Back to news article list

Chicago Tribune Insists: FDA Shows Mercury Risk In Tuna ff

30 January 2006 United States

The Chicago Tribune Newspaper continues to publish negative articles about mercury in tuna - here below you find the full text (atuna):

 

Newly released government data provide the best evidence to date that some cans of light tuna -one of America's favorite seafoods- contain high levels of mercury.

Testing by the Food and Drug Administration found that 6 percent of canned light tuna samples contained large amounts of mercury, a toxic metal that can cause learning disabilities in children and neurological problems in adults.

The findings are significant because the government has repeatedly stated that canned light tuna is low in mercury and a good choice for pregnant women and young children.

The FDA also found high mercury levels in samples of Chilean sea bass, which is often sold in high-end restaurants. Previously, the FDA had tested only one sample of the fish. High levels were detected in big-eye tuna, a species sold as ahi tuna and served in sushi.

No federal warnings exist for either fish, even though the average mercury level detected in the FDA tests was above the average in albacore tuna, which the government tells pregnant women and young children to limit eating.

In all, the FDA released testing results for more than 25 kinds of fish, sampled between 2001 and 2005. The findings were not released until now partly because the analysis wasn't complete, the agency said.

While a few species, such as tuna and Chilean sea bass (also known as Patagonian toothfish), were tested frequently in the latest round of sampling, many were not.

On Thursday, the agency said it would not take any action based on its newly released results, which come at a time when the FDA has been under fire for not adequately policing mercury in seafood, particularly canned light tuna. Most light tuna is made with skipjack, a relatively low-mercury species. But a Tribune investigative series recently reported that the U.S. tuna industry often uses a high-mercury species, yellowfin, to make some cans of light tuna.

The FDA had been unaware of the practice, so the agency’s latest testing did not address the yellowfin issue. Responding to the Tribune series, though, FDA officials started investigating whether canned light tuna contains hazardous mercury levels.

In the 216 samples of canned light tuna tested by the FDA, the mercury levels averaged 0.12 parts per million, in line with previous limited testing and well below the legal limit of 1.0 parts per million. But 12 samples exceeded 0.35 parts per million, an amount the government considers high. When the Tribune recently tested 36 cans of the same type of canned tuna, none of the samples exceeded that level. The discrepancy might be due to the difference in sample size or because mercury levels can vary widely in all fish.

When asked about the FDA’s latest testing results on light tuna, an agency official said consumers should not be concerned that 6 percent of canned light tuna tested high in mercury. What’s important, the official said, is that on average, such tuna tested relatively low.

The official, who answered questions on the condition of anonymity, also said the results for all fish tested indicate that mercury levels in commercial seafood were “relatively stable” compared with previous testing.

But many scientists said consumers should be concerned about mercury contamination even in fish that on average test low in the toxic metal. Though it is unclear whether a single high-mercury meal could harm a fetus, many experts said the developing nervous system is so sensitive to toxic substances that caution should prevail.

”I give a lot of talks to parents, and they always ask what is a safe fish to eat. I tell them I cannot give them an honest answer,” said Vas Aposhian, a University of Arizona toxicologist who resigned from an FDA panel that advised the agency as it crafted its 2004 mercury warning for seafood. He accused the FDA of minimizing the risks and bowing to industry pressure.

Of the five seafoods listed in FDA warnings as low-mercury options--shrimp, canned light tuna, salmon, pollock and catfish--only light tuna occasionally tests in the high range.

Many of the FDA’s new mercury results were from samples taken several years ago. An agency spokesman said results are not released to the public until “the analysis is completed and the quality assurance has been completed. Sometimes that process can be delayed.” All the FDA data can be found at www.cfsan.fda.gov/(tilde)frf/seamehg2.html.

The U.S. Tuna Foundation, the industry’s leading lobbying group, said the FDA’s new data actually confirm the safety of canned light tuna.

”FDA’s latest findings about mercury levels in canned tuna should end the debate over whether canned tuna is a safe and healthy food for all Americans,” David Burney, the foundation’s executive director, said in a statement. “No one is at risk from the minute amounts of mercury in any form of canned tuna.”

In 2004, the FDA and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency jointly warned high-risk consumers to eat no more than 6 ounces of albacore canned tuna per week because of high mercury levels.

Even if women of childbearing age and young children followed that suggestion, the EPA's own calculations show they would absorb too much mercury.

In addition, the tuna industry acknowledges that tens of millions of cans of light tuna are made each year with yellowfin and contain amounts of mercury equal to cans of albacore. These yellowfin cans are often marketed as gourmet light tuna, though most cans do not indicate that yellowfin is inside.

Among the fish testing relatively low in mercury in the FDA’s latest round of tests was tilefish, a species the agency warns pregnant women and young children not to eat.

Previous testing in the Gulf of Mexico found high mercury levels in tilefish. The latest samples came from waters off the Atlantic Coast, raising questions about the reliability of the FDA’s consumer advice.

”They don’t fully understand levels of mercury in fish and they’re trying to provide advice to people based on shoddy science,” said Jane Houlihan, vice president for research at the Environmental Working Group, a non-profit organization that has criticized the FDA’s mercury policy.

The FDA’s recent testing of fresh and frozen tuna raises additional questions about the agency’s warnings.

Samples of yellowfin and big-eye tuna showed high levels of mercury, the FDA data indicated. One sample of yellowfin tuna was over the legal limit of 1 part per million. Samples of big-eye averaged 0.62 parts per million, among the highest of any fish sold.

An industry spokesman previously told the Tribune that high-mercury yellowfin and big-eye are used in gourmet and regular canned light.

The Tuna Foundation maintains that only small yellowfin and big-eye are used in the regular cans.

In general, larger fish such as tuna and longer-lived fish such as Chilean sea bass are higher in mercury because they can eat more food contaminated with it.

Just how much mercury might be in a single can of tuna is unclear. That is because the FDA does not test individual cans. Instead, it removes small pieces of tissue from 12 cans and mixes the tissue together. The agency then tests the mixture, masking any extreme amounts of mercury in a single can. This is done with other fish species as well.

In the FDA’s recent testing, one sample of light tuna showed mercury levels of 0.72 parts per million--a high amount but still within the 1.0 legal limit. But because this result was a composite of 12 cans, it is likely that some of the individual cans had higher levels.

It is impossible to know whether one of those cans tested over the legal limit.

The FDA said it tests a mixture of cans rather than individual cans partly to save money.

”It would cost 12 times as much to test 12 separate cans and then average the data, which is what we would have to do,” said the FDA official who requested anonymity.

That methodology troubles some doctors.

”I find that incredibly disturbing,” said Jane Hightower, a San Francisco internist who treats patients with mercury-related ailments. “That is falsifying data as far as I am concerned.”

Hightower also said the FDA should do a better job of informing consumers about high mercury levels.

”This information should be made available to the public in a user-friendly format and not buried in the depths of an Internet Web site,” she said.