Won't stop me
A coworker emailed me this article today. I read it, and yea...I don't love the thought of all the mercury etc. possible in sushi. BUT, there are plenty of other harmful things we put in our bodies everyday. No, I wouldn't eat "raw-fish" sushi if I was pregnant (that will be the hardest 9 months ever) -- I can't say that I would give it up altogether, same goes for all seafood. I love the rolls with sweet gourd in them, and the cucumber ones are good, too.
On the other hand, I found another article referencing the same Los Angeles sushi joint tuna test. The second article presents the study's findings in a much different way, leading me to wonder who if either journalist was reporting correctly. In this article Dr. Michael Hirt argues:
"Sushi restaurants are not the sole source of mercury in your life. You can get mercury from all kinds of food sources, the air we breathe, and in tuna -- can tuna, as well as tuna you get in sushi -- and from the deli when you are having a tuna fish sandwich."
I tend to agree with him. This is probably not a new thing, but I have suddenly noticed a lot of articles warning of the danger in Tuna sushi. And guess what, This LA public health advocacy group at Gotmercury.org seems to be behind them all. (yet another recent article) Why attack the "sushi-genre" of tune? At least trace levels of mercury are found in "nearly all fish". Besides, I tend to eat less tuna in one sitting of sushi that I would in a typical serving at a regular seafood restaurant (where they cook it). Also, mercury doesn't disappear when you cook the fish, it's not like E. Coli or Salmonella, it's NOT a bacteria. Beyond even that, look at the junk food most of America is pumping into their bodies everyday. I won't even get into the health risks imposed there.
The Turtle Island Restoration Network's (the group behind Gotmercury.org) agenda items include this direct quote:
"4. Supermarkets and restaurants should stop selling the fish highest in mercury: swordfish, tilefish, shark, king mackerel, and tuna."
I think its none of their damn business...requiring them to post warning signs (which is one of their other goals) is one thing...but then let the educated consumer choose whether or not to purchase and partake of those species. Reading further, I finally came to their motive. Guess I should have figured judging by their organization's name:
"Reduce the demand for high mercury fish that are also pushing sea turtles toward extinction by not eating swordfish, tuna, tilefish, shark, and king mackerel or by reducing the amount that you eat those fish."
Their site also has a "Mercury Calculator" to help you estimate what percentage of the EPA limit of mercury exposure you are taking in each week. According to them, one 4 oz. sushi order of Bigeye Ahi Tuna is 170% of the limit. And, if you like mackerel sushi (which I don't care for, seems fishy)...depending on the type of mackerel used, a 4 oz. serving can be as much as 190% of the limit. Even fake crab meat (monkfish) in a large sushi portion is 50% the limit. Snapper comes in at 50% as well. Good news for Salmon fans...those smaller fish contain much less and apparently negligible amounts of mercury in that sized portion. I want to know where eel rates...cause I like mine BBQ!
Finally, Gotmercury.org has a factsheet about the risks of mercury, and the effects it can have. Go see if you want, interesting...but I would check the data against some more reputable third party sources.
On the other hand, I found another article referencing the same Los Angeles sushi joint tuna test. The second article presents the study's findings in a much different way, leading me to wonder who if either journalist was reporting correctly. In this article Dr. Michael Hirt argues:
"Sushi restaurants are not the sole source of mercury in your life. You can get mercury from all kinds of food sources, the air we breathe, and in tuna -- can tuna, as well as tuna you get in sushi -- and from the deli when you are having a tuna fish sandwich."
I tend to agree with him. This is probably not a new thing, but I have suddenly noticed a lot of articles warning of the danger in Tuna sushi. And guess what, This LA public health advocacy group at Gotmercury.org seems to be behind them all. (yet another recent article) Why attack the "sushi-genre" of tune? At least trace levels of mercury are found in "nearly all fish". Besides, I tend to eat less tuna in one sitting of sushi that I would in a typical serving at a regular seafood restaurant (where they cook it). Also, mercury doesn't disappear when you cook the fish, it's not like E. Coli or Salmonella, it's NOT a bacteria. Beyond even that, look at the junk food most of America is pumping into their bodies everyday. I won't even get into the health risks imposed there.
The Turtle Island Restoration Network's (the group behind Gotmercury.org) agenda items include this direct quote:
"4. Supermarkets and restaurants should stop selling the fish highest in mercury: swordfish, tilefish, shark, king mackerel, and tuna."
I think its none of their damn business...requiring them to post warning signs (which is one of their other goals) is one thing...but then let the educated consumer choose whether or not to purchase and partake of those species. Reading further, I finally came to their motive. Guess I should have figured judging by their organization's name:
"Reduce the demand for high mercury fish that are also pushing sea turtles toward extinction by not eating swordfish, tuna, tilefish, shark, and king mackerel or by reducing the amount that you eat those fish."
Their site also has a "Mercury Calculator" to help you estimate what percentage of the EPA limit of mercury exposure you are taking in each week. According to them, one 4 oz. sushi order of Bigeye Ahi Tuna is 170% of the limit. And, if you like mackerel sushi (which I don't care for, seems fishy)...depending on the type of mackerel used, a 4 oz. serving can be as much as 190% of the limit. Even fake crab meat (monkfish) in a large sushi portion is 50% the limit. Snapper comes in at 50% as well. Good news for Salmon fans...those smaller fish contain much less and apparently negligible amounts of mercury in that sized portion. I want to know where eel rates...cause I like mine BBQ!
Finally, Gotmercury.org has a factsheet about the risks of mercury, and the effects it can have. Go see if you want, interesting...but I would check the data against some more reputable third party sources.
3 Comments:
I hear what you're saying, although I really hate it when people say that there are plenty of sources of contamination in our lives besides that which we state. This serves to delegitimize the arguement that has been previously presented. What a sorry state of affairs in our world when we know our world is so fully and thoroughly contaminated with mercury, but simply accept it like it is no big deal. Newsflash! Mercury causes brain damage. Our legacy on earth may be just that, a bunch of brain damaged apes running around eating sushi and watching american Idol.(sorry about getitng politial) Loved the links in your post!
I'm not saying we should continue dumping mercury (and other pollutants) into the water, and I am not bashing organizations that speak up against it. I just don't see how by stopping buying these fish, we save the sea turtles. Also, I was not trying to "delegitimize" their arguement about the dangers of eating sushi due to mercury content...more rationalize my continued enjoyment of the dish. If I was going to stop eating sushi, then I should stop eating tuna altogether...which I am not going to do. (and I doubt you are either) i don't mean this to seem argumentative...just replying to your thoughts. On that note...feel like sushi for lunch later this week? :o)
Well you are right about that because I will keep eating sushi forever!
Post a Comment
<< Home