ABOUT
Smart discussion of the latest science and news on toxins in your food, water, and air, and what government agencies should be doing to protect public health. Enviroblog is a project of EWG Action Fund. (More. . .)
FEED
An EWG podcast for environmental health news on the go.
TIPS
Did we miss something? Email Amanda.
BLOGROLL
STAY CONNECTED
Get our monthly eNewsletter, action alerts, & environmental tips. [Privacy policy, About EWG]
UPDATE: Combating Autism Act of 2006
Study links mercury and premature births
FEATURED
BPA in your body: How to minimize your exposure
Caution: These 7 household items may feminize baby boys
BPA in infant formula: This is not a call to panic
7 ways to reduce your exposure to PBDEs
Ask EWG
Is there eco-friendly jewelry?
Are stainless steel water bottles safe?
Is mineral-based makeup safer?
SEARCH
Category Archive
October 23, 2007
A fish called Sally: The truth about mercury, omega 3s, and pregnancy
Washington Post reporter Sally Squires toed the fishing industry line in her front-page article on the recommendations issued by the industry through the National Healthy Mothers, Healthy Babies Coalition. Criticism from reporters and health advocates, as well as a statement from The Post’s Ombudsman, lead Squires to write a follow-up article on the subject of fish consumption.
Unfortunately, some people just can’t admit their mistakes. Squires doesn’t correct the record or apologize for misleading her readers, and to top it off the column reads like it was written by the fishing industry itself.
Squires could have owned up to her mistakes and her role in perpetuating industry-created confusion. If she had, here’s how today’s column would have read.
Earlier this month I wrote an article about a set of recommendations issued by the National Healthy Mothers, Healthy Babies Coalition. Their report, urging women to eat a minimum of 12 ounces of fish per week, ran contrary to FDA and EPA advisories. Due partially to mistakes on my part and partially to information that had not yet come to light, that story went to press with four important points omitted or misstated:
- The first paragraph of my October 4th article attributes the recommendations to top scientists and federal agencies. In fact, not a single top scientist or federal agency has backed the report or its findings. Clearly this fact changes the nature of the rest of the article; the recommendations carry little weight without the backing of respected scientists.
- The coalition members that I listed, including The American Academy of Pediatrics, the March of Dimes, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, did not support the recommendations and in fact had never even seen the report. The recommendations were issued by the coalition’s board of directors and were not screened by member organizations.
- The National Fisheries Institute, an industry organization, funded aspects of the report and its publicity. NFI paid scientists involved $1,500 plus travel expenses to attend the meeting at which they wrote the recommendations. NFI also paid $60,000 for an educational campaign to inform mothers of the coalition’s recommendations. Furthermore, the public relations group Burson-Marsteller (which represents the fishing industry) is facilitating the promotion of the report. Hampton Shaddock, a managing director at Burston-Marsteller, is also the vice-chairman of the National Healthy Mothers, Healthy Babies coalition.
- The coalition’s recommendations are not “backed up by the preponderance of science,” as Dr. Frank Greer, of the American Academy of Pediatrics, told my colleague Marian Burros at The New York Times.
I regret all of these errors, but I’d like to pay special attention to the last point.
There is an illusion of controversy and confusion around fish consumption. The Maternal Nutrition Group, who wrote the coalition’s recommendations, cited five studies that appear to support their case, but the bulk of the evidence demonstrates the risks to pregnant women of eating fish contaminated with methyl mercury. There is agreement in the scientific community, and I want to be perfectly clear about it:
There is a consensus that women of childbearing age should avoid eating fish that are high in mercury, and that they should limit their seafood consumption to 12 ounces per week or less.
Health advocates advise women to choose low-mercury fish, such as
- salmon
- sardines
- tilapia
- anchovies
- shrimp, and
- light tuna
Women should avoid fish known to be high in methyl mercury, such as
- albacore tuna
- king mackerel
- swordfish, and
- shark
The health benefits of omega 3 fatty acids are indisputable, so women should particularly seek fish that are high in omega 3s while remaining low in methyl mercury, or find alternate sources of omega-3s (such as fish oil supplements or flaxseed oil).
Health advocates would love to see the FDA release a comprehensive list of fish that should be avoided or eaten only in moderation during pregnancy, as well as other low-mercury sources of omega-3s. Until they do, though, you can refer to this chart, or to this Safe Fish List compiled by the Environmental Working Group.
Previous coverage on Enviroblog:
Mothers told, "Eat fish! No wait, don't eat fish!"
This Enviroblog post has not been sponsored by the seafood industry
Blog Action Day Tip: Know your source
August 17, 2007
Mercury (protests) rising
Chronic polluter BP ("Beyond" Petroleum) may have been given license to continue polluting Lake Michigan (more on than in a moment), but one of the country's biggest mercury polluters will be changing its ways in the coming years. The ERCO plant in Wisconsin will make the switch to mercury-free technology in 2009, eliminating the single biggest polluter in the state and a major cause of the Midwest's continued fish consumption advisories. The question of what to do with the mercury the company already has at its plant is a touchy one, since mercury traded on the open market often finds its way to other polluting sources. Still, this is a major victory for Oceana, the environmental organization that had been pressuring the company to convert for years. Oceana isn't shy about saying so, either. And why should they be? From their statement following ERCO Worldwide's announcement:
"Of the nine plants that were using mercury-cell technology to make chlorine when Oceana launched its campaign in 2005, only four remain that have not committed to stop using mercury. We hope ERCO’s decision will soon be replicated by the four remaining plants that continue to use 110-year-old technology, which results in the release of four times more mercury per plant, on average, than the average power plant.”
Our heartfelt congratulations and thanks to Oceana.
Tentative congrats also go out to those who loudly protested the decision of the state of Indiana to grant BP a permit to increase the amount of waste it releases into Lake Michigan. The state and the company are now "reconsidering" the permit. While state officials still say they have no legal grounds to rescind the permit, they are looking into the matter. Nice to know public complaints are being taken into consideration, but shouldn't public health have been considered from the beginning?
February 20, 2007
13% of Canadian tuna above mercury limits
A CBC investigation finds that 13% of tuna on shelves (sampled from Vancouver, Winnipeg and Toronto) exceeded Health Canada guidelines for allowable mercury in tuna. On the heels of a recent Lancet study reinforcing the importance of seafood in the diet of pregnant women, this should be another alarm bell for the tuna industry and regulatory agencies: Curtailing mercury pollution of our seas should be a priority.
January 5, 2007
UPDATE: Combating Autism Act of 2006
Just before Christmas, President Bush signed the Combating Autism Act of 2006. On December 21st, a largely supported act that will give more money to research and education on autism was enacted. The bill authorizes nearly $1 billion for research and education on autism over the next five years, a more than 50% increase.
The bill was sponsored by Senators Rick Santorum (R-PA) and Christopher Dodd (D-CT).
Learn more about autism and its triggers here.
UPDATE: Learn about why this bill is revolutionary with Dan Olmstead's recent article.
October 12, 2006
Study links mercury and premature births
A new study of over 1,000 pregnant Michigan women has found that those with hair samples containing high levels of mercury are three times more likely to give birth prematurely. The study acknowledges that pregnant women often receive mixed messages about fish- while they can benefit from unsaturated fatty acids and protein, they are also exposed to hazardous mercury.
While this is the first community-based study to investigate the dangers of mercury for pregnant women, it is only one of many to call into question the risks pregnant women face from mercury exposure.