Craig is temporarily a post-doctoral fellow at the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute who is looking for a permanent position. He spends most of his time balancing his overwhelming geekdom with normalcy so he can function in the real world. Luckily his wife likes his geekiness.
Peter Etnoyer is a Graduate Research Associate at the Harte Research Institute for Gulf of Mexico Studies, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi. He studies deep corals and ocean fronts, and he loves to be on the water.
Kevin Zelnio is a Graduate Student Researcher at Penn State studying the ecology of hydrothermal vent and methane seep communities. He raises awareness of the plight of the spineless through folk music.
Peter's post on mercury generated some passionate responses. Things have quited down a bit around here so I thought I would throw a bit of gas on the fire.
Oceana released results of hair tests conducted at last year's Alabama Deep Sea Fishing Rodeo, the oldes and largest saltwater fishing tournament in the US. The result...rodeo contestants had significantly higher levels of mercury in their bodies than would be found in the general population. This study mirrors that done a mere 6 years ago in which the Press-Register showed that anglers have higher mercury levels than non-anglers. Some Gulf Coast residents were found to have mercury levels five to nine times higher than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's safe level of 1 part per million in their hair.
Although the test are not as thorough as I would have liked to seen (65 of an ~3,000 participants), Oceana does provide fairly convincing results. A third of the 65 contestants had mercury levels above the EPA safe level, and the average of the total group was 0.93 parts per million, or nearly equal to the safe level. The reason for the high levels...the anglers who reported eating the most fish, especially large predators where mercury can concentrate, possessed the highest mercury levels,
Comments
To summarize the debate in the sushi post, http://scienceblogs.com/deepseanews/2007/07/how_safe_is_your_sushi_1.php
...online critics of a mercury study targeting tuna sushi in major US metropolitan areas claimed that US 'actionable levels' for mercury are 10-12 times too low and that US physicians warn pregnant women against seafood consumption mostly to meet the requirements of overly protective government standards.
The primary assertion was that mercury levels in fish were not harmful to adults, and that the benefits of Omega 3 fatty acids outweighed any potential harm from regular seafood consumption. The question would be whether these fishermen suffer any real ailments due to mercury.
One thing missing from the earlier conversation was the question of “how much fish do people eat?”. One chap in Japan stated that Japanese people don’t really eat that much. As a former Angeleno, I know that many people in Los Angeles eat 4-6 pieces of sushi 3-4 times a week. If you go to the mercury calculator at GotMercury.org you'll see that much tuna puts many people over 100% exposure.
Posted by: Peter Etnoyer | July 18, 2007 11:46 AM
And I typically eat sushi once or twice a month, but get the 3 rolls for 10$ lunch special... (that 18 pieces, that eel is so yummy... and the spicy mercury laden tuna... and of course spicy spider maki!)
Since I've reproduced already, I guess its ok to get some Mercury in the ole veins. the kids came out all right.
Posted by: Kevin Z | July 18, 2007 6:59 PM