Tuna and Mercury

I looked up fish mercury levels at the department of agriculture.
Canned tuna had the most.
It said that it has about 40 times the amount of
mercury than salmon does.

So I keep eating salmon and have cut back
on the canned tuna!!!

"Nick" <[email hidden]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I looked up fish mercury levels at the department of agriculture.
Canned tuna had the most.
It said that it has about 40 times the amount of
mercury than salmon does.

So I keep eating salmon and have cut back
on the canned tuna!!!

well.. 40 times what amount?
you can find traces of mercury pretty much everywhere.. it all boils down to
the quantities.

MMu said:

well.. 40 times what amount?
you can find traces of mercury pretty much everywhere.. it all boils down to
the quantities.

Silly me! Here I thought that the chemical form of mercury in fish is
what determines how much if any will be absorbed by the body.

Go figure!

___/ On Wednesday 24 August 2005 15:01, [Mr-Natural-Health] wrote : \___

Quoted message said:

MMu said:

well.. 40 times what amount?
you can find traces of mercury pretty much everywhere.. it all boils down
to the quantities.

Silly me! Here I thought that the chemical form of mercury in fish is
what determines how much if any will be absorbed by the body.

Go figure!

Is anything known about its affect on the body, e.g. the brain, the liver
and so forth? The salmon recommendation was a useful one, but what I worry
about more are the direct or indirect, short- and long-term effects of
mercury absorption...

Many thanks,

Roy

"Mr-Natural-Health" <[email hidden]> schrieb im
Newsbeitrag news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

MMu said:

well.. 40 times what amount?
you can find traces of mercury pretty much everywhere.. it all boils down
to
the quantities.

Silly me! Here I thought that the chemical form of mercury in fish is
what determines how much if any will be absorbed by the body.

fish bind mercury as methylmercury cysteine or something chemically very
similar to that-
there is a dose/effect relationship proportional to the ammount of mercury
found in fish.

do you honestly disagree that the quantity of mercury plays a bigger role
than the "times amount" comparison?

I don't remember the exact amount; only the 40
fold difference between Salman and the canned tuna.

Google it. I believe its at the department of agriculture's
website.

Roy Schestowitz said:

Is anything known about its affect on the body, e.g. the brain, the liver
and so forth? The salmon recommendation was a useful one, but what I worry
about more are the direct or indirect, short- and long-term effects of
mercury absorption...

Yes Roy, we do know about the long-term effects mercury has on the
brain. Just look at our resident village idiot John Gohde, aka
Mr-Natural-Health. That ought to make you cringe. I know it makes me
cringe.

RBR

___/ On Thursday 25 August 2005 05:47, [RBR] wrote : \___

Quoted message said:

Roy Schestowitz said:

Is anything known about its affect on the body, e.g. the brain, the liver
and so forth? The salmon recommendation was a useful one, but what I worry
about more are the direct or indirect, short- and long-term effects of
mercury absorption...

Yes Roy, we do know about the long-term effects mercury has on the
brain. Just look at our resident village idiot John Gohde, aka
Mr-Natural-Health. That ought to make you cringe. I know it makes me
cringe.

I have looked up and found some mentionings of the name so I now know what
you mean. Wikipedia anarchist... "Achieving good Nutrition is an Art, NOT a
Science!" is apparently his famous idiotic statement.

I come here as a scientist, not as a village idiot. Somebody suggested that
there are way to measure and dispose of heavy metals in our bodies. I
wonder if that's an urban legend. The poster sounded as if he knew what he
was referring to. I still am not sure to what extent mercury is the body is
damaging and in what sense.

Roy

Roy Schestowitz said:

___/ On Thursday 25 August 2005 05:47, [RBR] wrote : \___

Quoted message said:

Roy Schestowitz said:

Is anything known about its affect on the body, e.g. the brain, the liver
and so forth? The salmon recommendation was a useful one, but what I worry
about more are the direct or indirect, short- and long-term effects of
mercury absorption...

