|
|
Topic started on 15-12-2008 @ 05:03 PM by Montana
|
FDA reconsiders consumer advice on fish consumption.
Source
The Food and Drug Administration has been circulating a draft report within the government that argues the health benefits of eating fish outweigh the
potential ill effects of mercury. But the Environmental Protection Agency has fired off a memo to the White House calling the 270-page FDA study
"scientifically flawed and inadequate" and an "oversimplification" lacking analytical rigor.
I think we can all agree that mercury consumption is bad for you. Especially for pregnant women and small children. But now the FDA is saying it's
better to eat mercury tainted fish than to limit your fish consumption? I smell a rat of some kind. Just not sure what color yet. Kudos to the EPA for
jumping right on this issue, too!
Environmental groups are crying foul. They say it's a sneak attempt to undercut important public health advice in the waning hours of a Bush
administration that has treated science as a stepchild.
Now this I can believe, perhaps the fishing industry is having a poor year and has demanded the administration provide a type of low-key 'bailout'
of their own? I have no proof of that, of course, but the sell-out of consumer protection organizations to corporate interests has become epidemic
over the last few years.
Love the zinger at the end of the article-
But the EPA said, "this FDA report bases its conclusions on models that use very limited inputs from studies that have significant problems for risk
analysis."
|
copyright & usage
|
Click here for more Medical Issues & Conspiracies topics
Hot Topics
|
Top Topics
|
This Week
|
Subscribe
|
Home
|
reply posted on 15-12-2008 @ 05:08 PM by zysin5
|
reply to post by Montana
Right! they will tell you alot of stuff is perfectly fine for you to put into your body!
Just over the weekend, I put together my research over the years into one massive thread.. I hope it can help you and the other readers come into full
view of what is going on here..
What are they putting into our bodies? And say its okay?
Thanks for bringing this up.. As for some reason I can feel that this is going to be collective news over the next few months. I hope this can stay
strong in the hive mind.. I know its been on my mind often all weekend long and today.
Theres alot of research to be done.. And many lines can be drawn between groups, companies, and people. Just being able to connect the dots to all
this can take up to a year to do.. Its all about reading, and knowing that we are always a couple steps behind them.
[edit on 15-12-2008 by zysin5]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 15-12-2008 @ 05:18 PM by Montana
|
What really tweaks me is the FDA is supposed to protect US, the consumer. It is not supposed to downplay obvious and well-accepted health risks. But
the FDA has been minimizing the adverse effects of mercury for quite some time.
They have disputed the potential harm in tooth fillings, vaccines and now fish. One has to wonder why. Well as every conspiracy theorist knows,
'Follow the money'!
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-12-2008 @ 05:36 PM by Bnmssnit
|
reply to post by Montana
After all it been reported that mercury is used in many vaccinations so it must e safe(tic)!They rail against colloidal silver use ut mercury
and other poisons are safe ! ha Sure you can trust the government.....ask any Indian!
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 15-12-2008 @ 05:37 PM by Montana
|
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-12-2008 @ 05:50 PM by DangerDeath
|
When I hear mercury i think cinnabar
and
Minamata!
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-12-2008 @ 05:55 PM by beaverg
|
Awesome! Great news. This past year I've only eaten the fish I catch once a month. I can bump it up to once a week now that the FDA says it's okay.
Thanks for making mercury ingestion safe guys! 
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-12-2008 @ 05:59 PM by Montana
|
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-12-2008 @ 06:02 PM by Waldy
|
Hey, at least you wont be hungry. Who cares if it results in 20 years less lifespan and potentially horrible death.
The world is hungry, lets give them the food we been poisoning. 
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-12-2008 @ 06:06 PM by OzWeatherman
|
Most the Mercury found in fish is in trace levels, which is not harmful to humans.
Maybe the FDA was referring to people who do not eat fish due to the fact that they are scared of getting mercury poisoning. Either way, I wouldnt
recommend eating fish that had more than a trace level of Mercury
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 15-12-2008 @ 06:14 PM by DangerDeath
|
reply to post by Montana
Unless there is an intention to poison people...
They know about minamata, I have no doubt about that.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-12-2008 @ 06:23 PM by Montana
|
reply to post by OzWeatherman
That is true, most is trace levels. However, even trace levels can add up, and i'm not sure how many people are aware of the levels that are becoming
more common.
