Anabolics
Search More Than 6,000,000 Posts
Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    Yung Wun is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    In The Chocolate Factory
    Posts
    698

    Mercury in Fish May Be Less Toxic Than Believed

    Mercury in Fish May Be Less Toxic Than Believed

    Reuters Health
    By Maggie Fox
    Thursday, August 28, 2003


    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The mercury that builds up in fish may be less dangerous than people feared, scientists said on Thursday.

    The finding by the researchers, which may come as good news to pregnant women and others who have eaten fish, indicated the structure of the mercury compounds may make them less toxic to people, though they stressed more study is needed.

    "There may be reason for cautious optimism," Graham George, who did the work at the Stanford University Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory in Menlo Park, California, said in a statement.

    "The mercury in fish may not be as toxic as many people think - but there is a lot we need to find out before we can make this conclusion," added George, now at the University of Saskatchewan in Saskatoon, Canada.

    Mercury is a potent neurotoxin that is especially harmful to developing fetuses and can cause sensory loss, tremors, loss of muscular coordination, speech, hearing, and visual problems, as well as increased risk of heart attack.

    A metal, it can build up in tissues.

    It gets into the environment when toxic waste is burned and the mercury molecules fall from the smoke onto the ground and into water. There it builds up in the bodies of animals that eat contaminated plants and drink contaminated water.

    Predatory fish, such as tuna, swordfish and lake bass, are especially likely to have high levels of mercury in their flesh. For this reason, the U.S. government advises pregnant women to limit how much they eat.

    But an important factor is what the mercury, a reactive element, binds with and environmental toxicology experiments have presumed it is methylated - tied up with carbon and hydrogen atoms.

    But George and colleagues report in this week's online edition of the journal Science that the mercury in fish is actually attached to both a carbon atom and a sulfur atom.

    And since sulfur attaches more tightly to other elements than methyl groups do - it is possible that would make the mercury less likely to be metabolized, or taken up, by the body.

    The researchers used a technique called X-ray absorption spectroscopy to look at the physical structure of the mercury compounds in fish muscle tissue.

    They tested day-old zebra fish larvae and found the sulfur-mercury compound was less toxic than methylmercury chloride, the compound often used to determine the toxicity of mercury in fish.

    "People have used methylmercury chloride to model the toxic properties of mercury in fish because they don't know what's on the mercury. And now that we know what's on the mercury in fish tissue, we can better investigate its toxic properties," said George.

    Now they will look at what form of mercury compound accumulates in mammals that eat mercury-laden fish.

    "Once we understand how mercury is bound in mammalian tissues, we'll be ideally poised to design a drug that could perhaps remove it," George said.

    Canadian Bodybuilding forums
    Last edited by Yung Wun; 11-14-2013 at 07:05 PM.

  2. #2
    cb25's Avatar
    cb25 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    AZ to MA...depends on whe
    Posts
    2,781
    Interesting...i've always heard about the dangers of methylmercury in tuna...now it seems like their claims are a bit off base...however, i don't think that sulfated mercury is all that much less toxic...heavy metals in large amounts (even the necessary ones - iron, zinc etc) is never good...

  3. #3
    flex_300 is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    6
    good post! I have read a similar article recently. It said that tuna and swordfish, a couple of the many fish listed for their mecury content, are safe to eat as long as they are not consumed at every meal of the day

  4. #4
    cb25's Avatar
    cb25 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    AZ to MA...depends on whe
    Posts
    2,781
    Quote Originally Posted by flex_300
    good post! I have read a similar article recently. It said that tuna and swordfish, a couple of the many fish listed for their mecury content, are safe to eat as long as they are not consumed at every meal of the day
    I think that's safe to say. The most important message of the dangers of Mercury are to pregnant mothers and small children. These are the people who are most susceptible to the dangers...for the rest of us, a moderate amount shouldn't hurt.

  5. #5
    timmz11's Avatar
    timmz11 is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    132
    i would have to agree...pregnant mothers and small children would be at the largest risk because their brain is still in developement...exspecially during the last month of pregnancy...for the rest of us...i would think i decent amont of tuna swordfish..etc...would be ok..
    but i do have one question....what would you think a safe amont of tuna would be? i mean to most of us who want to build muscle mass with out a ton of fat.tuna is one of our best sources..no carbs and low far...tons of protein..sooo
    tell me what u think about this guys...
    is 2-3 cans a day safe?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •