Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
.jpg "Research Chemical Sciences")
.png "Research Chemical Sciences")
How much tuna is too much?
- Thread starter Spork
- Start date
diamonddiceclay
New member
you can eat almost as much tuna as you want-mercury is less of a concern than you might think
Almost all foods have mercury levels within the norms for natural environmental mercury content. Only some fish and fishery products have levels greater than considered normal.
In 1979, FDA raised the mercury action level to 1 ppm. A study showed that a 1 ppm action level would adequately protect consumers.
Swordfish and tuna are the only commercially popular fish that may have a mercury content above 1 ppm. These two species accumulate mercury as they grow larger because they consume large amounts of small fish.
Mercury levels in tuna, and probably swordfish, have not changed in the past 100 years.
Of the top 10 types of fish consumed by U.S. residents, tuna comes in at the top of the list for mercury contamination. On average, an 8-ounce can of tuna contains enough mercury to exceed the EPA’s recommended daily consumption level for an adult.
But.... The benefits of Eating Fish Outweigh Mercury Risk
The benefits of eating fish may outweigh concerns that mercury exposure can harm neurodevelopment in young children, according to a recent study.
The study looked at the effect of prenatal and postnatal exposure to mercury on 5-year-old children in a country where people eat fish every day. Contrary to expectations, it found that children with the higher levels of mercury -- those who presumably ate the most fish -- often scored the best on neurodevelopment tests (JAMA 280[8]:701-707, 1998).
"Our results support [the] observation that it would be inadvisable to forgo the health benefits of fish consumption to protect against a small risk of adverse effect at the levels of MeHg [methylmercury] found in ocean fish on the U.S. market," wrote the authors, a group from the University of Rochester (N.Y.).
However, the tenor of those conclusions rankled the author of an editorial that accompanied the study. "We think that they are not as cautious as we would like them to be," Kathryn Mahaffey, Ph.D., an environmental scientist with the Environmental Protection Agency, said in an interview.
Her editorial contends that the study may not have used tests sensitive enough to detect the true effects of mercury.
Mercury consumed in food is a neurotoxin, known largely from two disasters, one in Iraq, where mercury contaminated bread, and one in Minamata, Japan, where industrial effluent was dumped into the water and got into fish at very high levels. Fish accumulate MeHg in their tissues, and the concentration becomes higher up the food chain.
But while those incidents confirmed that very high exposure is devastating, particularly for the fetus and young children, the question has remained: How much exposure, if any, is safe?
The researchers in this study looked at 711 5-year-old children who live in the Seychelles, islands in the Indian Ocean about 1,000 miles off the coast of Africa. They measured mercury levels from hair samples taken from the mothers to determine the children's prenatal exposure and from the children themselves to gauge postnatal exposure. The children, who are part of a large ongoing study of child development, were then administered a battery of six tests of neurodevelopment.
Fish is a staple of the diet in the Seychelles, and the study mothers reported eating an average of about 12 fish meals a week.
The researchers then grouped the children into five subgroups based on their mean exposure levels both prenatally and postnatally. The highest mean levels were 15.3 parts per million (ppm) for the prenatal groupings and 14.9 ppm for the postnatal groupings.
Previously, the level at which deleterious effects would begin to appear was thought to be 10 ppm. However, that level is an extrapolation, based on a dose-response analysis from studies in which the exposure was much higher. (In the United States, the average level is approximately 1-3 ppm, although levels above 10 ppm are reported in U.S. populations who consume high levels of methylmercury from fish.)
The test scores of the children, the authors said, "are similar to what would be expected from a healthy, well-developing U.S. population. No test indicated a deleterious effect of MeHg exposure."
And "four of the six measures showed better scores in the highest MeHg groups, compared with lower groups for both prenatal and postnatal exposure," they said.
The Seychelles study is at odds with a study of 7-year-olds done in the Faeroe Islands, near Iceland, in which it was found that prenatal exposure in the range of 3-10 ppm resulted in deficits.
The Seychelles researchers suggest that there may be important differences between the two groups. In the Faeroes, the people eat pilot whales. Pilot whale meat has a much higher concentration of mercury than Seychelles fish, and when the Faeroe Islanders eat whale meat, they presumably eat a lot of it. Also, the whale meat is heavily contaminated with other pollutants, including polychlorinated biphenyls, while Seychelles fish is not.
But the EPA's Dr. Mahaffey said the difference may be that the Faeroe study used a test that is better able to detect subtle cognitive and neuromotor disturbances.
In this country the levels of mercury in commercial fish are regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. In general, Dr. Mahaffey said, the fish with the most mercury are the larger ones that can be cut into steaks, including tuna; even canned tuna contains some measurable levels of mercury. On the other hand, fish sticks are relatively safe, she said.
Forty-one states have issued various advisories recommending that the public limit or avoid consumption of certain fish from specific bodies of water because of the potential for mercury contamination. Eleven of these states have advisories for all of their freshwater rivers and lakes and/or their coastal waters. (See map.)
The Seychelles study is ongoing and the researchers intend to continue evaluating the children with other tests, Dr. Mahaffey wrote.
"The results from additional evaluations using more sensitive tests of development are needed before firm conclusions can be drawn," she wrote.
There u go... hope this helped
In 1979, FDA raised the mercury action level to 1 ppm. A study showed that a 1 ppm action level would adequately protect consumers.
Swordfish and tuna are the only commercially popular fish that may have a mercury content above 1 ppm. These two species accumulate mercury as they grow larger because they consume large amounts of small fish.
Mercury levels in tuna, and probably swordfish, have not changed in the past 100 years.
