SEARCH:
Sign in | Join | Help
search Mercola.com
 
FREE Subscription 
The World’s Most Popular Natural Health Newsletter
Scientists Call for Worldwide Warning: Be Wary of Eating Fish

I have been warning about the health risks associated with eating mercury-contaminated fish for some time, and now the world’s leading mercury scientists are calling for worldwide attention to this serious issue.

After a year-long effort to review and synthesize the major mercury science findings, every member of four scientific panels endorsed "The Madison Declaration on Mercury Pollution." Its findings warrant a worldwide warning to the public -- especially to children and women of childbearing age -- to be careful about how much and which fish you eat.

The declaration confirms that eating fish is the primary way most people are exposed to highly toxic methylmercury, and exposure to this toxin now constitutes a public health problem. Other concerning findings include:

  • On average, three times more mercury is falling from the sky today than before the Industrial Revolution 200 years ago.
  • There is now solid scientific evidence of methylmercury's toxic health effects, particularly to the human fetus.
  • New evidence indicates that methylmercury exposure may increase the risk of cardiovascular disease, particularly in adult men.

It is very sad, as fish would otherwise be an incredibly healthy food, that pollution has made it very difficult to find safe fish. The only way I advocate eating fish is if you first have it lab tested to make sure it is free of mercury (and other harmful pollutants like PCBs). Otherwise, it simply is not worth the risk. Meanwhile, if you have been eating fish you can calculate your mercury risk if you are interested.

AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment: Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 62–66

EurekAlert March 8, 2007





 
 Do you find this article interesting?
Comment on This Article Community Comments (13)
 
 
Posted On Mar 08, 2007
Autism, (beside oxidative stress, triggering predisposition to inherited/triggered disease like cancers, tumors, health aberrations) is/are a direct result of exposure to such heavy metal toxicity.

Significantly reduce or eliminate such exposure, & health is improved.

The EPA has done much empirical work on the subject, & there are several actuarial studies (in the confines of insurance life expectancy research) also linking proximity to major freeways, petro chemical/oil refineries & wind currents from them, turnpikes, & automotive or rail thoroughfares, with ADVERSE, and high levels, of air borne heavy metal exposure.

Just like in olden times (Europe a few centuries ago) the nearer one was to a river, estuary, or body of water, the propensity to disease (like cholera, malaria, polio, bubonic plague from fleas on rodents near dock, etc.) today's DANGEROUS real estate on land is indeed around the exhaust (benzene, and a host of silicates and carbonates and heavy metals) spued from internal combustion engines or factories.

Sadly, we now see a further degradation in the oceans & their fisheries, which Jacque Cousteau & others were sounding the alarm bells on at least 30 years ago.

Our global fisheries are way over stressed, polluted & essentially will be
extinct in very short order (less than one generation by most reasonable estimates). 

We reap what we sow, or in this case, we catch what we pollute & then gill net.

If the oceans of the world are to be saved, non conforming countries raping them, like Japan, as well as all other major fishing fleets in the world, must be mothballed for at least one or two full decades now, & massive policing be enforced on abusers with their boats or ships sunk on sight for ANY INFRACTIONS.

We all owe it to what Carl Sagan coined: "A Pale Blue Dot."

 
Russ Bianchi
Savvy User Savvy User, Joined On 9/2006
Russ Bianchi  
 
 
 
Posted On Mar 09, 2007
What is so great about fish?  Just the oils?  Now that it is fairly well known that grass fed animals have more omega 3 oils than fish, we should be pushing for grass fed meats, and related eggs and milk.  Grass has high omega 3s.  And farm raised fish have no omega 3 unless they add it to the food.  Farm raised is very inferior to wild.

 
RobC
Novice User Novice User, Joined On 3/2007
RobC  
Replied

Witch Doctor
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 9/2006
Witch Doctor  
 
Posted On Mar 24, 2007
RobC - Your argument makes sense, from omega-3 point of view.

I would keep some ocean fish in my diet, maybe once a week, to get a dose of minerals from ocean water, as insurance in case I am not getting enough of some trace minerals.

But there are other ways to get trace minerals, like sea salt, or kelp or other seaweed or ocean algae or Goji berries from the Himalayas, or even drinking Starbucks coffees from around the world!

