Mercury in Fish

Most consumers are aware that mercury (in the form of methylmercury pollution) can accumulate in the flesh of fish. Concentrations high enough to constitute a health risk my be found in some species such as swordfish.

Chen & Williams (2009) surveyed fish consumed in the United states and found that mercury levels declined significantly between 1995 and 2005. However they still recommend that pregnant women and children should not consume high quantities of the species most likely to accumulate mercury, such as swordfish and shark.

References:

• Chen DY, Williams VJ. (2009). Marine fish food in the United States and methylmercury risk. International Journal of Environmental Health Research, 19, 109-124.

Milk, Honey, and Big Macs

In "Weight Control in a Land of Milk and Honey" Lisa Terre paints a picture of an America in which unhealthy foods are pushed, in abundance, through relentless "predatory advertising practices".  These two factors leading to spiralling levels of obesity-combined with a disempowering bias against the obese and attribution of their problems simply to a lack of self-control.  Discounting the temporary effects of dieting Terre points instead to a more general pushback against this unhealthy climate.  However, how can health focused initiative be made effective? In the mean time the only solution for those suffering ill effects of being overweight seems to be careful self-monitoring and incremental lifestyle changes--with an overall 5-10% BMI reduction being a realistic goal.

References:

• Terre, L. (2007). Weight control in a land of milk and honey. Behavioral Medicine Review,1, 447-450.

Eating Emu in America

Emu meat is marketed as a healthy red meat with relatively low fat (2.5% versus over 5% for beef, Shao et al, 1999) and cholesterol.  Emus are farmed predominantly in the United States and Australia (Dingle, 1997). However a large scale market for this products has not developed.

Adams et al (2000) argue that emu meat is best marketed as a 'game animal' meat similar to duck and quail.  that is to say, most people would not buy it at the supermarket, but might be willing to try it in a restaurant setting. 

Their survey results suggest that the willingness of people to eat a new meat product, even in a fine dining context, is strongly affected by wider 'social acceptability'.  And at the time of the study the social acceptability of eating emu was consider somewhat low.  Based on its absence from restaurant menus (as far as I have observed) this still seems to be the case.

References:

• Adams, C.R., Hoover, L.C., Arnett. D.B. and Thomspon, L.D. (2000). Social acceptability's role in an expanded rational expectation model of intention to consume an innovative meat product in a restaurant setting. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 24, 252-262.
• Dingle, J.G. (1997). Emu and Ostrich production and its consequences for human nutrition. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society of Australia, 21, 37-43.
• Shao, C.H., Avens, J.S., Schmidt, G.R., Maga, J.A. (1999). Functional, sensory, and microbiological properties of restructured beef and emu steaks. Journal of Food Science, 64, 1052-1054.

Student Attitudes to GM Food

A survey of 372 students found that factors such as age, gender, bio tech knowledge, politics, religion and trust in government or industry had no consistent relation with willingness to eat transgenicc meat.  Fifty percent of the students indicated that they would eat transgenic meat. These students were also more likely to read labels when shopping, and they had higher trust that scientists are truthful about transgenic meat.

It is interesting that although the FDA and GM animal producers oppose labeling of BM products, as this study suggests that people who attend most to labels are also most accepting of GM meat products.  However this small student self-report study may not reflect actual shopping behavior, or the attitudes of the wider general public.

Sources:

• Ibrahim, M., Johnson, F. Brewer, A. (2010). Student response to transgenic meat: an analysis of a Fort Valley State University survey. 2010 Annual Meeting, February 6-9, 2010, Orlando, Florida. [Full Text]

FDA Considers GM Salmon

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is currently considering whether  genetically modified Atlantic salmon are safe for consumers, and whether it should carry special labelling.

AquaBounty Technologies Inc developed the fish to be fast growing, halving the normal 3 year growing period.  The GM fish produces growth hormones all year, rather than just in the summer.

AquaBounty appear to oppose labelling requirements that would identify the salmon to consumers as genetically modified.  Reuters report that David Edwards, head of animal biotechnology for the Biotechnology Industry said that special labelling:  "just causes confusion for the consumers."

Opponents question the safety of the product, and warn that escaped GM fish could devastate wild salmon populations.

Genetically engineered vegetables (such as corn and soy) are widely available, as a GM pet animals (e.g. Yorktown Technologies LP's GloFish).  However the Aqua Bounty salmon will be something of a test case when it comes to food animals. If AquaBounty obtain approval for their Atlantic salmon similar lines of tilapia and trout would likely follow.


Sources:

• Biotech salmon faces scrutiny at FDA panel
• FDA advisors to vote on genetically engineered salmon
• A genetically engineered fillet: GMO salmon and future food
• Has FDA Already Decided About Genetically Engineered Salmon?

Canada Protests Country of Origin Labelling

Country of Origin Labelling (COOL) has been in the news recently.  It currently requires that if an animal is raised in Canada, but processed in the United States, it must be labelled as "Canadian".

Republican senator Saxby Chambliss, who is currently visiting Canada, supports the law.  He argues that because Canadian products are of a high quality, comparable to American products, the label should produce no disadvantage.

However the Canadian government feels this practice  places the Canadian product at a disadvantage in the American market because Americans want to 'buy American' even when other products are of similar quality. Canada and Mexico  are protesting to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) that COOL labelling represents an unwarranted barrier to trade.

Sources:

• U.S. senator backs meat labelling law [CBC]
• Country-of-origin meat labelling on the way [Times Colonist]

Recall: Hallmark Fisheries Crabmeat

Hallmark Fisheries (Oregan) is recalling crabmeat products. The effected products are large containers are used by food service companies and so it is unlikely that members of the public will have them in their larders.  The recall relates to five-pound cans, one-pound vacuum packs, one-pound plastic tubs, and eight-ounce plastic tubs of crabmeat branded Hallmark, Peacock, Yaquina Bay and Quality Ocean International. The recall affects the states of Washington, Nevada, Oregon and California.

The potential contaminant is a bacterium called Listeria (Listeria monocytogenes) which can cause an illness (called: listeriosis) in young children, the elderly or people with weakened immune systems.  Pregnant women should avoid products that might contain Listeria is it is can be transmitted to the baby at birth and potential cause meningitis. Listeria results in 2,500 illnesses and 500 deaths in the United States each year.

• Listeria Prompts Crabmeat Recall
• Hallmark Fisheries recalls crab meat products distributed in Nevada
• Crab Meat Product Recall In Nevada