Bamboozled on Fish

It is one thing to report both sides of a story. It is quite another to be bamboozled by an industry PR campaign passing off self-serving "science" as new public health research.

Last week the fish industry bamboozled a credulous gaggle of the national news media into reporting an industry-supported "study" claiming that pregnant women should disregard the Food and Drug Administration's advice to eat no more than 12 ounces a week of mercury-contaminated fish during pregnancy. As dutifully reported by The Washington Post (on the front page), ABC.com, Reuters, NBC's Today show, and dozens of other outlets, the study concluded that pregnant women should eat at least 12 ounces of fish a week, including fish FDA says pregnant women should not eat at all.

Mercury is serious business, a potent neurotoxin. There is universal scientific agreement that seafood is the main source of elevated mercury in the blood of American women, and that limiting consumption of fish that are high in mercury during pregnancy is sound public health policy. The FDA, which certainly does not rush to recommend against eating specific foods, has issued two mercury health advisories since 2001. The agency's advice is clear: Pregnant women, and women who are thinking about becoming pregnant, should eat no more than 12 ounces of fish per week, no more than six ounces of albacore tuna, and no shark, tuna, mackerel, or swordfish at all.

Faced with scientific consensus and a government advisory, what was the seafood industry to do? They do what all industry's do: hire expensive K St. lobbyists and pour millions into creating a fake controversy, arguing that the benefits of certain nutrients in fish outweigh the risks of mercury, and that therefore women should eat unlimited amounts of even the most mercury-contaminated fish.

Many in the news media swallowed this nonsense hook, line and sinker, without bothering to ask common-sense questions that National Public Radio and Bloomberg News were thoughtful enough to pursue. Their basic questions about funding for the report revealed that the fish industry paid $74,000 to cover the panel's travel expenses and website development costs, and website development costs. A little more digging showed that the vice chairman of the coalition that produced the "study" works for the K Street lobbying and PR operation, Burson Marsteller.

Not a single independent public health or scientific authority agrees with this piece of lobbyist-funded propaganda. Not the American Academy of Pediatrics, not the National Academy of Sciences, and not the Food and Drug Administration. What the real experts agree on is that mercury-laden fish should be avoided because they present a real health threat to the developing baby, and that women should seek other low mercury sources of beneficial omega-3 fatty acids.

Skipping over substance and writing simplistic "he said-she said" stories is how the news media failed us on global warming. For years when we should have been solving the global warming problem, the media insisted on giving equal billing to a handful of coal and oil industry-funded "skeptics," creating the illusion that there was a split among the experts about global warming and its causes, when none existed. Many in the media appear poised to repeat this disaster with mercury.

Our organization is in the business of researching chemical threats to human health and fighting to improve protections when they are supported by the science. When we release a report, we expect and welcome thorough scrutiny from reporters and independent experts about our findings, methodology and funding. When a non-peer reviewed "study" recommends dramatically increasing pregnant women's consumption of mercury above guidelines from FDA and leading medical organizations, shouldn't the same standards apply?

There is no controversy about whether pregnant women should avoid fish high in mercury, and reporting this fabricated controversy is more than factually wrong, is irresponsible and downright dangerous. If mothers-to-be actually followed the industry's advice there would be an epidemic of mercury-damaged children in this country.

The news media owe us not just the straight truth about mercury, but an examination of how K Street got America's journalistic elite to believe such a whopper of a fish story.

Comments

[JamieMcGregor]

Dear Editor:

Your story (10 Oct, “Bamboozled“) requires correction. Each member of the Maternal Nutrition Group is a medical professional or PhD with long interest and expertise in optimizing each child’s prenatal health, development, and subsequent learning capacity--beginning before, during, and after pregnancy and breastfeeding. Readers, family members, policy makers, and all mothers should read the recommendations for themselves healthymothershealthybabies.comm).



Our guidelines update current knowledge and address unintended consequences of the 2004 FDA advisory, which lead to diminished ocean seafood consumption by pregnant/breastfeeding mothers.


Readers can review these recommendations - and the peer-reviewed research they are founded on - out of their own or their families biologic self interest. Policy makers should familiarize themselves with these and other means of optimizing nurturance of pregnant women and their children to enhance well-being and learning (and possibly earning) capacities of U.S. children. Individual mothers and families will want to provide their children with the biologic advantages of well considered early life nutrition.


Our Maternal Nutrition Group re-emphasized the FDA advisorie’s recommendations on the benefits of ocean seafood and affirmed the importance of a mixed balanced diet including colorful fruits and vegetables, whole grains, as well as omega 3 and other “good” fats throughout pregnancy and breastfeeding.


Our updated recommendations are compatible with those promulgated by the American Heart Association for optimized nutrition in later life. My colleagues and I welcome ongoing interest and updating new knowledge as it becomes available.

Sincerely,



James A. McGregor, MDCM

[zaneblue]

The stupid thing about the story is there is no need for this debate. Pregnant women should take very high quality fish oil, which has the omega-3 fatty acids their babies need, with the mercury filtered out. Very simple.

Fish low in mercury generally are also fish low in omega-3 fatty acids, because mercury is stored in the fish fat, so that tactic won't really work.

[dadw5boys]

Isn't it funny that ares like Eastern Tennessee and Western North Carloina are left out of the BIG SETTLEMENT for air pollution from that recently settlement of the Electric Power plant that burn High Sulphur Coal.
The Washington D.C. and Cheaspeak Bay area get a ton of money and clean up while the Lakes and Steams to the south of there get nothing.
Those areas of the Tennessee Valley and North Carloina are trashed with the fall out from not only those Virgina and Ohio power plants but the Plant in Texas and those along the Mississippi.
The people in the Tennessee Valley have high rates of lung and heart problems. The trees on the Mountain tops are killed from the acid rain and the toxic fogs that blow in from the west and north west.
Thanks to our State Government few things are ever done to protect it Citizens from these outside attacks on the state by pollution.
The State of Tennessee will send Police to the border to arrest people for crossing into Virgina or North Carloina to shop and save money on the sales taxes they pay for Tobacco products and groceries.
The corruption in Tennessee runs deep and keeping it's citzens in line is more important than defending the state against outside attacts on the citizens health. The State of Tennessee is so funny they even pass laws that make 1 / 3 of the citizens OUTLAWS with mandstory Insurance laws but no raise in the miniumn wage to help the low income workers buy auto insurance.
Keep them poor and under your thumb is how the State of Tennesssee views the workers in their state.

[olivine]

There won't be a fish industry much longer due to over-fishing the oceans, so the seafood industry need to be looking ahead to finding some other jobs. And, if a food source is so toxic that pregnant women are strongly advised not to eat it, I think I will skip it as well. Pity the fish don't have that option.

[Newfycrat]

"Pregnant and breast-feeding women should eat at least 12 ounces of fish and seafood per week to ensure their babies' optimal brain development, a coalition of top scientists from private groups and federal agencies plans to declare today."
Please tell me how this is at odds with mercury. Any woman who wonders how much fish she should eat probably also knows about mercury. It is quite easy to eat that much fish (if you have the stomach for it) without eating the fish you are supposed to avoid.
Why shouldn't you educate women about the HUGE benefits of Omega 3 fatty acids with infant brain growth while also telling her about mercury in certain fish. This could be a win win situation without all the bickering.
(You know, the emerging theory is that we evolved by eating fish, not hunting in Savannas. There are many reasons for this theory but one is also the hypothesis that all those Omega 3's contributed to our rapid brain growth)

[RichardWiles]

Newfycrat, this report recommends women eat a minimum of 12 ounces perweek – the same amount the FDA defined as a maximum. That’s like sayingthat everyone should be exposed to the maximum safe amount of lead, ormore. If women hear these bogus recommendations and go out and eat lots offish, they’ll end up eating the most popular fish, which are generally theones most loaded with mercury. Not to mention the fact that two of thefish specifically recommended in this report, mackerel and tuna, are onthe FDA’s Do Not Eat list for pregnant women in certain forms. What womenreally need is a list of fish and other sources of omega 3s that are lowin mercury. EWG has asked the FDA for that list several times, but so farthey’ve failed to produce it.

[Desiderata]

"If mothers-to-be actually followed the industry's advice there would be an epidemic of mercury-damaged children in this country."

There already is a epidemic of mercury-damaged children, inflicted with autism from the mercury preservatives in vaccines.

The mercury is no longer used in vaccines in the USA today, but a bunch of the old vaccines went to China, and, surprise, there is a rise of autism among that country's children. Are they getting vengeance with their lead contaminated toys shipped to us?