Quantcast

Consumer Reports Finds Eating Tuna Too Risky for Pregnant Women

Food

Eat more fish. It’s a ubiquitous bit of dietary advice you hear over and over. For pregnant and nursing mothers, it’s something that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) specifically recommends. To lots of people, “fish” equals tuna. It’s canned. It’s cheap. It’s easy. But new analysis from one of the country’s most trusted resources when it comes to product safety, Consumer Reports (CR), concludes that tuna’s high levels of mercury outweigh its potential benefits for expecting mothers.

How does mercury get into seafood? Basically, coal-fired power plants and other power sources continue to pump mercury into our atmosphere. Graphic credit: Consumer Reports

The report, The Great Fish Debate, relies on data from the FDA and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), but directly conflicts with the agencies’ latest recommendations on seafood, which state that a medium amount of tuna is okay for consumption as the health benefits outweigh the effects of consuming mercury. It’s a touchy subject for the agencies, which recently set a minimum level for the amount of fish people should consume weekly. In fact, after CR pointed out to the FDA that its own data indicated elevated risks, the agency replaced a chart that ranked seafood according to mercury levels with a new one that lists species in alphabetical order, in what would seem to be an attempt to obfuscate the contradictory data.

The central issue here centers on brain development in fetuses and young children. Tuna and other fish are high in omega-3 fatty acids, which play an important role in the formation of a healthy, powerful brain. Unfortunately, because of increasing amounts of mercury in our oceans, tuna and other predatory fish are now laced with methlymercury, a neurotoxin that can permanently damage the brain, according to the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Considering tuna is the second most popular seafood in the U.S. next to shrimp, it is no wonder that CR is concerned.

Why now? What happened? The answer is actually a perfect example of the inter-connectivity of the relationships between our food, water and energy systems, what we call the nexus. The mercury issue exemplifies the ways in which our energy choices directly affect water quality and by extension, the food we eat.

How does mercury get into seafood?

Basically, coal-fired power plants and other power sources continue to pump mercury into our atmosphere, which then makes its way into large bodies of water via precipitation. Mercury (not extremely dangerous) in the water gets processed by bacteria into methlymercury (very dangerous), which then makes its way up the food chain, from the smaller fish to the largest ones. Each step of the way up, the levels get more concentrated. Result: Bluefin and Albacore tuna with 54-58 micrograms of mercury per four cooked ounces (which is very high compared to salmon’s two micrograms per the same amount).

 

And the next step up on the food chain? Us. So, how do we reduce the amount of methlymercury in our fish? Read more about mercury in fish and efforts at reduction.

In many ways the “to-eat-or-not-to-eat” question comes down to whether the risks outweigh the benefits and whether the benefits are cumulative, because mercury is a cumulative toxin. Everyone involved (CR, FDA and EPA) agrees there is a continuum between what types of seafood are beneficial and what types are too risky, but the groups disagree on where to draw the line. The FDA and EPA recognize that people—especially expecting mothers and those who breastfeed—should not eat large, predatory fish species such as shark, tilefish from the Gulf, swordfish and mackerel, but for whatever reason, have decided that tuna and other fish are fine to eat.

CR’s report makes it clear that tuna is not safe at all for expecting mothers and that it should be cut out of the diet of anyone who eats more than 24 ounces of seafood per week. CR’s reasoning for its tuna classification is partially based on the EPA’s own guidelines for safe consumption. For instance, the FDA instructs women to eat up to six ounces of albacore or white tuna weekly, yet a 125-pound woman exceeds the EPA’s “safe” limit by eating only four ounces. A 48-pound child surpasses the EPA’s limit at about a third of a can a week. To make matters even worse, the amount of mercury found in each can of tuna can vary wildly. The FDA’s own data showed that 20 percent of the cans tested since 2005 contained almost double the average level of mercury the agency lists.

Lots of families on tight budgets look to cans of tuna as an affordable way to get important omega-3s in their kids’ diets. Proponents of the tuna industry would say that CR’s decision to take tuna off the table (literally) limits lower-income families’ options. Luckily though, there are tons of other foods that are high in omega-3s and aren’t laced with neurotoxins, many of which are as cheap as tuna. There are vegetables like cauliflower and edamame, greens like purslane, grains like wild rice and nuts like walnuts. Grass-fed beef and bison are a great source because grass is actually a good source of omega-3. Canola and flaxseed oil contain a lot of omega-3. Plus there are many omega-3 enriched products including eggs and juices. Then of course there are the supplements.

