Can You Cook the Mercury Out?

[Guest guest]

I have tried posting this 2x in the past days...strange, so here goes again. http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,71090-0.html By Gretchen Cuda| Also by this reporter13:00 PM Jun, 06, 2006 Gordon Brown works in a state-of-the-art laboratory at Stanford University, but some of his most

innovative research happens in his kitchen. Officially, he is an expert on the geochemistry of toxic metals, but he has a lot of ideas simmering inside his head of white hair. When curiosity drives him to ask basic scientific questions, sometimes he can't wait to get to the lab to test them. Take mercury for example -- a toxic metal that accumulates in fish. Having a better understanding than most of the factors that affect mercury toxicity, Brown knew that heat had the potential to alter the molecular structure of mercury (and thus its toxicity), and wondered, what happens to the mercury in fish if they are cooked? The question is shockingly simple, yet something few (if any) other scientists had bothered to ask. Armed with a frying pan and samples from the local fish market, Brown designed an experiment to test the hypothesis that cooked tuna contains less

methylmercury, the form of mercury that is toxic to humans, than uncooked tuna. The results surprised him. Compared to raw fish, cooking did not reduce the mercury levels as he had anticipated. In fact, the amount of methylmercury appeared to increase with the duration of cooking time, although Brown says that this trend might be due to the underlying variation of his experiments, rather than a true indication that methylmercury levels are increased by the cooking process. At best, he says, "there is no effect." Of course, Brown is quick to point out that his kitchen experiments are not publishable data, and can't be used to draw any official conclusions. But it makes you wonder what might happen if more scientists took their work home. __________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

And what about toxic fumes as you are cooking them????

Barb

Can You Cook the Mercury Out?

I have tried posting this 2x in the past days...strange, so here goesagain.http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,71090-0.htmlBy Gretchen Cuda| Also by this reporter13:00 PM Jun, 06, 2006Gordon Brown works in a state-of-the-art laboratory at StanfordUniversity, but some of his most innovative research happens in hiskitchen. Officially, he is an expert on the geochemistry of toxicmetals, but he has a lot of ideas simmering inside his head of whitehair. When curiosity drives him to ask basic scientific questions,sometimes he can't wait to get to the lab to test them.Take mercury for example -- a toxic metal that accumulates in fish.Having a better understanding than most of the factors that affectmercury toxicity, Brown knew that heat had the potential to alter themolecular structure of mercury (and thus its toxicity), and wondered,what happens to the mercury in fish if they are cooked?The question is shockingly simple, yet something few (if any) otherscientists had bothered to ask. Armed with a frying pan and samplesfrom the local fish market, Brown designed an experiment to test thehypothesis that cooked tuna contains less methylmercury, the form ofmercury that is toxic to humans, than uncooked tuna.The results surprised him. Compared to raw fish, cooking did notreduce the mercury levels as he had anticipated. In fact, the amountof methylmercury appeared to increase with the duration of cookingtime, although Brown says that this trend might be due to theunderlying variation of his experiments, rather than a true indicationthat methylmercury levels are increased by the cooking process. Atbest, he says, "there is no effect."Of course, Brown is quick to point out that his kitchen experimentsare not publishable data, and can't be used to draw any officialconclusions. But it makes you wonder what might happen if morescientists took their work home.