Canned tuna: Not so safe

[Guest guest]

http://www.mlive.com/weblogs/neuroticmom/index.ssf?/mtlogs/mlive_mom/archives/2006_06.html Canned tuna: Not so safeThe July 2006 issue of Consumer Reports has an article raising new questions about the safety of canned tuna -- even the light kind, which has previously been considered low in mercury. They now recommend that pregnant women never eat it. Canned light tuna, long recommended as the safer choice because of its presumably lower mercury content, sometimes harbors at least as much of that potentially harmful heavy metal as white tuna does, our analysis of Food and Drug Administration data has shown. That finding raises new concerns about the safety of canned tuna for pregnant women. We scrutinized the

results of FDA tests posted recently on its Web site and, as expected, found that most cans of light tuna had only a third as much mercury, on average, as white tuna, also known as albacore. But 6 percent of the light-tuna samples contained at least as much of the metal--in some cases more than twice as much--as the average in albacore. One possible reason: Some canned light tuna may contain yellowfin, which tends to have much more mercury than skipjack, the type usually found in cans labeled as light. (But albacore is generally the only species that's labeled.) The FDA has not warned consumers about those occasionally higher mercury levels because it believes the levels don't pose any significant threat, according to Acheson, M.D., the chief medical officer at the agency's Center for Food Safety & Applied Nutrition. "If you eat a single can of something that's a little higher than the average, it's not going to do any acute harm," Acheson

said when we asked him about fetal safety. But Consumer Reports' fish-safety experts note that some cans are much higher in mercury than average. And they say there's enough uncertainty about the safety of even brief exposure of the fetus to such higher mercury levels that a more cautious approach is warranted. The Chicago Tribune has a story today about the Consumer Reports article, in which they say Consumer Reports looked into the issue after the Tribune published an investigative series in Dec. 2005 on mercury in fish, which can be found here. Consumer Reports also urged pregnant

women not to eat four other types of seafood: Chilean sea bass, halibut, American lobster and Spanish mackerel, in addition to the ones the FDA has already warned against (swordfish, shark, king mackerel and tilefish). So why hasn't the FDA issued warnings about canned tuna and the other four types of seafood? The Tribune investigative series contains some shocking information on that score. In one of the nation's most comprehensive studies of mercury in commercial fish, testing by the newspaper showed that a variety of popular seafood was so tainted that federal regulators could confiscate the fish for violating food safety rules. ... The Tribune's investigation reveals a decades-long pattern of the U.S. government knowingly allowing millions of Americans to eat seafood with unsafe levels of mercury. Regulators have repeatedly downplayed the hazards, failed to take

basic steps to protect public health and misled consumers about the true dangers, documents and interviews show. The government does not seize high-mercury fish that violate U.S. limits. Regulators do not even inspect seafood for mercury--not in ports, processing plants or supermarkets. In fact, federal officials have tested so few fish that they have only a limited idea of how much mercury many species contain, government data show. For example, the government has tested just four walleye and 24 shrimp samples since 1978. The newspaper tested more samples of commercial walleye than the government has in the last quarter-century. [bold mine] Four walleye in 28 years??? It's extremely frustrating to know that the FDA hasn't been on top of this. In typical second-pregnancy fashion, I have relaxed my standards about a lot of things, including canned tuna. When

pregnant with Belle, I didn't eat any seafood except an occasional piece of shrimp. This time, for some strange reason, I've been craving Subway tuna sandwiches. I've only had a few, but apparently that's enough for concern: Though it is unclear whether a single high-mercury meal could harm a fetus, experts say the developing nervous system is so sensitive to toxic substances that caution should prevail. "You only get one chance to develop a brain," Hightower said. Ugh. All I can do now is stop eating fish, and hope no damage has been done. On the bright side, Belle doesn't like tuna, so she at least hasn't had any. (Thanks to reader N. for the tip on the Tribune articles.) Comments? Email me.

Also, check out the Parenting Forum. __________________________________________________