Why Do The ''Experts'' Still Recommend Eating Fish?

Last week, I told you about an awesome series of articles detailing the lax environmental standards governing mercury contamination in fish. So why did a group of experts, sponsored by the federal government -- along with representatives from Norway, Canada, Iceland and the United Nations -- recommend Americans still eat fish twice a week? And, in particular, children and pregnant and nursing women?

Absolute insanity...

The extent of the "warning" regarding mercury in these recommendations, announced by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration:

  • Advising pregnant and nursing moms to refrain from eating shark, swordfish, tilefish, king mackerel, tuna steaks and whale meat.
  • Women wanting to become pregnant should avoid eating the aforementioned fish six months prior to conception.

In fact, one expert argues wrongly that not eating fish is more harmful than eating it, and the benefits far outweigh the risks. Going back to last week's Chicago Tribune report, why would anyone want to buy a "healthy" product like fish from their grocery store if they knew it contained three times the legal limit of mercury?

Folks, in a perfect world, fish would be a near-perfect food -- high in protein and full of essential nutrients and fats -- if it weren't for mercury which accumulates in higher concentrations in older, predatory fish like shark, swordfish and tuna.

If you insist on eating fish, however, and want to know more about the extent of your mercury exposure, I urge you, for the sake of your health and that of your family, to check out the online mercury calculator at GotMercury.org.

Yahoo News December 21, 2005

Click Here and be the first to comment on this article
Post your comment