Duane

 
 
 
Posted On Mar 08, 2007
Most of us who have been aware of food related health issues are aware to some degree of the mercury in fish. It is incredibly saddening to me, because as you state in the article, fish should be the one food that is very healthy for us, but because of pollution it is now extremely unhealthy. And so I wonder, as we look around at what is good for us to eat and what isn't, do people just finally give up trying? It seems there are no government agencies trustworthy, so you have to question their stamp of approval on items... or well, at least I do.
Kumba

 
Kumba
Novice User Novice User, Joined On 3/2007
Kumba  
 
 
 
Posted On Mar 08, 2007
I am saddened by this as well. Although I stopped eating fish long ago because they way most fish are caught is very damaging to the environment.  Also my husband never liked the taste of fish.  Therefore I have known of a couple of different ways to get some of those same nutrients as found in fish.  the first is Flax seed.  It is high in  Omega-3 fatty acids, which are also a natural Cholesterol reducer.  I also work with a company that has an Omega-3 fatty acid supplement.
I know if you like eating fish this will not replace the flavor for you, but it is a way to get those healthy nutrients.

 
rfanshier
Novice User Novice User, Joined On 2/2007
rfanshier  
Replied

BabyBoomer
Novice User Novice User Joined On 11/2006
BabyBoomer  
 
Posted On Mar 24, 2007
I don't get the push for eating fish all these last several years. I've never cared for the taste of fish. When I was growing up in the 50s and 60s no one was always pushing to eat fish. My mother lived 92 1/2 years and I know she ate fish only occassionally.
I just don't get the whole fish thing....tried the capsules once and they taste awful on the burp back.
?????

 
 
 
Posted On Mar 24, 2007
RE - WARNING ON EATING FISH DUE TO MERCURY POISONING....... YOU ARE ADVOCATING REPLACING THE ACTUAL EATING OF FISH WITH TAKING SUPPLEMENTS TO GET OUT OMEGA 3 AND OMEGA 6....BUT....IF ALL FISH ARE NOW HIGHLY CONTAMINATED WITH MERCURY THEN WOULDN'T THE SUPPLEMENTAL OMEGA 3 AND 6, EVEN FROM KRILL ALSO BE CONTAMINATED ? AFTER ALL THE FISH OIL IN THE SUPPLEMENT WHETHER FROM KRILL OR ANY FISH, IS STILL SUPPOSEDLY  COMING FROM CONTAMINATED FISH ?
HOW DO CAN YOU SAY TO AVOID FISH, AND THEN IN ANOTHER BREATH SAY THAT WE SHOULD TAKE FISH OIL SUPPLEMENTS FROM KRILL ?

 
Aleahsa
Apprentice User Apprentice User, Joined On 11/2006
Aleahsa  
Replied

Witch Doctor
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 9/2006
Witch Doctor  
 
Posted On Mar 24, 2007
Fish contain natural mercury, because mercury occurs naturally in soil.  Mercury also concentrates from decaying leaves and other organic matter.  The impression is being given here that all the mercury is due to pollution.  There are fish in my homestate that are in pristine high-altitude area with very sparse population and no industry, but still have higher than "safe" limits of mercury.  Mercury is in the rocks and soil, and underwater plants will pick it up and convert it to the water-soluble form.  That's where the fish get some of it from.  Pollution has added more, but you shouldn't think that because mercury is found in fish that it means all or most of it came from pollution.

I have spoken to food chemists at fish oil processors, and the processing they describe is impressive.  It will remove the heavy metals, the smell, and most the nutrients right along with it.  The finished fish oil product is just a highly refined fat, and if all you want is EPA and DHA then take it.  For my purposes,  I think the refining process renders it useful to put in my car's transmission, but not in my body.  I would find the least processed fish oil and cod liver I could find, and eat fish.  There is guidance available on the fish species and locales with the least mercury.

Just my opinion.
Duane


Wil Evarts
Novice User Novice User Joined On 3/2007
Wil Evarts  
 
Posted On Mar 24, 2007
Aleahsa, Good thoughts. There are other oils besides fish oil that have omega 3 & 6, such as flaxseed oil.  Wil Evarts

 
 
 
 
© Copyright 2009 Dr. Joseph Mercola. All Rights Reserved. If you want to use this article on your site please click here. This content may be copied in full, with copyright, contact, creation and information intact, without specific permission, when used only in a not-for-profit format. If any other use is desired, permission in writing from Dr. Mercola is required.
* These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease. If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or have a medical condition, consult your physician before using this product.