Mercury Policy Project : In Their Own Words

What They Tell You About:


ScienceA February 2008 Mercury Policy Project/Oceana report cited research it says found "...mercury exposure could increase the risk of cardiovascular complications ..."

The same report examined testing done on seafood samples, like tuna, to determine their mercury content and compared them to FDA data.


What They're Not Telling You

The study referenced here did show that men who ate the highest levels of omega-3 and the lowest levels of mercury had the least risk of heart attack. But all men who ate the highest levels of omega-3s had a drastically reduced risk of heart attack over 40 percent, regardless of mercury.

That 40 percent reduction in risk is consistent with one of the most comprehensive studies to date on the impact of seafood consumption that finds eating fish 1-2 times per week reduces risk of dying from heart disease by 36 percent.

When it comes to its tuna testing, the Mercury Policy Project / Oceana report only tested 23 samples, while the FDA tested 228. What's more those 23 tests found average mercury concentration levels well below the FDA's "action level"-in other words, tuna took the test and passed.

The Tough Questions:
Why would an organization whose mission is so reliant on science find it acceptable to distort research to fit its rhetorical needs?