Yes Roy, we do know about the long-term effects mercury has on the
brain. Just look at our resident village idiot John Gohde, aka
Mr-Natural-Health. That ought to make you cringe. I know it makes me
cringe.

I come here as a scientist, not as a village idiot. Somebody suggested that
there are way to measure and dispose of heavy metals in our bodies. I
wonder if that's an urban legend. The poster sounded as if he knew what he
was referring to. still am not sure to what extent mercury is the body is
damaging and in what sense.

PubMedCentral.com is your friend. Here's a starter:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12711426&query_hl=16

RBR said:

Yes Roy, we do know about the long-term effects mercury has on the
brain. Just look at our resident village idiot John Gohde, aka
Mr-Natural-Health. That ought to make you cringe. I know it makes me
cringe.

Ah! I see that RBR 'the one Knee Wonder' read my post on that other
thread and is able to hobble along well enough to punch his scribble on
a keyboard. 🙂

You have my condolences.

Roy Schestowitz said:

Quoted message said:

Silly me! Here I thought that the chemical form of mercury in fish is
what determines how much if any will be absorbed by the body.

Go figure!

Is anything known about its affect on the body, e.g. the brain, the liver
and so forth? The salmon recommendation was a useful one, but what I worry
about more are the direct or indirect, short- and long-term effects of
mercury absorption...

Well, perhaps if you were to concentrate?

The chemical form of mercury in fish is what determines how much if any
will be absorbed by the body. It is all a matter of biochemistry. And,
if you were to care to research the issue you would in fact find
reports stating that the chemical form of mercury found in fish means
that the actual effect on your brain is not as bad as most people are
reporting. Of course, it helps to have been following the health
reports for a couple of years.

Some people just need to be whining about something.

You have my condolences.

Roy Schestowitz said:

I have done some reading on the subject in Wikipedia, being a source which I
consider relatively reliable. The information was rather limited though.

Wikipedia?

The articles in Wikipedia do NOT make any health claims.

Just thought that you might want to know.

_____/ On Thursday 25 August 2005 16:57, [Mr-Natural-Health] wrote : \_____

Quoted message said:

Roy Schestowitz said:

Quoted message said:

Silly me! Here I thought that the chemical form of mercury in fish is
what determines how much if any will be absorbed by the body.

Go figure!

Is anything known about its affect on the body, e.g. the brain, the liver
and so forth? The salmon recommendation was a useful one, but what I
worry about more are the direct or indirect, short- and long-term effects
of mercury absorption...

Well, perhaps if you were to concentrate?

I was, but my knowledge in chemistry and biochemistry is mere.

Quoted message said:

The chemical form of mercury in fish is what determines how much if any
will be absorbed by the body. It is all a matter of biochemistry. And,
if you were to care to research the issue you would in fact find
reports stating that the chemical form of mercury found in fish means
that the actual effect on your brain is not as bad as most people are
reporting. Of course, it helps to have been following the health
reports for a couple of years.

Some people just need to be whining about something.

You have my condolences.

Thanks for the information.

Roy

Roy Schestowitz said:

there are dangers associated with tuna
consumption, especially among pregnant women and the foetus. However, what
implications would a daily consumption of tuna have on an average man? What
will be the short- and long-term effects of it, if any?

The whole issue of tuna is really quite mute!

You will be hard pressed to find any brand of canned tunafish that
contains more than one ounce of fat per serving. The low-fat craze and
the female mind has pretty much motivated all tuna canning companies to
drain all the fat from tuna fish.

In order to get any amount of Omega-3 EFAs from canned tuna, you need
at least 3 ounces of fat per serving. Since all the Omega-3 EFAs have
been drained from most brands of tunafish, any knowledgeable person
interested in their health and who has spent a minimal amount of time
researching the issue would NOT be consuming tuna in the first place,
regardless of the mercury issue.