From the source article:
Fish and shellfish are the biggest sources of human exposure to mercury. Fetuses and young children are the most susceptible to harm. About 8 percent
of U.S. women of childbearing age have enough mercury in their blood to be at risk of having babies with subtle learning disabilities, the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention estimates.
Something to definitely pay attention to, and reason enough for any woman who is planning a pregnancy to seek tests and physician's advice!
Moderation, moderation, moderation. As always...
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-12-2008 @ 06:25 PM by clay2 baraka
|
Originally posted by Montana
FDA reconsiders consumer advice on fish consumption.
[sarcasm]
See, that's why we should deregulate and disband the FDA. Why pay all this money to a government agency to tell us it's perfectly safe when
we can just have a multinational, corporate PR director do it for free?
[/sarcasm]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-12-2008 @ 06:28 PM by Maxmars
|
With fish stocks 'failing' and problems with pollutants 'surprising' us every which way we turn, it's likely that "profit" has something to do
with this.
After all the FDA is basically welfare for corporations (since they virtually 'own' it). All those highly paid honchos deciding it's OK for us to
eat crap they probably won't let their families eat tells me there's money in the balance.
Now, realistically speaking, the EPA is not far behind in being 'remiss' in their responsibility. But then, this would be a derailing point for the
OP. Nice find!
[edit on 15-12-2008 by Maxmars]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-12-2008 @ 06:35 PM by Montana
|
More information relating to mercury poisoning and pregnancy...
New York
One in four adults in New York City have elevated levels of toxic mercury in their blood -- most likely due to eating a lot of fish, according to a
new survey by the city's Department of Health.
Los Angeles
The Environmental Protection Agency believes that about 630,000 of the roughly 4 million babies born annually in the United States – twice as many
as previously thought – may be exposed to dangerous levels of mercury in the womb, according to an analysis released Thursday.
Environmental Health News
In a study of over 1,000 women, mothers who gave birth very prematurely were three times more likely to have high levels of mercury. Their mercury
exposure was linked to fish consumption. Women who ate more fish had higher mercury levels.
BBC
Most of the mercury came from the children's mothers in the form of fillings, injections containing the thimerosal, or through eating a lot of
fish.
EPA recognition of New
England hospitals
Over the last two years, participants in the voluntary program have eliminated more than 1,120 pounds of mercury from their waste streams by replacing
mercury-containing equipment such as thermometers and sphygmomanometers, recycling and/or replacing high mercury flourescent bulbs with lower mercury
bulbs, reducing use of mercury-containing laboratory chemicals and educating staff on mercury reduction techniques.
[edit on 12/15/2008 by Montana]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-12-2008 @ 09:41 PM by ziggy1706
|
They must be doin drugs!! Hell they backup big pharma! lol man, i wonder what kinda pills big pharma is giving the FDA people, i mean geesh! 
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 16-12-2008 @ 12:41 PM by CeltAngel
|
I couldn't find the link to the original report, but here is an article talking about
the half life of mercury in vaccines.
Long story short, it says thermosal in vaccines isn't so bad for babies because the half life is only 3.7 days. I've heard at least once (from a
pediatrician acquaintance) that - heck, it's ok, it's only in there a couple of days!
....only a couple of days? And that makes it right?  I really think this is just one more attempt to get the general populace to accept
positively toxic materials in our lives. I have yet to figure out how someone (especially one as "educated" as a doctor) can actually be suckered
into trash like this?
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 16-12-2008 @ 12:57 PM by BlackOps719
|
What they meant in reality was that considering that the meat and vegetables that we consume on a daily basis are loaded down with freakish growth
hormones, chemicals, pesticides and other volatile cancer causing death agents that a little mercury in the fish won't make much difference.
It's like drinking a glass mixed with ten different household cleaners....it really wont matter if you add one more to the punch.... and they will
all more or less kill you. At least mercury takes years to cause serious harm. I would be more worried about the deadly amount of flouride in your
drinking/bath water that you ingest multiple times per day.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 16-12-2008 @ 01:26 PM by Long Lance
|
why worry about fish when you've got mercury fillings?
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
smoking tooth footage
i mean when people inhale and ingest the stuff 24/7 it's bound to have a greater impact, obviously.
strawman at best. ocean fish are mostly endangered anyway, so why not cut it out and look for fatty acids elsewhere?
[edit on 2008.12.16 by Long Lance]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
