|










©2006 - 2007
G'Day GourmetTM
| |
Washington Post writer takes a thorough second look at mercury in
fish debate
SEAFOOD.COM NEWS [Washington Post online] - October 24, 2007 - By Sally Squires
- Should pregnant women eat fish? That's a question Lean Plate Club members
often ask, policymakers continue to mull and scientists debate.
So when the nonprofit National Healthy Mothers, Healthy Babies Coalition
recently advised pregnant women to eat at least 12 ounces of fish per week -- in
contrast to the 12-ounce upper limit advised by the federal government -- it
appeared to represent a shift in thinking. The new recommendation led some to
ask: Could the benefits of the healthy omega-3 fatty acids in fish outweigh the
dangers of methyl mercury with which most fish are contaminated?
The new advice was written for the coalition by a group of 14 scientists known
as the Maternal Nutrition Group, who spent five years reviewing the scientific
findings about the risks and benefits of fish. They met in Chicago for a day
last summer to write their recommendations.
After I wrote an article for The Post almost three weeks ago about the Healthy
Mothers recommendations, I received a handful of calls and e-mails faulting me
for not reporting that the scientists involved had been paid up to $1,500 plus
travel expenses by the National Fisheries Institute to attend the Chicago
meeting and that the Healthy Mothers group had also sought $60,000 from NFI to
set up a Web site to publicize the new advice -- omissions that I regret.
The flap made me wonder: What makes the debate about fish so heated? And if
scientists remain so at odds about eating seafood during pregnancy, what should
consumers do?
To try to answer these questions, I've spent the last couple of weeks
interviewing numerous scientists, doctors and environmental experts and reading
as many scientific papers and reports about methyl mercury, omega-3s, fish and
pregnancy as possible. To my surprise, I found a lot of scientific agreement
that I hope will help guide your decisions about seafood. (And for those who
don't eat seafood, there are other options below.)
First and foremost, eat fish low in mercury whether you're pregnant or not.
There's wide agreement on this. Fish is rich in protein, generally low in
calories and packed with omega-3 fatty acids, and generally lower in
contaminants. The National Academy of Sciences, the American Heart Association
and the 2005 U.S. Dietary Guidelines are among the expert sources that advise
Americans to eat about two meals of fish per week for health benefits ranging
from heart protection to help with weight control. This advice is also
consistent with the guidelines from the Food and Drug Administration, the
Environmental Protection Agency and, yes, the Healthy Mothers coalition.
Omega-3s are especially important for pregnant women because these essential
fats are key to fetal brain development. 'You want optimal function and every
brain cell that God created for you,' says Philippe Grandjean, a Harvard School
of Public Health adjunct professor who heads a long-term study of the risks and
benefits of seafood consumption in the Faeroe Islands.
There's also evidence that omega-3s improve mood, which could help with the
prevention and treatment of depression, including postpartum depression. These
fats also appear to decrease the risk of having a preterm baby. That's important
because a recent March of Dimes study found the cost of treating preterm and
low-birth-weight babies reached nearly $6 billion in 2001 alone.
'The benefits of omega-3s are a slam dunk,' says San Francisco physician Gina
Solomon, senior scientist for the Natural Resources Defense Council, an
environmental group. 'Their benefits are quite clear.'
But what about the methyl mercury in seafood?
'The crux of the matter is that you've got this neurotoxin,' notes toxicologist
Michael Bolger, head of the FDA's Chemical Hazard Assessment Team. 'No one
debates that. But where does it fit in the matrix of risks and benefits? What
does it mean ultimately in seafood? That is the real issue here.'
How damaging mercury can be at high levels is illustrated by a Japanese chemical
plant disaster in the 1950s. Tons of mercury compounds and other chemicals were
dumped into Minamata Bay. Babies exposed prenatally to this chemical mix
developed mental retardation, cerebral palsy, deafness, blindness and other
severe effects. Not only were there deaths from eating contaminated fish, but
hundreds of people suffered neurological damage.
In the early 1970s, there was another disaster, this time in Iraq: Scores died
and 6,500 people were hospitalized after eating grain products treated with a
fungicide containing methyl mercury.
Concerns that mercury from coal-fired power plants and other sources was
contaminating seafood prompted the FDA to issue an advisory in 1995 for the
general population to limit eating shark and swordfish (which are known to be
high in mercury) to no more than once per week. Pregnant women were advised to
eat no more than one such meal per month. That's because those larger fish are
higher on the food chain. The bigger the fish, the more likely it is to
accumulate methyl mercury.
