In case you needed another reason not to consume the dangerously overfished bluefin tuna: This week, The New York Times had a story about a study of mercury contamination, conducted by the newspaper, of leading sushi restaurants in New York. Guess which species showed the highest level of mercury? In the study, the Times collected samples of tuna sushi from leading restaurants like Blue Ribbon Sushi and Nobu Next Door. The results "found so much mercury in tuna sushi from 20 Manhattan stores and restaurants that at most of them, a regular diet of six pieces a week would exceed the levels considered acceptable by the Environmental Protection Agency."
In addition, the Times noted that "sushi from 5 of the 20 places had mercury levels so high that the Food and Drug Administration could take legal action to remove the fish from the market." In a sidebar about the health risks related to mercury, the Times noted that "several studies have concluded that elevated mercury levels may be associated not only with neurological problems but with cardiovascular disease among adults as well."
Sushi made from bluefin showed the highest level of mercury. As the Times report noted, their findings "reinforce results in other studies showing that more expensive tuna usually contains more mercury because it is more likely to come from a larger species, which accumulates mercury from the fish it eats." In addition to the high levels of mercury found in bluefin tuna, there is also the consideration that the population of the mighty fish is under such pressure that many are calling for an Atlantic-wide moratorium on catching bluefin.
The findings prompted famed restaurateur Drew Nieporent (owner of Nobu, Nobu Next Door, and Tribeca Grill) to comment: "I'm startled by this. Anything that might endanger any customer of ours, we'd be inclined to take off the menu immediately and get to the bottom of it."
This is not just a problem in New York's sushi bars. Today, in a bit of serendipity, Oceana released a study showing high mercury levels in fresh tuna, other sushi, and swordfish from sushi bars and grocery stores from cities across the country. I hope that others who sell sushi and other fish also take the FDA warnings on mercury and seafood to heart, and also get on board and support efforts to reduce the amount of mercury that finds its way into our oceans (and ultimately our diets).
Seventh Generation launches anti-toxics campaign with wee gimmick
Ask Umbra on her hotness, corporate gift baskets, and more
Heat makes honey toxic, and other myths of the hive
Comments
View as Flat
dale ball Posted 9:13 pm
24 Jan 2008
Dale Ball
Permalink
Sam Wells Posted 2:43 am
25 Jan 2008
Thus it is erroneous to say all bluefin tuna or that all pelagic fish have high mercury levels. This is simply not true.
Onward through the fog
Permalink
suzannah Posted 3:19 am
25 Jan 2008
Oceana: Protecting the world's oceans.
Permalink
freeztar Posted 4:57 am
25 Jan 2008
Here's a link that says that many variables determine mercury levels, in any fish:
http://www.ec.gc.ca/MERCURY/EH/EN/eh-ec.cfm
"In general, levels of mercury increase with fish size and age, although not always. Levels also vary by species and location. Bioaccumulation in fish is influenced by the amount of methylmercury present, which is in turn affected by local biogeochemical processes and by mercury inputs from atmospheric pollution."
Permalink
Lauren Guite Posted 5:25 am
25 Jan 2008
Lauren Guite
Environmental Defense
finding the ways that work
Permalink
Lauren Guite Posted 5:27 am
25 Jan 2008
Lauren Guite
Environmental Defense
finding the ways that work
Permalink
Jerome Woody Posted 6:02 am
25 Jan 2008
grist.org
Permalink
joeybrookhart Posted 7:25 am
25 Jan 2008
"Comparatively" is the operable word. It's true that bluefin species are in pretty dire straits the world over. They're overfished, and they're getting smaller and smaller (see the oft-cited "90% fished out" study published in Nature May 2003 for starters). However, they're still the largest tuna species by size, and they still feed at the top of the food chain. Thus, any bluefin will likely have more methylmercury than, for instance, sardines (which are much lower on the food chain) or a species whose diet consists solely of plants.
And if that isn't complicated enough, some fish stand still while others widely roam. Mercury concentrations, like some other pollutants (e.g., PCBs) can vary by geography as another comment noted. Bluefin are highly migratory, transversing wide areas of the ocean; for this reason, I would think it to be a pretty good indicator of the prevalence of methylmercury in our global oceans. It might be interesting to note whether the Southern Bluefin (in the Pacific Ocean) has more/less mercury on average than the Northern Bluefin (in the Atlantic and Mediterranean), but now we're splitting hairs.
Bottom line, bluefin is overfished and so, for those seafood lovers who care about their choices (shouldn't we all?), you probably want to avoid it regardless of the mercury issue!
Several groups have gotten savvy and developed seafood guides geared specifically to sushi lovers - see for example the NRDC guide, and the Monterey Bay Aquarium is apparently getting ready to launch its own version this year. The Environmental Defense seafood selector posted already does a good job of providing the eco- and health-conscious impacts. Consumer guides and cards are also becoming more prevalent in other countries - there are cards in the UK, Netherlands, Switzerland, Germany South Africa, Australia and now one in Hong Kong.
For the 411 on all of these cards by geography, visit http://www.seafoodchoices.org (and click on "Resources" to see the links)
Joey Brookhart
Seafood Choices Alliance - an international non-profit bridging the conservation and seafood communities
Permalink
joeybrookhart Posted 7:54 am
25 Jan 2008
It's true that there are both natural (e.g, volcanoes) and man-made sources for mercury in the environment. Man-made sources include mining operations, coal-burning (as in, from power plants) and incineration of medical waste among others.
We've been burning fossil fuels for 150 years now, since the industrial revolution (and burning coal far longer).
Furthermore, our own US government acknowledges that "atmospheric deposition is the dominant source of mercury over most of the landscape." This covers both natural and man-made sources.
Something is... well something is just downright fishy with the claim that volcanoes are to blame for mercury in the ocean. It stands to reason that man-made sources would be contributing greatly to the accumulation of mercury currently in the environment.
And consumers, take note! Any organization that truly puts consumers' interests first would not raise this smoke screen or play such a 'blame game' - regardless of where the mercury comes from, the fact is that whether we like it or not mercury IS present in our seafood and environment. Just because it occurs naturally doesn't mean it's safe. Arsenic occurs naturally, too, but I wouldn't recommend chowing down.
At the same time, there are many wonderful seafood options to choose from that aren't contaminated with mercury - so neither should we stop eating seafood altogether.
A good overview of the natural (and unnatural) mercury cycle can be found at the USGS website - with a graphic for those so visually inclined.
USGS Mercury Fact Sheet
National Academy of Science, Institute of Medicine
US government websites, including FDA and EPA
Joey Brookhart
Seafood Choices Alliance
Permalink
Mike Milne Posted 9:05 am
25 Jan 2008
Just go to http://www.GotMercury.com and list the fish you eat and your put in your weight.
Permalink
cmello Posted 4:02 am
29 Jan 2008
I noticed that whenever I ate tuna (steaks), my tongue would get sore. I figured it was a Sign. Tuna had changed: there was a trace of something in modern tuna not good for me and my sore tongue was signalling that. I guess I have inadvertently saved myself from years of exposure to mercury.
It's not just tuna...
I have developed lots of sensitivities to consumer products that I had not had a problem with before in the last 20 years. In nearly every case, I have been able to track my sudden sensitivity to the product to a change in its contents. (I check out the contents on products I use on the EWG site nowadays -- Environmental Working Group.)
cmello
Permalink