Selenium fights mercury. Result: Most fish safe

[Guest guest]

[vitalchoice.com]

 

Most Fish Rank as Very Safe on New Standard; Selenium-Aware Rating

System Reflects the Element's Mercury-Stifling Effects Researchers

recommend revisions to current fish consumption advisories, to account

for the protective power of the selenium abundant in most seafood and

many freshwater fish by Craig Weatherby

-------------

Vital Choice sells only clearly safe, lower-mercury seafood, so we have

little at stake in any debate over the risks and rewards of frequent

fish-eating. But we've stepped into the fray because there's been way

too much heat ... and not enough light ... surrounding the emotionally

fraught subject of fish and mercury. Eco and consumer organizations

raise ongoing alarms about mercury in fish, and the big national tuna

brands fund most of the rebuttal efforts. Too often, both sides

cherry-pick and mischaracterize the evidence ... though it's the

presumably well-intentioned eco and consumer advocates that have

typically done the worst distorting. Because the evidence shows that

virtually all seafood delivers big health rewards at every age ... and

poses virtually no risks at any age (see the joint EPA-FDA guidance [

http://www.imakenews.com/eletra/go.cfm?z=vitalchoiceseafood%2C380648%2Cb1kJkvww%\

2C2633081%2CbfPRTnr

for the few exceptions) ... we're most distressed when folks

raise exaggerated alarms while downplaying the well-documented need for

healthier protein sources in people's diets (primarily plant foods and

fish, with some grass-fed meats). New paper refutes flawed but

influential mercury study One of the two new papers, published in the

journal Ecohealth, presents the clearest explanation to date of the

several human studies on mercury toxicity (or lack of it) from eating

fish (Ralston NV 2008/2009). This review of the evidence includes a

convincing rebuttal of the infamous Faroe Islands study, which was

relied on by the National Research Council (NRC) to set standards for

mercury intake from fish, citing bizarre rationales and tortured logic

that remain scientifically disreputable. Incredibly, the NRC threw out

the overwhelming evidence that eating fish with low-to-moderate mercury

levels (and high selenium/mercury ratios found in almost all seafood)

daily produces no developmental deficits in children. Why? Because they

needed evidence of harm to set intake limits, and were willing to rely

on an inferior, largely irrelevant study to get it! For example, and

most egregiously, the NRC threw out evidence from an equally large,

better-designed study among mothers and children in the Seychelles

Islands, where (unlike the Faroe Islands) people consume fish-borne

mercury and selenium in levels and ratios very similar to those found in

the American seafood diet. For more on that, see Fight Over Mercury

Risks Muddied by Bad Science [

http://newsletter.vitalchoice.com/e_article000709698.cfm?x=b8wQMPW,b67kwpM8,w

..

  Weve reported on the overwhelming evidence that most ocean fish do

much more good than harm (if any) to children, and also on the generally

unrecognized, overlooked role that fish-borne selenium plays in

neutralizing fish-borne mercury. (See Mercury-Fighting Mineral in Fish

Overlooked in Heated Debate [

http://newsletter.vitalchoice.com/e_article000709707.cfm?x=b8wQMPW,b67kwpM8,w

and FDA Analysis Supports More Fish for Moms and Kids [

http://newsletter.vitalchoice.com/e_article001294700.cfm?x=b11,0,w

..) Now, leading researchers in the field have published two

separate studies ... funded by the U.S. EPA and other federal agencies

.... in which they propose a new, scientifically sounder measure of

seafood safety, called the Selenium-Health Benefit Value or Se-HBV. The

Selenium-Health Benefit Value scoring idea is based on strong evidence

showing that, regardless of the amount of mercury in a fish, if the

selenium level is higher the fish is safe to eat ... and the more

selenium a fish species contains in relation to mercury, the safer it

is. And with very few exceptions, the studies show that almost all of

the ocean fish commonly sold in stores contain enough selenium to

neutralize the mercury they contain. Click here to view a

selenium-mercury chart [

http://www.imakenews.com/eletra/go.cfm?z=vitalchoiceseafood%2C380648%2Cb1kJkvww%\

2C3389694%2CbfPRTnr

for 15 recently tested Pacific species (all caught near

Hawaii), including four major tuna types, swordfish, mako shark, wahoo,

and some uncommon Pacific species. As you'll see, all but mako shark are

higher in selenium than mercury, with swordfish having even selenium and

mercury levels. These rankings make it clearer than ever that ocean fish

are substantially safer than their mercury content implies .. especially

since the authors of previous human studies found safe, protective

selenium-mercury ratios in almost all ocean fish that people ate. The

list of 15 recently tested fish includes yellowfin, skipjack, bigeye,

and albacore tuna. In addition to having a very safe selenium-mercury

ratio, our troll-caught albacore is unusually low in mercury, due to its

age and size. Skipjack is very commonly used in national brands of

canned & quot;light & quot; tuna. Despite the new findings, it still makes

sense for younger children and pregnant/nursing women to follow the

joint EPA-FDA guidance [

http://www.imakenews.com/eletra/go.cfm?z=vitalchoiceseafood%2C380648%2Cb1kJkvww%\