Prompted by a National Academy of Sciences report on the toxicological effects
of methyl mercury, the FDA reevaluated its advisory and withdrew the general
warning about shark and swordfish in 2001. But the agency expanded its warning
for pregnant women, adding tilefish and king mackerel to the list of fish to
avoid.
In 2004, the FDA issued a third advisory, this time with the EPA. It addressed
pregnant and breast-feeding women as well as women of childbearing age who
wished to become pregnant. Young children were also included. Those groups were
advised to eat no more than 12 ounces weekly of fish or seafood and to limit
albacore tuna to six ounces per week.
Not surprisingly, the advisories appear to have cut fish consumption among women
of childbearing age. Project Viva, a federally funded study of 2,000 pregnant
women begun in 1999 by Emily Oken, an assistant professor at Harvard Medical
School, found that average fish consumption was increasing. But after the 2001
advisory was issued, fish consumption dropped from an average of nearly 2
servings per week to a little more than 1 1/2 weekly among participants.
Because of this decline, some scientists and physicians worry that fears about
methyl mercury contamination in some fish have been misinterpreted by the public
to mean eat less fish of any sort.
'What we don't want people to do is to stop eating fish,' says the FDA's Bolger,
who helped to draft the advisories. 'That is a big concern. Or that pregnant
women would reduce their level of fish consumption during pregnancy. That is
what we have always been concerned would happen with this advisory.'
A more recent study of nearly 12,000 parents and children in the United Kingdom
has underscored the benefits of eating 12 ounces a week of fish during pregnancy
-- or even more. Earlier this year, the study's team of British and American
scientists published their findings in the Lancet: Children of women who ate
less than 12 ounces of fish a week during pregnancy had lower IQs and lower
academic test scores at age 8, and more behavioral and social problems
throughout early development, than youngsters whose mothers ate 12 or more
ounces per week. That study was funded by the University of Bristol and the
nonprofit Wellcome Trust.
Also, a 20-year longitudinal study in Seychelles, funded by the National
Institute for Environmental Health Sciences and conducted jointly with
Seychelles scientists and researchers at the University of Rochester, has not
linked increased fish consumption with adverse affects. The Seychelles
experience is especially relevant, since the seafood there contains nearly
identical methyl mercury levels to that found in the United States. One
difference: Residents of the Seychelles consume about 10 times as much fish as
Americans.
Those worried about mercury's effects in pregnant women often point to a
long-term study in the Faeroe Islands that found children born to mothers with
the highest levels of mercury had a very slight but measurable decrease in some
neurobehavioral measures. For example, children who are now in their teens have
slight but persistent attention deficits and score lower on tests that measure
motor skills and verbal ability. But the major source of mercury in the Faeroe
Islanders' diet was not fish but pilot whales, which have very high
concentrations of methyl mercury.
Unlike a lot of other seafood, pilot whales also happen to have low levels of
the mineral selenium. One theory under investigation by Nicholas Ralston at the
EPA's Energy and Environmental Research Center at the University of North Dakota
is that selenium may help protect against mercury contamination. Selenium is
present in deep-water seafood at five to 20 times the concentration of mercury.
When the two chemicals bind, methyl mercury appears to be neutralized.
Until scientists sort out all the details, many think that the message to the
public ought to be eat fish, just make it the fish lowest in methyl mercury,
especially when pregnant. That means choosing salmon, sardines, tilapia,
anchovies, shrimp and light tuna, not albacore. (See this chart for more
options.)
'I think so far this has been a false controversy,' says Kathryn Mahaffey,
senior scientist in the EPA's Office of Pesticides and Toxics. When Mahaffey's
daughter was pregnant, Mahaffey said, she encouraged her to eat fish that was
lower in methyl mercury. 'And now, I have two wonderful, healthy grandchildren,'
she says.
And Mahaffey notes that for vegetarians, vegans and those who don't like fish,
there are foods naturally rich in omega-3s, such as flaxseed, and those
fortified with them, including eggs and margarine. Fish oil supplements are
another choice. Earlier this year, the European Commission recommended that
pregnant and lactating women take fish oil supplements.
The messages about seafood have become needlessly confusing, says Solomon of the
Natural Resources Defense Council. 'Consumers can understand shades of gray,'
she says. 'People can understand that fish is good for you but that there are
some fish that are high in mercury levels and those should be avoided or eaten
in moderation.'
© 2007 The Washington Post Company
|