Just my opinion, but I am right as always. 🙂

___/ On Thursday 25 August 2005 17:11, [Mr-Natural-Health] wrote : \___

Quoted message said:

Roy Schestowitz said:

there are dangers associated with tuna
consumption, especially among pregnant women and the foetus. However,
what implications would a daily consumption of tuna have on an average
man? What will be the short- and long-term effects of it, if any?

The whole issue of tuna is really quite mute!

You will be hard pressed to find any brand of canned tunafish that
contains more than one ounce of fat per serving. The low-fat craze and
the female mind has pretty much motivated all tuna canning companies to
drain all the fat from tuna fish.

I'd prefer it without the fat actually. I get enough fat and carbohydrates
from the rest of my diet. Tuna tends to compensate for a low protein
intake.

Quoted message said:

In order to get any amount of Omega-3 EFAs from canned tuna, you need
at least 3 ounces of fat per serving. Since all the Omega-3 EFAs have
been drained from most brands of tunafish, any knowledgeable person
interested in their health and who has spent a minimal amount of time
researching the issue would NOT be consuming tuna in the first place,
regardless of the mercury issue.

Just my opinion, but I am right as always. 🙂

I do not have an appeal for tuna due to Omega-3. For the time being, I just
worry about undesirable contents such as mercury, which the media makes a
hype of, perhaps justifiably, perhaps not.

___/ Also wrote: \___

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I have done some reading on the subject in Wikipedia, being a source
which I consider relatively reliable. The information was rather limited
though.

Wikipedia?

The articles in Wikipedia do NOT make any health claims.

Just thought that you might want to know.

I have a hard time trusting you not just because of RBR, but also because of
your banishment from Wikipedia. No offence intended.

Roy

Roy Schestowitz said:

I have a hard time trusting you not just because of RBR, but also because of
your banishment from Wikipedia. No offence intended.

Roy

Yeah, ...right, sure. I happen to have posted to my user page just a
few days ago. I think that I will now try to write your name on my
talk page, right now.

Just thought that you might want to know.

Mr-Natural-Health said:

RBR said:

Yes Roy, we do know about the long-term effects mercury has on the
brain. Just look at our resident village idiot John Gohde, aka
Mr-Natural-Health. That ought to make you cringe. I know it makes me
cringe.

Ah! I see that RBR 'the one Knee Wonder' read my post on that other
thread and is able to hobble along well enough to punch his scribble on
a keyboard. 🙂

You have my condolences.

Methinks my one bad knee would still kick your ass in a 10K race. :o)

Apart from sitting around eating [censored] and letting all your teeth rot,
did you actually do something athletic in your youth, inquiring minds
wanna know.

Your parents have *my* condolences.

RBR

RBR said:

Methinks my one bad knee would still kick your ass in a 10K race. :o)

Apart from sitting around eating [censored] and letting all your teeth rot,
did you actually do something athletic in your youth, inquiring minds
wanna know.

Me thinks that my two good strong legs could kick in that one lame knee
of yours to make a matching pair.

Ha, ... Hah, Ha! RBR let one of his knees rot. What kind of a role
model are you? Oh, I know now. You are a failure.

Just my opinion, but I am right as usual. 🙂

Mr-Natural-Health said:

RBR said:

Methinks my one bad knee would still kick your ass in a 10K race. :o)

Apart from sitting around eating [censored] and letting all your teeth rot,
did you actually do something athletic in your youth, inquiring minds
wanna know.

Me thinks that my two good strong legs could kick in that one lame knee
of yours to make a matching pair.

Ha, ... Hah, Ha! RBR let one of his knees rot. What kind of a role
model are you? Oh, I know now. You are a failure.

So you basically did nothing, as I thought. Talk about a failure. LOL.

Quoted message said:

Just my opinion, but I am right as usual. 🙂

Ah, the spokesperson for the American Dental Association speaks!

Loser!

RBR