More than half (57%) of cans tuna that are consumed in the European market exceed the maximum mercury established for fish (0.3 mg/kg), warns a report carried out by international organizations Bloom and food watchwhich denounces that this limit be superior1 mg/kg, for fresh and canned tuna.
“More than one can in two exceeds the most restrictive maximum mercury concentration defined for seafood (0.3 mg/kg). If this most restrictive maximum mercury concentration were also applied to tuna, the sale of more than one can of every two would be prohibited“warns the report that has randomly analyzed 148 canned tuna in five European countries (Germany, England, Spain, France and Italy).
In addition, of the 148 cans analyzed, one can of the brand Petit Navirepurchased at a Carrefour City store in Paris contains a record concentration of 3.9 mg/kg. This represents almost 4 times the maximum concentration of fresh tuna and 13 times the restriction of 0.3 mg/kg. Meanwhile, of the 30 that come from Spain, a can of the Carrefour brand purchased in a supermarket in Valencia had a record level of 2.5 mg/kg, that is, more than 8 times higher than the limit.
According to them, this report reveals a “true scandal of health “public opinion” on the contamination of tunas by mercury. Although this concerns all or almost all tunas caught, BLOOM wants to emphasize that, “in addition to mercury contamination in the environment, the main reason for this health problem lies in the industrialization of said fishing and the resulting overconsumption of tuna”.
On the other hand, for obvious health reasons described in this research, but also due to the “disastrous” environmental, social and economic impacts of industrial fishing described in previous reports in his series TunaGatethey consider that tuna “can no longer be considered a basic food”. After 18 months of investigation, BLOOM reveals how, since the 70s, public powers and lobby of tuna “have consciously chosen to promote economic interests of industrial tuna fishing to the detriment of the health of hundreds of millions of tuna consumers in Europe”.
In the report they recall that canned tuna “benefits from additional legal measures and it is necessary that they can legally reach concentrations nine times higher than the maximum limit for other species”: the current standard applies to fresh tuna and not to the finished product. Now, he points out, “canned tuna” loses a lot of water With respect to fresh tuna and mercury, therefore, it is two to three times more concentrated in a canned product than in a piece of fresh fish. By consuming canned tuna as is, it is not rehydrated and, consequently, the mercury concentration is maintained.”
“No method taking into account all the consequences on the health of adults and children has been used to determine mercury concentrations in fish,” he laments, recalling that “pets are more protected of mercury than babies”, since the thresholds that apply to cans for pets are more binding than those used for human food.
“Mercury is a powerful neurotoxic It is fixed in the brain and is very difficult to eliminate. “Everyone knows it,” explains Julie Guterman, a researcher at BLOOM and main author of the survey. “I found it hard to believe that industrialists and politicians could knowingly opt for criminal cynicism, but I had to face the facts. Acting before regulatory thresholds were set means that manufacturers and retailers can now legally sell contaminated products. Making believe people that eating tuna is safe from a health point of view is a unforgivable lie with dramatic consequences,” he warns.
Measures proposed by the report
In his opinion, a mercury threshold, classified as acceptable, must be set three times higher for tuna than for other species of fish, such as cod, without the slightest health justification, demonstrating that “this danger threshold does not exist.” “has been established to protect human health, but only to protect the financial interests of the tuna industry,” since mercury is no less toxic in the still than in any other fish.
Given this situation, and considering that tuna is the best-selling fish in Europeasks distributors to commit to marketing only tuna that does not exceed the most protective mercury standard possible (0.3 mg/kg; also, the European Commission must take conservative measures for tuna, aligning with the stricter maximum concentration previously set for some fish: 0.3 mg/kg; and the controls of the entire tuna production chain must be reinforced, both at the public and private levels, so that truly protective standards for public health are respected.
Furthermore, they consider that national authorities must carry out massive information campaigns in this regard so that citizens know the risks of consuming these products, especially for the most sensitive public (pregnant women, children, etc.), applying a label on fish in the predatory category and products that contain them to warn clearly of the health danger posed by the ingestion of mercury.
In the medium term, it calls for a change in European regulation 915/2023, which sets the maximum concentrations of mercury in food products, and must be updated, in collaboration with the elected members of the European Parliament. Due to the toxicity of mercury, the tolerable weekly intake (TSI) should be deleted and consumption recommendations must be evaluated again; and the committees of the European Commission such as the SCoPAFF (Standing Committee on Plant Animal Food and Feed), which has decision-making power on key issues such as pesticide residues, GMOs and contaminants in food, must demonstrate a full transparency and they must make their decisions following a democratic process.
The AESAN asks not to fall into “alarmism”
For its part, the Spanish Agency for Food Safety and Nutrition (AESAN) states that “tuna consumption is safe” and asks “not to fall into alarmism.” Furthermore, they point out that the European report “deals with a well-known problem that has been the subject of study and evaluation by health authorities”, and as a consequence the maximum limits and current consumption recommendations are established.
At the same time, they remember that “the reason for establishing a different level for tuna is due to the size and type of feeding of these fish and is supported by the levels found in the samples analyzed.” “A maximum limit cannot be established below the value found in the samples, since it is not possible to take any action to reduce the level present in the fish once once captured,” the same sources point out.
Regarding the lack of control, the agency that depends on the Ministry of Consumer Affairsrecalls that last year in Spain, 4,021 inspections were carried out on manufacturers and packers of fishing products, “in order to verify compliance with food safety regulations, resulting in a compliance with food regulations at 90.43% of the inspections carried out in this sector”.
Likewise, they reiterate that fish consumption is “safe and beneficial for health”, and the “healthy and sustainable” dietary recommendations of the AESAN establish a consumption of fish (alternating white and blue) of between 3 and 4 servings a week. Finally, given the possibility that there is an excess of mercury in the cans sold in Spanish supermarkets, claim that the AESAN “has never observed” a higher level of mercury in canned tuna. “In fact, the concentration factors that we use include a factor of 1 applicable to canned tuna for mercury,” they conclude.
#tuna #cans #market #exceed #established #maximum #mercury #limit