2C2633081%2CbfPRTnr

] on consuming the few species relatively high in mercury ... some of

whose safety ratings could change under the new standard (e.g.,

swordfish has a high selenium-mercury ratio). Nuanced new

selenium-focused standard fits the evidenceThe authors' proposed

Selenium-Health Benefit Value safety standard incorporates both the

absolute and relative amounts of selenium (chemical symbol Se) and

elemental mercury (chemical symbol Hg) in fish or shellfish. First, do

no harm The following excerpt from Dr. Ralston's paper in Ecohealth

speaks volumes about the danger of excessive fear of mercury in fish.

Note: Hg and MeHg are the symbols for the elemental and methyl

(fish-borne) forms of mercury, and Se is the symbol for selenium):

& quot;The prime directive of professionals in all areas of public

responsibility should be, Primum non nocere (First, do no harm). & quot;

& quot;Risk assessments based on neurodevelopmental harms from maternal

consumption of pilot whale and shark meats with disproportionately high

Hg:Se [mercury:selenium] molar ratios (*5:1) and highly negative Se-HBVs

seem to have resulted in gross overestimates of the risks associated

with MeHg exposure from eating ocean fish. & quot; & quot;The unbalanced

approach of only examining risks resulted in regulatory advisories that

emphasized restrictions to minimize MeHg exposure, but overlooked the

more substantial positive effects of ocean fish consumption during

pregnancy. & quot; & quot;Maternal consumption of typical seafoods with

highly positive Se-HBVs seems not only to be harmless but remarkably

beneficial to healthy child development. Exaggerations of the risks of

MeHg exposure have caused women to avoid eating ocean fish during

pregnancy. & quot; & quot;Following such misguided advice may have

inadvertently caused far more damage to children than the worst possible

risks that were supposedly being avoided. & quot; & quot;To resolve this

issue, it seems that using the Se-HBV or a similarly balanced criterion

for assessing seafood safety will alleviate many current

misunderstandings of advisories regarding maternal seafood consumption.

Using the Se-HBV as an environmental indicator that distinguishes

health-promoting from hazardous fish will provide a basis for developing

urgently needed regulatory protections against hazardous Hg:Se ratios

that may be present in freshwater fish [and a few ocean fish like

shark]. & quot; (Ralston NV 2008/2009).

  As professor Nick Ralston, Ph.D. said, Most varieties of ocean

fish have highly positive Se-HBVs ... and recent studies show that

mothers who eat these types of ocean fish improve their children's IQ by

up to 10 points. (ERC 2009) In a recnet phone conversation, Dr. Ralston

told us that the Selenium-Health Benefit Value derives its credibility

from & quot;mechanistic & quot; rodent studies and from several human

studies focused designed to detect harm to children from mercury in

seafood. Rodents metabolize selenium and mercury exactly as humans do,

and in them, selenium is proven to protect against mercury very

effectively. And the selenium-mercury ratios of the fish and marine

mammals eaten by people in the major human population studies predicted

their outcomes perfectly. Children participating in the only studies

showing (slight) evidence of possible harm from seafood-heavy diets ...

which were conducted in New Zealand the Faroe islands ... ate lots of

shark and pilot whale, which have high mercury-selenium ratios. (See our

& quot;New paper refutes ... & quot; sidebar.) No doubt, it will take time

for folks to relinquish the current, scientifically dubious view of

seafood safety with regard to mercury ... but the human and animal

evidence now weighs quite heavily on the side of the proposed change to

the proposed Selenium-Health Benefit Value safety standard. Here's the

relevant press release issued by the Energy & Environmental Research

Center (EERC) at the University of North Dakota (EERC 2009): University

of North Dakota Press Release, June 22, 2009 EERC Research Finds Mercury

Levels in Freshwater and Ocean Fish Not as Harmful as Previously

ThoughGRAND FORKS --- The Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC)

at the University of North Dakota announced today that after years of

extensive research, results of environmental, laboratory, and human

studies show that mercury levels in freshwater and ocean fish are not as

harmful as previously thought. Current fish advisories may be misleading

and should be revised, taking the benefits of selenium into account. The

findings come from two major reports released in the journals

Environmental Science & Technology and EcoHealth, both indicating that

failure to consider selenium in relation to mercury levels in freshwater

and ocean fish will result in critical mistakes in interpretation that

generate unreliable and potentially inaccurate advice regarding fish

consumption and is deterring people from eating a nutritious product.

