5 ms·

The article doesn't mention meat and dairy as a source of surprisingly high levels pesticides and their byproducts. [1] https://medium.com/center-for-biologica

by cesnja 8y ago

The article doesn't mention meat and dairy as a source of surprisingly high levels pesticides and their byproducts. [1] https://medium.com/center-for-biological-diversity/does-meat-contain-pesticides-c587f6b252e7 https://medium.com/center-for-biological-diversity/does-meat...

fencepost 8y ago
That's what happens when you're effectively an apex predator - you eat the things that eat the things with contamination and much of it gets concentrated into you, particularly the things that bioaccumulate over time. Outside of pesticides but similar, that's why it's important to limit things like tuna consumption particularly from larger species that can build to high mercury levels.
- beenBoutIT 8y ago
  IIRC, there has never been a case of mercury toxicity from normal consumption of commercial seafood recorded in any American medical journal. These larger species you mention could exist outside of that sphere.
  - jdietrich 8y ago
    Define "normal consumption". Some bodybuilders and strength athletes eat large quantities of tuna as a low-fat source of protein; a non-trivial proportion of dieters rely on fish as their main source of protein. These may be unusually high levels of consumption, but they aren't edge cases and aren't prima facie stupid if you're unaware of the risk of mercury toxicity. A lot of smart, health-conscious people end up with dangerously high levels of mercury precisely because they believe that seafood is a healthy option and aren't aware of the risk of mercury exposure. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12676623/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12676623/
  - idontpost 8y ago
    Literally on the first page of google results for "mercury toxicity from normal consumption of commercial seafood": https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4721310/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4721310/ Cites dozens of studies of cases of adverse effects from mercury from seafood.
    - xyzzyz 8y ago
      This is pretty worthless study. They are doing multiple comparisons without doing Bonferroni correction. Once you do that, there's no significant finding. On top of that, they have stupidly large 95% confidence intervals, their test metrics are pretty weak, and they only have blood levels of Hg of only a fraction of study participants. They seem to attempt to control for confounds, which is commendable, but with their sample being rather small, there's little hope of obtaining significant finding after controlling and correcting for multiple comparisons. Controling for confounds here is the most important part really. It's like all the studies finding that people drinking wine have better health outcomes -- it turns out that wealthy people both are more likely to drink more wine, and have better health outcomes for reasons other than drinking wine. If you don't control for that, you'll find spurious associations.
  - chmln 8y ago
    I would bet that mercury toxicity is incredibly underdiagnosed, especially if it's not acute. Fatigue, insomnia, and a host of other symptoms are fairly common and not easy to spot as a part of a bigger problem. Anecdata: when I went to a large hospital they laughed off my idea that I have heavy metal poisoning and didn't even have the facilities to test for it. Only months later after visiting a naturopath and getting tested did my suspicions get confirmed. This case will never be on any official health records.
    - omalleyt 8y ago
      What was the treatment?
      - joenathanone 8y ago
        >heavy metal poisoning Only treatment I'm aware of is some light jazz or R&B.
      - cogman10 8y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_metal_detoxification https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_metal_detoxification Dialysis and depending on the metal Chelation. Both suck and neither were likely prescribed by a naturopath.
    - Alex3917 8y ago
      It's actually common in startup founders who sell their startups and then start eating expensive sushi all the time. My understanding is that several billionaires in silicon valley have mild Parkinson's-like tremors because of this.
      - nubbins 8y ago
        High end omakase meals generally come with 1 or 2 .5 oz pieces of tuna. Even at 3x a day it would be comparable to one can of tuna. Of course mercury varies heavily from fish to fish but unless they were living on tuna/swordfish this sounds like an urban legend or could be something else in raw fish like liver parasites or bacteria.
  - bobthepanda 8y ago
    It is worth noting that the FDA recommends limiting fish consumption to 12 oz a week for mercury-related reasons: https://www.fda.gov/food/foodborneillnesscontaminants/metals/ucm351781.htm https://www.fda.gov/food/foodborneillnesscontaminants/metals...
  - fingerlocks 8y ago
    My doctor claims to have treated several fishermen in the past for mercury toxicity. This doctor has been practicing in what was historically a “fishermen’s neighborhood” for some 30 years (Ballard area of Seattle) so it seemed plausible. I have nothing but this weak anecdote to contribute to the discussion. But I’ll ask the doc for details next time I’m in and report back when the topic comes up again.
gabbygab 8y ago
What does that matter? If we get it from directly from plants we eat or indirectly through meat, you are still getting pesticides.
- gpantazes 8y ago
  Wouldn't it be interesting if we didn't get the same level of pesticides through meat & dairy? I think it's worthwhile information to point out.
- goda90 8y ago
  What if we go to regulate pesticides, and through lobbying and special interest groups, animal feed gets less regulation. It'd be good to know that the pesticides can affect people even if their grains and vegetables don't get sprayed.
- jdietrich 8y ago
  >What does that matter? It's actionable information. If you're worried about ingesting pesticides, you might believe that eating fewer vegetables and more meat would be a safer option. The simple fact of bioaccumulation means that this would be the wrong approach.
- devmunchies 8y ago
  The amount of plants a cow eats vs a human is a big difference. You'll be exposed to less pesticides if you just eat plants instead of eating the cow and plants. I'm talking about factory farming where the cow is fed large amounts of corn and soy.

