Literature DB >> 15364590

Mercury in canned tuna: white versus light and temporal variation.

Joanna Burger1, Michael Gochfeld.   

Abstract

There are abundant data and advisories for mercury levels in wild fish, but far fewer for commercial fish that compose a large majority of the fish most people eat. Until recently, relatively little attention has been devoted to examining mercury in canned tuna, despite its great importance in human diets. There is substantial media coverage of the benefits and risk from fish consumption, but few peer-reviewed data on canned tuna, the most commonly consumed fish in the United States. In this paper, we examine the levels of total mercury in canned tuna obtained from a New Jersey grocery store from 1998 to 2003, looking for temporal consistency within this data set and particularly for comparison with the Food and Drug Administration's 1991 study. We analyzed 168 cans individually for total mercury. All values are reported as parts per million (= microg/g) on a wet weight basis. In a subset of samples analyzed for total and inorganic mercury, the inorganic mercury was below detection levels; hence at least 89% of the mercury can be considered methylmercury. We found that white-style tuna had significantly more total mercury (mean 0.407 ppm) than light-style tuna (mean 0.118 ppm), presumably reflecting that "white" tuna is albacore, a species relatively larger than the skipjack tuna, which is commonly available as "light" or "chunk light." The maximum mercury in a can was 0.997 ppm, but 25% of white tuna samples exceeded 0.5 ppm. Data suggest a slight increase in levels since 1991, and mercury levels were significantly higher in 2001 than in other years. The mean level of mercury in white tuna (mean 0.407 ppm) was significantly higher than the mean value of 0.17 ppm currently used by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in its risk assessment and public information. There were no significant differences in mercury levels in tuna packed in oil compared to water. Draining contents had no effect on mercury levels, and the fluid, both oil and water, contained little mercury. These data indicate that people who eat canned tuna frequently can choose light tuna and reduce their mercury intake. Canned mackerel had much lower levels of mercury than tuna. Since cans of white tuna frequently exceed the FDA's original action level of 0.5 ppm, it would be prudent to continue some systematic monitoring of the nation's canned fish supply, particularly as the targets of commercial fisheries inevitably change as certain stocks become depleted.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15364590     DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2003.12.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Res        ISSN: 0013-9351            Impact factor:   6.498


  28 in total

1.  Geochemistry in the modern soil survey program.

Authors:  M A Wilson; R Burt; S J Indorante; A B Jenkins; J V Chiaretti; M G Ulmer; J M Scheyer
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2007-07-11       Impact factor: 2.513

Review 2.  Conceptual environmental justice model for evaluating chemical pathways of exposure in low-income, minority, native American, and other unique exposure populations.

Authors:  Joanna Burger; Michael Gochfeld
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2011-05-06       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Fish and seafood availability in markets in the Baie des Chaleurs region, New Brunswick, Canada: a heavy metal contamination baseline study.

Authors:  Marc Fraser; Céline Surette; Cathy Vaillancourt
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2012-09-08       Impact factor: 4.223

4.  Analysis of mercury, selenium, and tin concentrations in canned fish marketed in Iran.

Authors:  S V Hosseini; F Aflaki; S Sobhanardakani; L Tayebi; A Babakhani Lashkan; J M Regenstein
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2012-12-12       Impact factor: 2.513

5.  Stakeholder participation in research design and decisions: scientists, fishers, and mercury in saltwater fish.

Authors:  Joanna Burger; Michael Gochfeld; Tom Fote
Journal:  Ecohealth       Date:  2013-02-15       Impact factor: 3.184

6.  Red meat, poultry, and fish intake and breast cancer risk among Hispanic and Non-Hispanic white women: The Breast Cancer Health Disparities Study.

Authors:  Andre E Kim; Abbie Lundgreen; Roger K Wolff; Laura Fejerman; Esther M John; Gabriela Torres-Mejía; Sue A Ingles; Stephanie D Boone; Avonne E Connor; Lisa M Hines; Kathy B Baumgartner; Anna Giuliano; Amit D Joshi; Martha L Slattery; Mariana C Stern
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2016-02-22       Impact factor: 2.506

7.  Fish faddism causing low-level mercury poisoning in the Caribbean: two case reports.

Authors:  Lexley M Pinto Pereira; Surujpaul Teelucksingh
Journal:  Cases J       Date:  2009-04-29

8.  Total mercury in fresh and processed tuna marketed in Galicia (NW Spain) in relation to dietary exposure.

Authors:  M Ángeles García; Ricardo Núñez; Julián Alonso; M Julia Melgar
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2016-09-26       Impact factor: 4.223

9.  Risk to consumers from mercury in bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix) from New Jersey: Size, season and geographical effects.

Authors:  Joanna Burger
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  2009-07-29       Impact factor: 6.498

10.  Sources of mercury exposure for U.S. seafood consumers: implications for policy.

Authors:  Noelle E Selin; Elsie M Sunderland; Christopher D Knightes; Robert P Mason
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 9.031

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.