We have a long and storied past with the New York Times that grew out of an article penned by Marian Burros that was, in the end, colossally off base and required not just a correction but a public admonishment from the papers ombudsmen. So, when we see the Old Grey Lady straying into well charted and questionable territory we do what we always do and insist on the facts.

This week began with such a straying. Our letter is below;

March 30, 2010

John Geddes

Managing Editor

New York Times

VIA Email

Dear Mr. Geddes,

Mondays New York Times included an article by Martha Rose Shulman titled Getting More Fish in Your Diet. From a dietary and public health perspective, Shulmans aim with this report is an admirable one; however, she miscommunicates some very clear joint Food and Drug Administration (FDA)/Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) seafood consumption advice. The advice is, first and foremost, only for the population of women who are or may become pregnant, nursing moms, and young children. Ms. Shulman fails to identify this target audience. Next, her guidance on tuna is inconsistent with the federal advice. Here is it, verbatim:

Eat up to 12 ounces (2 average meals) a week of a variety of fish and shellfish that are lower in mercury.

• Five of the most commonly eaten fish that are low in mercury are shrimp, canned light tuna, salmon, pollock, and catfish.
• Another commonly eaten fish, albacore (“white”) tuna has more mercury than canned light tuna. So, when choosing your two meals of fish and shellfish, you may eat up to 6 ounces (one average meal) of albacore tuna per week.

In summary, for the target population, 12 ounces of a variety of fish per week are safe and healthful. As much as half (6 ounces) can be albacore tuna.

Ms. Shulman also makes some sustainability claims that are erroneous.

Shulman begins her discussion of tuna by noting that consumers should choose canned light or skipjack because it is a smaller species that is not at risk of extinction. Despite what perhaps her sources at the Environmental Defense Fund might suggest there are no tuna stocks that are used in canning that are at risk of extinction. I would direct her to the WWF partnership; International Seafood Sustainably Foundation (ISSF) which reports that despite challenges with some stocks, there are none facing extinction.

We ask that you correct her work in order to provide your readers with the best possible independent information about seafood and seafood consumption.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Jennifer McGuire, MS, RD

National Fisheries Institute