Of the top 10 types of fish consumed by U.S. residents, tuna comes in at the top of the list for mercury contamination. On average, an 8-ounce can of tuna contains enough mercury to exceed the EPA’s recommended daily consumption level for an adult.
But.... The benefits of Eating Fish Outweigh Mercury Risk
The benefits of eating fish may outweigh concerns that mercury exposure can harm neurodevelopment in young children, according to a recent study.
The study looked at the effect of prenatal and postnatal exposure to mercury on 5-year-old children in a country where people eat fish every day. Contrary to expectations, it found that children with the higher levels of mercury -- those who presumably ate the most fish -- often scored the best on neurodevelopment tests (JAMA 280[8]:701-707, 1998).
"Our results support [the] observation that it would be inadvisable to forgo the health benefits of fish consumption to protect against a small risk of adverse effect at the levels of MeHg [methylmercury] found in ocean fish on the U.S. market," wrote the authors, a group from the University of Rochester (N.Y.).
However, the tenor of those conclusions rankled the author of an editorial that accompanied the study. "We think that they are not as cautious as we would like them to be," Kathryn Mahaffey, Ph.D., an environmental scientist with the Environmental Protection Agency, said in an interview.
Her editorial contends that the study may not have used tests sensitive enough to detect the true effects of mercury.
Mercury consumed in food is a neurotoxin, known largely from two disasters, one in Iraq, where mercury contaminated bread, and one in Minamata, Japan, where industrial effluent was dumped into the water and got into fish at very high levels. Fish accumulate MeHg in their tissues, and the concentration becomes higher up the food chain.
But while those incidents confirmed that very high exposure is devastating, particularly for the fetus and young children, the question has remained: How much exposure, if any, is safe?
The researchers in this study looked at 711 5-year-old children who live in the Seychelles, islands in the Indian Ocean about 1,000 miles off the coast of Africa. They measured mercury levels from hair samples taken from the mothers to determine the children's prenatal exposure and from the children themselves to gauge postnatal exposure. The children, who are part of a large ongoing study of child development, were then administered a battery of six tests of neurodevelopment.
Fish is a staple of the diet in the Seychelles, and the study mothers reported eating an average of about 12 fish meals a week.
The researchers then grouped the children into five subgroups based on their mean exposure levels both prenatally and postnatally. The highest mean levels were 15.3 parts per million (ppm) for the prenatal groupings and 14.9 ppm for the postnatal groupings.
Previously, the level at which deleterious effects would begin to appear was thought to be 10 ppm. However, that level is an extrapolation, based on a dose-response analysis from studies in which the exposure was much higher. (In the United States, the average level is approximately 1-3 ppm, although levels above 10 ppm are reported in U.S. populations who consume high levels of methylmercury from fish.)
The test scores of the children, the authors said, "are similar to what would be expected from a healthy, well-developing U.S. population. No test indicated a deleterious effect of MeHg exposure."
And "four of the six measures showed better scores in the highest MeHg groups, compared with lower groups for both prenatal and postnatal exposure," they said.
The Seychelles study is at odds with a study of 7-year-olds done in the Faeroe Islands, near Iceland, in which it was found that prenatal exposure in the range of 3-10 ppm resulted in deficits.
The Seychelles researchers suggest that there may be important differences between the two groups. In the Faeroes, the people eat pilot whales. Pilot whale meat has a much higher concentration of mercury than Seychelles fish, and when the Faeroe Islanders eat whale meat, they presumably eat a lot of it. Also, the whale meat is heavily contaminated with other pollutants, including polychlorinated biphenyls, while Seychelles fish is not.
But the EPA's Dr. Mahaffey said the difference may be that the Faeroe study used a test that is better able to detect subtle cognitive and neuromotor disturbances.
In this country the levels of mercury in commercial fish are regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. In general, Dr. Mahaffey said, the fish with the most mercury are the larger ones that can be cut into steaks, including tuna; even canned tuna contains some measurable levels of mercury. On the other hand, fish sticks are relatively safe, she said.
Forty-one states have issued various advisories recommending that the public limit or avoid consumption of certain fish from specific bodies of water because of the potential for mercury contamination. Eleven of these states have advisories for all of their freshwater rivers and lakes and/or their coastal waters. (See map.)
The Seychelles study is ongoing and the researchers intend to continue evaluating the children with other tests, Dr. Mahaffey wrote.
"The results from additional evaluations using more sensitive tests of development are needed before firm conclusions can be drawn," she wrote.
There u go... hope this helped
DanielBishop
New member
Ernie Taylor eats 8 cans a day....
He also eats 45 egg whites a day.
He's a retard.
He also eats 45 egg whites a day.
He's a retard.
scientific proof. hmm....
you should not try to get scientific proof for everythin.
In the bodybuilding community a lot of research is done by just trying it on our own bodies. We were the first to advocate high protein diets doctors(scientists) called us morons they said we would all die a premature death. Dont even get the bro's who are on started on experimenting with they're own body's they wont quit
Bottom line, i have eaten 3 cans a day while cutting (by god mu piss even smelled like the stuff). A moment when you body is at it weakest. And have had no adverse effects quite on the contrary i looked good man (well for my genetics i did).
you should not try to get scientific proof for everythin.
In the bodybuilding community a lot of research is done by just trying it on our own bodies. We were the first to advocate high protein diets doctors(scientists) called us morons they said we would all die a premature death. Dont even get the bro's who are on started on experimenting with they're own body's they wont quit
Bottom line, i have eaten 3 cans a day while cutting (by god mu piss even smelled like the stuff
). A moment when you body is at it weakest. And have had no adverse effects quite on the contrary i looked good man (well for my genetics i did).
