BAD EGGS

A recent NY Times report warned high levels of mercury were found in tuna sushi sold in Manhattan. In 2004 the FDA and the Environmental Protection Agency issued an advisory, "...to warn women who might become pregnant and children to limit their consumption of certain varieties of canned tuna because the tuna might damage the developing nervous system."

But, get this! The FDA did not include fresh tuna in the advisory.

"Most of the tuna sushi in the Times samples contained far more mercury than is typically found in canned tuna."

Tuna is not only potentially dangerous to pregnant women and children. "Over the past several years, studies have suggested that mercury may also cause health problems for adults, including an increased risk of cardiovascular disease and neurological symptoms", cautions the Times.

"Dr. P. Michael Bolger, a toxicologist who is head of the chemical hazard assessment team at the Food and Drug Administration, did not comment on the findings in the Times sample but said the agency was reviewing its seafood mercury warnings. Because it has been four years since the advisory was issued, Dr. Bolger said, 'we have had a study under way to take a fresh look at it.'"

Bolger also pooh poohed the risk a few weeks ago, stating, "'...there is no concern'" when questioned about the safety of mercury levels found in sushi-grade tuna in Milwaukee,
according to a Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel news report

I smell something rotten and it is not a can of bad tuna.

Over seven years ago the FDA was urgently requested to warn the public about consuming fresh tuna as well as canned tuna.

Typing in the words "fresh tuna" in the search field on the FDA's website, I discovered:
[The full document ]

After meeting with the FDA regarding consumer guidance on methylmercury exposure, Patricia Lieberman, Ph.D. staff scientist, and Diane Zuckerman, Ph.D., executive director of the National Center for Policy Safety for Women & Children, sent a follow-up letter on November 16, 200, to Joseph A. Levitt, Director of the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition , after meeting at the FDA. They strongly recommended that the FDA issue a consumer advisory regarding methylmercury exposure in fresh and canned tuna:

Based on the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) report on the potential adverse effects of chronic methylmercury exposure, we are convinced that the FDA must do more to protect vulnerable populations (pregnant women, women who might become pregnant, nursing mothers, and young children) from the risk of that exposure. In our experience, NAS is very cautious, so when they suggest that 60,000 newborns each year may be at risk for neurological problems due to methylmercury, we take that estimate very seriously.

In the absence of complete information about the levels of methylmercury contamination of fish, we believe that the FDA should warn vulnerable populations not to eat swordfish, shark, and fresh tuna, since they have been previously shown to contain unsafe levels of methylmercury. We believe that the risks outweigh the potential benefits since at-risk consumers can simply switch from eating swordfish, shark, and fresh tuna, to other fish and seafood that have equal nutritional benefits but are not contaminated with methylmercury. When consumers purchase swordfish, shark, and fresh tuna that is either prepackaged or packaged at a fish counter, the package should bear a label that tells pregnant women, women who might become pregnant, nursing mothers, and young children not to eat it. At restaurants, a similar warning should be on menus if those items are served.

Yes, the FDA was fully aware of the hazards of fresh tuna when they issued their advisory concerning the consumption of canned tuna four years ago.

The FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition also chose to ignore their own Food Safety Survey data. These surveys were periodically conducted to provide a "summary of major trends in food handling practices and consumption of potentially risky foods".

The 2001 survey stated that the number of Americans consuming "potentially risky" fish had alarmingly jumped from 9% in 1998 to 15% in 2001.

The New York Times reported that in December 2003 the FDA proposed releasing new guidelines on eating fish. These guidelines did not mention the potential dangers of eating tuna. A federal advisory committee of scientists and physicians vehemently objected.

The FDA then revised the guideline to caution pregnant women, women who might become pregnant, and young children of the risk of eating more than the FDA's recommended daily amount of canned tuna.

It has been eight long years. "Sushi bars and restaurants have swelled 250% in the last decade to about 9,ooo nationwide, according to the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of Japan," states the Sentinel.

Early in January 2008, prior to the NY Times Manhattan sampling, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel's Public Investigator Team tested 10 pieces of raw tuna sold in local restaurants and a grocery store. They discovered dangerously high levels of mercury.

Was this sushi-grade tuna safe to eat?

It depends on who you ask.

The EPA says no. The FDA says, "Eat your sushi."

"A 130-pound person who ate eight ounces (about six to eight pieces) of either tuna sampled by P.I. would exceed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's standard - or suggested maximum daily intake of methylmercury by more than 35 times," states the Journal-Sentinel.

"Yet, by U.S. Food and Drug Administration standards this fish is legal to be sold and served. Barely legal, that is.

"While both Canada and the European Union set their legal levels of mercury at 0.5 parts per million, the FDA's legal maximum for mercury is 1 ppm." That is double the amount permitted in some other industrialized nations.

Why is there a discrepancy in standards?

First Milwaukee, then Manhattan. How many other cities will have to test raw tuna before the FDA will act?

What will it take to get the FDA to issue an advisory about raw tuna?

Does the fishing industry have the answers?


P.S.
Although things may be fishy at the FDA, stop to consider another statistic from the 2001 Food Safety Survey: almost half the population, 53%, continued to eat raw eggs even after the FDA issued an advisory in 1999.

How many of us will still order tuna roll at the sushi bar?
.