It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


One in Four Fish in U.S. Waterways Contaminated with Unsafe Levels of Mercury

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 03:08 PM

Mercury contamination found in a quarter of U.S. freshwater fish exceeds federal safe levels for human consumption, according to a study released today by the U.S. Geological Survey.

The agency examined mercury in fish, sediment and water drawn from 291 rivers and streams between 1998 and 2005, finding 25 percent carried mercury at levels above the safe standard for human consumption (0.3 parts per million wet weight), while all of the fish had detectable mercury levels.

"This study shows just how widespread mercury pollution has become in our air, watersheds, and many of our fish in freshwater streams," Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said in a statement. "This science sends a clear message that our country must continue to confront pollution, restore our nation's waterways, and protect the public from potential health dangers."

Some of the highest levels of mercury in fish were found in "blackwater" streams in North and South Carolina, Georgia, Florida and Louisiana, all of which have large, undeveloped, forested watersheds. Some high levels were also found in the western United States, which the scientists attributed to mining.

Makes you think twice about wanting to eat fish.
If you must eat it in a survival situation, try not to eat it too often.

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 03:12 PM
It does depend on the fish, though. Different species of fish absorb mercury better than others. But I'm sure location can contribute as well. But it's still safer to eat specific types of fish over others.

Flounder= good. Swordfish= bad.

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 03:31 PM
We used to eat alot of local walleye when it was"in season" but quit because last year they tested the lake for mercury and the levels were astonishing high. Trout from the streams would seem safer, but I worry about that too as there is alot of pollution from the paper mills, and air pollution out of TN. We just quit eating it all together.

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 04:03 PM
Sounds like revelations right out of the bibel kinda dosnt it? Im not a big fish eater, VERY picky about it. But..i thik we all shuold be concerned at this point WHERE the mercury is coming from. I have a theory....LANDFILLS. Yes, landfills. I did some recent reading on how they work. Landills are made, garbage dumped, and household garbage is FULL of chemicals and toxins. example of that, would be the new energy conserving light bulbs..they all say on the box danger.contains mercury. Im sure thiers medical waste being dumped as well, to curb costs from hospitols. Hell if they can extract deadly fluoride from the phosphorus and fertilizer industry and poison us by putting it in our toothpaste! I am not the least bit shocked at this news, let alone the platic garbage floating near hawaii, thats twice the size of the USA. Apparelty, landfills are not working.
Landfills, all have pipes and/or hoses to pump any water that builds up in them out, usualy into local waterways or bodys. Hence forth, mercury light bulbs end up in city trash, go to landfill, water is pumped out contaminated with mercury..and we get posioned fish.

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 04:08 PM
Ciggarette butts too! I once found years ago, an actual list of well over 600 chemicals ciggarette companys use in making them. Formaldyahade for sure, ammonia, chlorine ect ect. i owuld not be the lest bit suprised, if minute traces of metals and related metals are in thier. Since ciggareetee butts go to the lnadfill, that too would add to the water being pumped out into lakes, streams ect ect.

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 04:18 PM
According to the USGS huh... I wonder if there are any independent 3rd party studies that back these findings up.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not contesting, I know Mercury contamination in fish is real, and is a big deal, especially for me as I love fish, just keeping an open mind.

Remember when Chick-Fil-A launched the "Eat more Chikin" campaign? With a big cow trying to convince everyone to eat chicken?

Well, couple that strategy with the recent shyness towards beef due to the fact that it's been riddled with hormones and fed genetically altered feed.

Now add that to the fact that much of the fish we consume is wild-caught, well outside the scope of influence of mafias like Monsanto, and a scary report from the USGS on the toxicity of fish could be viewed as another "Eat more Chikin" campaign. Y'know? "Don't eat that fish, we can't control the quality. Instead, go back to our tasty beef and plumped chicken."

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 04:29 PM
Well, if all else fails, you can always hang it upside down to the outside of the house just like a thermostat...

posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 03:48 AM
A study reported in the journal Science in 1972 found that fish in the Smithsonian Museum that were caught in the late 1800s had average methylmercury levels of 0.38 parts per million (ppm). In comparison, fish samples analyzed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1978 contained an average of 0.16 ppm of methylmercury while more recent tests conducted by FDA found an average of 0.12 ppm in the 25 most commonly consumed fish;

In other words, the fish have always had high levels of mercury, even before people starting burning coal."
And since we have been burning more coal the mercury levels have been dropping??????????????????

Its not that the mercury levels are raising its that our scientific test are getting better at detecting lower levels and getting more accurate.

top topics


log in