

have put a limit of MeHg in foods between 0.5 and 1.0 ppm. Most of the MeHg we

consumed in our diet is through seafood. All fish and shellfish have varying

levels of MeHg in their flesh. In general, larger fish have the higher the

levels of MeHg due to a process called bioaccumulation. Small and mid-size fish

will tend to have reduced levels of MeHg as they consume even smaller organisms

in the food chain.

[bee's Note: They write about two major epidemiological studies that scientists

and advocates point to for determining potential harmful levels, both of which

are misleading and false.]

There are two basic questions with regard to Hg [mercury] in seafood. The first

question is at what Hg concentration levels are there demonstrable harmful

effects, especially for the fetus. The second question is a benefits/risk

scenario, that is, when do potential risks of Hg in seafood outweigh the

benefits from seafood consumption that are well documented.

With regard to risk/benefit analysis there has been considerable work to

demonstrate that seafood consumption greatly outweighs the risks. There has been

an exceptional amount of high-quality publications in medical journals and

scientific health journals showing the positive benefits of fish consumption and

health. While most lay-persons know the positive link between seafood

consumption and reduction of coronary heart disease, it is also becoming evident

of the role seafood and the long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids and improving

cognitive function in infants, and mental health.

Therefore, we can ask ourselves, if we reduce our seafood consumption because of

perceived risks, what are the health consequences in the long run? Several

researchers at the Harvard School of Risk/Benefit Analysis have done just that

and published a series of papers in 2005. In looking at different scenarios of

changes of fish consumption patterns because of advisories they found that

reduction of fish consumption would significantly reduce quality adjusted

life-years (QALYs) for society as a whole even when considering low-level toxic

compounds such as Hg [mercury]. They concluded that there are so many beneficial

compounds in seafood, it would be risky to reduce the levels of consumption

especially seafood that has high levels of long chain omega-3 fatty acids. "

Conclusions: The bottom line is, let us all be less fearful of " real " natural

foods, including fish, since it is more important to obtain the nutrients in

them than to be concerned about mercury or toxins. Your body is perfectly

capable of eliminating toxins in them, including mercury, particularly when you

are on this program.

The best in health, Bee