regarding farmed salmon

[Guest guest]

Last week (I think...my weeks tend to run together) some one sent a link to a

report about the pollutants found in farmed salmon. I was very interested in it

as we like salmon. I was off on a wild tagent today and read this on

www.news.scotsman.com I thought others might be interested in it... I've

pasted it below my signature.

Dawn mom of 4, 8 and under, the youngest wcf

Salmon scare report was flawed and biased

JAMES REYNOLDS

ENVIRONMENT CORRESPONDENT

Key points

.. Report claiming farmed salmon is contaminated was funded by a green pressure

group

.. Report prepared before laws required fish to be identified as farmed or wild

.. First Minister claims findings were 'doubtful at best', Greens call for

inquiry

Key quote

" There may be some legitimacy in saying the reason they chose to fund this study

was that they had another agenda well beyond the health effects. " Dr.

Carpenter, one of the report's authors

Story in full: THE damning report that threatened to devastate the salmon

farming industry in Scotland was a case of flawed science, selective research

and hidden bias.

Since the report was released, it has emerged that the research was both

initiated and funded by the Philadelphia-based Pew Charitable Trust (PCT) - an

organisation with a well-documented history of fierce campaigns against global

pollution which approves of taking action against industries it views as

damaging to the environment.

The scientists who claimed farmed salmon was far more contaminated than the wild

variety had no evidence to back up their claim as they did not test salmon which

was specifically labelled as farmed.

Salmon obtained from supermarkets in Britain was purchased before new labelling

laws were introduced. Consequently there was no guarantee that the samples were

either farmed or wild.

The report was conducted by respected scientists at the Institute for Health and

the Environment at the State University of New York, at Albany. It claimed that

salmon reared in Europe and Britain were so contaminated with carcinogenic

chemicals that consumers should risk eating no more than six portions a year to

protect their health. For ish farmed salmon, which the study claimed was

the most contaminated of any tested, the maximum intake was no more than three

portions a year.

The chemical contaminants, which included PCBs and dioxins, broke guidelines set

by the United States Environmental Protection Agency and greatly outweighed any

of the health benefits of eating oily fish which provide essential omega-3 fatty

acids which can prevent heart disease, the study said.

But Carpenter, one of the leading scientists involved in the research, has

conceded that the PCT may have had another motive far removed from health

concerns, in initiating and funding the study.

Although he maintained that his own work was purely scientific, he told the

industry web magazine, Intrafish: " There may be some legitimacy in saying the

reason they chose to fund this study was that they had another agenda well

beyond the health effects. "

The fish purchased in Britain for the study were bought before the introduction

of new labelling laws which require the type of products to be identified. As

such, there was no guarantee that they were farmed or wild.

There are so many vested interests on all sides in this debate that the

need for an independent inquiry to get at the real truth is stronger than ever

MARK RUSKELL, GREEN PARTY

Dr Carpenter also said he was " unaware " that wild salmon was still on sale in

Europe, adding: " If we had been able to get wild Atlantic salmon we would have

tested them. " The claims, therefore, that farmed salmon was not as healthy as

wild, cannot be substantiated.

Dr Webster, a scientific adviser to ish Quality Salmon (SQS), which

represents 65 per cent of the industry, said: " It appears that the scientists

here were unknowing pawns in a game which is being played out by the PCT. In

that regard, the agenda was not to conduct a piece of science and let both

society and scientists make judgments on what it means. It was actually a

concerted effort to put something into the public domain with the full backing

of a major PR organisation in order to get maximum benefit from it. "

He added: " I can see nothing other than some sort of hidden agenda being the

explanation for this research being put out in the manner that it was. "

Ms Rimel, the current president and chief executive of PCT, said: " The

study was prompted by a smaller investigation conducted several years ago on

contaminant levels in farm-raised salmon undertaken by a Canadian researcher.

Due to the small sample size and limited geographic distribution of the fish

analysed, the trusts believed that a larger, more comprehensive study was

warranted given the importance of this issue. The findings of this study

constitute potentially troubling news, and offer important information that

should be considered in discussions regarding the standards that are used by

governments in regulating and advising the public about the safety of fish. "

In the ish Parliament yesterday, the First Minister, Jack McConnell,

declared that the claims in the report, published in the journal Science last

Thursday, were " doubtful at best " and urged Scots to continue eating the

product. He said: "

The quality of the industry has been affirmed by independent agencies and we

should back them in what they say.

Last night, however, the Green Party renewed its call for an inquiry into the

aquaculture industry, which supports about 6,500 jobs across Scotland, the

majority of which are in the west. Mark Ruskell, the party's environment

spokesman, said: " There are so many vested interests on all sides in this debate

that the need for an independent inquiry to get at the real truth is stronger

than ever. "