SM2
Hazard to Others
Posts: 359
Registered: 8-5-2012
Location: the Irish Springs
Member Is Offline
Mood: Affect
|
|
Mercury in fish
Intuitively, perhaps once the toxic forms of Hg have reached low or even (especially high) order species, it has bonded covalently and denatralized
proteins. Thus, perhaps eating fish with a relatively high Hg content may not be so unhealthy after all. However, if that Hg somehow energetically
gets stripped and converted to an alkyl Hg, all bets are off.
Just think it's an intriguing thing to think about - Hg in fish- the damage has already been done. Eating whatever sea ford might be more like
eating protein with a little Calomel sprinkled on.
Now X-Ray and gamma from Japan is a whole other story.
|
|
|
DDTea
National Hazard
Posts: 940
Registered: 25-2-2003
Location: Freedomland
Member Is Offline
Mood: Degenerate
|
|
It isn't elemental mercury that bioconcentrates in fish; it is methyl mercury and dimethyl mercury that are absorbed and retained by the fatty tissues
of fish that swim in contaminated waters.
The damage has not necessarily been done already. There are compounds present in toxic algal blooms that also bioconcentrate in fish. This is why at
certain times of year, barracuda can be poisonous when eaten. Think about it: barracuda are not venomous or poisonous animals in and of themselves!
"In the end the proud scientist or philosopher who cannot be bothered to make his thought accessible has no choice but to retire to the heights in
which dwell the Great Misunderstood and the Great Ignored, there to rail in Olympic superiority at the folly of mankind." - Reginald Kapp.
|
|
|
AJKOER
Radically Dubious
Posts: 3026
Registered: 7-5-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
OK, in my opinion, the questionable good news is that inorganic Hg compounds released into the atmosphere (chiefly from ongoing and increasing coal
burning) are turned into CH3Hg+ (the monomethylmercury(II) cation) by aquatic anaerobic organisms. So detection and cleanup need to chiefly focus on
this cation.
The bad news is that it is highly toxic to marine life which, in itself, has not been an historic course changer for policy makers (for example, the
death/dying of coral reefs throughout the world, isn't front page news, if news at all). But, as the methylmercury presence is now significant enough
to poison people (and perhaps, therefore, selfishly important), there is more pressure to alter bad policy (which I, for one, consider good news).
Now, in America, it is probably wise for an industry (like fishing) that could be the blunt of a serious economic impact (as the fear of eating any
fish spreads) to act early. This is due to the fact that a weak/declining US industry has increasingly diluted lobbying/political power to effect
change in their interest. Now normally, this is a constructive process, but in this case, for those with a longer term prospective of having to live
on planet Earth, perhaps not.
[Edited on 24-8-2012 by AJKOER]
|
|
|
SM2
Hazard to Others
Posts: 359
Registered: 8-5-2012
Location: the Irish Springs
Member Is Offline
Mood: Affect
|
|
I think you guys know a hell of a lot more than I do.
|
|
|
DDTea
National Hazard
Posts: 940
Registered: 25-2-2003
Location: Freedomland
Member Is Offline
Mood: Degenerate
|
|
In fairness, I have been working in an ecotoxicology lab for almost a year now. In that time, I have done chemical analyses in support of
bioconcentration studies in bluegill fish for three different compounds, each lasting ~3 months. I've learned a fair bit about bioconcentration in
that time! 
"In the end the proud scientist or philosopher who cannot be bothered to make his thought accessible has no choice but to retire to the heights in
which dwell the Great Misunderstood and the Great Ignored, there to rail in Olympic superiority at the folly of mankind." - Reginald Kapp.
|
|
|
zed
International Hazard
Posts: 2277
Registered: 6-9-2008
Location: Great State of Jefferson, City of Portland
Member Is Offline
Mood: Semi-repentant Sith Lord
|
|
Ah, within walking distance, flows the mighty Willamette River. Therein, one might, with a little luck, land a 400 pound Sturgeon. A lifetime
supply. Especially since the huge fish, carry a huge Mercury load.
Healthy adult humans are advised to eat no more than one 8oz portion of Sturgeon per month.
[Edited on 8-9-2012 by zed]
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