Both reports state that the effects of mercury exposure are entirely

dependent on the amount of selenium present in the diet. Selenium is an

essential nutrient in healthy brain development and protects the brain

from oxidative damage, said Dr. Nick Ralston, an EERC Research Scientist

involved with the studies. More importantly, selenium protects the body

from mercury's negative effects. The more selenium in the tissue, the

less mercury toxicity occurs. Since fish in some areas have much higher

levels of selenium than mercury, the consumer receives the healthy

benefits of selenium and a natural defense against mercury, he said.

Results from the first study, conducted jointly by the EERC, the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Western Ecology Division, and the

University of Missouri's Nuclear Reactor Center, show that an estimated

97% of the freshwater fish from lakes and rivers in the western United

States are safe to eat. Conducted in 12 states in the western United

States, it is the only study of this magnitude that has measured both

mercury and selenium in fish tissue. The study examined 468 freshwater

fish representing 40 species and found that fish from most regions of

the country contained more selenium than mercury and so consumers are

protected against mercury toxicity, said Ralston. The study also

discovered that a very small fraction of fish contained more mercury

than selenium and might pose a greater mercury toxicity threat than

otherwise expected. Human and wildlife populations with poor dietary

selenium intake will be especially vulnerable to mercury exposure from

eating fish from bodies of water with inadequate selenium resources.

Similarly, fear about the potential health risks associated with

consuming mercury from ocean fish and shellfish has prompted advisories

intended to limit the amount of fish that women eat during pregnancy.

The second major study conducted, funded by the National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and EPA, examined a new seafood safety

criteria known as the Selenium-Health Benefit Value (Se-HBV), which is

specifically designed to be the first step in accurately predicting both

the risks and benefits of eating various forms of seafood. Foods that

contain large amounts of mercury relative to selenium have negative

Se-HBVs, and foods rich in selenium have positive Se-HBVs. Human studies

consistently show that mercury's toxic effects are directly proportional

to mercury-selenium ratios in the foods consumed. Since studies have

found that foods with negative Se-HBVs are very dangerous during

pregnancy, these foods should be avoided. Very few seafoods have

negative Se-HBVs, but current policies and regulations are based on

studies that involved rare types of seafoods, tracking mothers who

either ate pilot whales or large sharks, both of which have negative

Se-HBVs ranging from -10 to -100. Most varieties of ocean fish have

highly positive Se-HBVs between 20 and 200, and recent studies show that

mothers who eat these types of ocean fish improve their children's IQ by

up to 10 points, Ralston said. Therefore, seafood safety criteria based

on Se-HBV will improve public health by properly restricting consumption

of hazardous seafoods such as pilot whale and shark, while at the same

time encouraging mothers to eat the right types of fish that optimize

their nutrition and enhance the IQs of their children. & quot;The EERC is

recognized as the worldwide leader in research on the impacts of mercury

on the environment, & quot; said EERC Director Gerald Groenewold. The

findings from both of these studies are phenomenal. These findings are

critical to developing accurate advisories for fish consumption so that

people continue to receive the practical health benefits of eating fish.

We hope this new evidence and proposal help bring sanity back to the

debate over seafood risks and rewards! Sources

- Choi AL, Budtz-Jrgensen E, Jrgensen PJ, Steuerwald U, Debes F, Weihe

P, Grandjean P. Selenium as a potential protective factor against

mercury developmental neurotoxicity. Environ Res. 2008 May;107(1):45-52.

Epub 2007 Sep 12.

- Energy & Environmental Research Center, University of North Dakota

(EERC). EERC Research Finds Mercury Levels in Freshwater and Ocean Fish

Not as Harmful as Previously Thought. June 22,

2009. Accessed at

http://www.imakenews.com/eletra/go.cfm?z=vitalchoiceseafood%2C380648%2Cb1kJkvww%\

2C3381730%2CbfPRTnr

- Peterson SA, Ralston NV, Peck DV, Van Sickle J, Robertson JD, Spate

VL, Morris JS. How might selenium moderate the toxic effects of mercury

in stream fish of the western U.S.? Environ Sci Technol. 2009 May

15;43(10):3919-25.

- Ralston NV, Blackwell JL 3rd, Raymond LJ. Importance of molar ratios

in selenium-dependent protection against methylmercury toxicity. Biol

Trace Elem Res. 2007 Dec;119(3):255-68.

- Ralston NV, Ralston CR, Blackwell JL 3rd, Raymond LJ. Dietary and

tissue selenium in relation to methylmercury toxicity. Neurotoxicology.

2008 Sep;29(5):802-11. Epub 2008 Aug 9.

- Ralston NV. Selenium health benefit values as seafood safety criteria.

Ecohealth. 2008 Dec;5(4):442-55. Epub 2009 Apr 14.