Seafood lovers looking to decrease their mercury intake can eat lower on the food chain by replacing tuna with sustainably procured mussels, clams, oysters and shrimp. Eating these smaller species not only cuts out most of the mercury in your diet, it’s also much more sustainable, because—for one—it reduces your water footprint. If you want finfish, there are many low-mercury species, such as salmon, tilapia, haddock and hake. All of the above-mentioned seafood has fewer than six micrograms of mercury per four ounces, meaning most contain less than five percent of the mercury found in tuna.

There are also fish on the market that contain almost no mercury because they were raised on farms. While some fish farms are not sustainable and still sell fish with high levels of mercury, there are many amazing farms that use highly sustainable recirculating techniques. The Recirculating Farms Coalition has more information about these innovative farms.

For concerned parents and mothers, there are many available resources that teach you all you need to know about seafood safety and sustainability. Food and Water Watch’s Smart Seafood Guide and the Monterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch program are both invaluable resources to learn about purchasing sustainable, safe seafood.

Considering all of the safe options for ensuring omega-3 is included in your diet, it’s a wonder that the FDA still lists tuna as safe for consumption, especially when it comes to the health of an infant’s brain. For us, we’re going with CR’s recommendation—even if it means turning all of those cans of tuna in our cupboard into cat food. That is, just as long as the cat isn’t expecting.

YOU ALSO MIGHT LIKE

Video Shows How Helping Women Farmers Shrinks Hunger

3 Common Chemicals That May Cause Breast Cancer

Despite Industry Opposition, Scientists Report Formaldehyde Causes Cancer

EcoWatch Daily Newsletter

Tim P. Whitby / 21st Century Fox / Getty Images

The beauty products we put on our skin can have important consequences for our health. Just this March, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned that some Claire's cosmetics had tested positive for asbestos. But the FDA could only issue a warning, not a recall, because current law does not empower the agency to do so.

Michelle Pfeiffer wants to change that.

The actress and Environmental Working Group (EWG) board member was spotted on Capitol Hill Thursday lobbying lawmakers on behalf of a bill that would increase oversight of the cosmetics industry, The Washington Post reported.

Read More Show Less
A protest march against the Line 3 pipeline in St. Paul, Minnesota on May 18, 2018. Fibonacci Blue / CC BY 2.0

By Collin Rees

We know that people power can stop dangerous fossil fuel projects like the proposed Line 3 tar sands oil pipeline in Minnesota, because we've proved it over and over again — and recently we've had two more big wins.

Read More Show Less
Sponsored
Scientists released a study showing that a million species are at risk for extinction, but it was largely ignored by the corporate news media. Danny Perez Photography / Flickr / CC

By Julia Conley

Scientists at the United Nations' intergovernmental body focusing on biodiversity sounded alarms earlier this month with its report on the looming potential extinction of one million species — but few heard their calls, according to a German newspaper report.

Read More Show Less
DoneGood

By Cullen Schwarz

Ethical shopping is a somewhat new phenomenon. We're far more familiar with the "tried and tested" methods of doing good, like donating our money or time.

Read More Show Less
Pixabay

Summer is fast approaching, which means it's time to stock up on sunscreen to ward off the harmful effects of sun exposure. Not all sunscreens are created equally, however.

Read More Show Less
Sponsored
Mark Wallheiser / Getty Images

The climate crisis is a major concern for American voters with nearly 40 percent reporting the issue will help determine how they cast their ballots in the upcoming 2020 presidential election, according to a report compiled by the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication.

Of more than 1,000 registered voters surveyed on global warming, climate and energy policies, as well as personal and collective action, 38 percent said that a candidate's position on climate change is "very important" when it comes to determining who will win their vote. Overall, democratic candidates are under more pressure to provide green solutions as part of their campaign promises with 64 percent of Democrat voters saying they prioritize the issue compared with just 34 percent of Independents and 12 percent of Republicans.

Read More Show Less
Flooding in Winfield, Missouri this month. Jonathan Rehg / Getty Images

President Donald Trump has agreed to sign a $19.1 billion disaster relief bill that will help Americans still recovering from the flooding, hurricanes and wildfires that have devastated parts of the country in the past two years. Senate Republicans said they struck a deal with the president to approve the measure, despite the fact that it did not include the funding he wanted for the U.S.-Mexican border, CNN reported.

"The U.S. Senate has just approved a 19 Billion Dollar Disaster Relief Bill, with my total approval. Great!" the president tweeted Thursday.

Read More Show Less
Reed Hoffmann / Getty Images

Violent tornadoes tore through Missouri Wednesday night, killing three and causing "extensive damage" to the state's capital of Jefferson City, The New York Times reported.

"There was a lot of devastation throughout the state," Governor Mike Parson said at a Thursday morning press conference, as NPR reported. "We were very fortunate last night that we didn't have more injuries than what we had, and we didn't have more fatalities across the state. But three is too many."

Read More Show Less