by cesnja 8y ago

fencepost 8y ago

That's what happens when you're effectively an apex predator - you eat the things that eat the things with contamination and much of it gets concentrated into you, particularly the things that bioaccumulate over time. Outside of pesticides but similar, that's why it's important to limit things like tuna consumption particularly from larger species that can build to high mercury levels.

beenBoutIT 8y ago
IIRC, there has never been a case of mercury toxicity from normal consumption of commercial seafood recorded in any American medical journal. These larger species you mention could exist outside of that sphere.
- jdietrich 8y ago
  Define "normal consumption". Some bodybuilders and strength athletes eat large quantities of tuna as a low-fat source of protein; a non-trivial proportion of dieters rely on fish as their main source of protein. These may be unusually high levels of consumption, but they aren't edge cases and aren't prima facie stupid if you're unaware of the risk of mercury toxicity. A lot of smart, health-conscious people end up with dangerously high levels of mercury precisely because they believe that seafood is a healthy option and aren't aware of the risk of mercury exposure. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12676623/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12676623/
- idontpost 8y ago
  Literally on the first page of google results for "mercury toxicity from normal consumption of commercial seafood": https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4721310/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4721310/ Cites dozens of studies of cases of adverse effects from mercury from seafood.
  - xyzzyz 8y ago
    This is pretty worthless study. They are doing multiple comparisons without doing Bonferroni correction. Once you do that, there's no significant finding. On top of that, they have stupidly large 95% confidence intervals, their test metrics are pretty weak, and they only have blood levels of Hg of only a fraction of study participants. They seem to attempt to control for confounds, which is commendable, but with their sample being rather small, there's little hope of obtaining significant finding after controlling and correcting for multiple comparisons. Controling for confounds here is the most important part really. It's like all the studies finding that people drinking wine have better health outcomes -- it turns out that wealthy people both are more likely to drink more wine, and have better health outcomes for reasons other than drinking wine. If you don't control for that, you'll find spurious associations.
- chmln 8y ago
  I would bet that mercury toxicity is incredibly underdiagnosed, especially if it's not acute. Fatigue, insomnia, and a host of other symptoms are fairly common and not easy to spot as a part of a bigger problem. Anecdata: when I went to a large hospital they laughed off my idea that I have heavy metal poisoning and didn't even have the facilities to test for it. Only months later after visiting a naturopath and getting tested did my suspicions get confirmed. This case will never be on any official health records.
  - omalleyt 8y ago
    What was the treatment?
    - joenathanone 8y ago
      >heavy metal poisoning Only treatment I'm aware of is some light jazz or R&B.
    - cogman10 8y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_metal_detoxification https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_metal_detoxification Dialysis and depending on the metal Chelation. Both suck and neither were likely prescribed by a naturopath.
  - Alex3917 8y ago
    It's actually common in startup founders who sell their startups and then start eating expensive sushi all the time. My understanding is that several billionaires in silicon valley have mild Parkinson's-like tremors because of this.
    - nubbins 8y ago
      High end omakase meals generally come with 1 or 2 .5 oz pieces of tuna. Even at 3x a day it would be comparable to one can of tuna. Of course mercury varies heavily from fish to fish but unless they were living on tuna/swordfish this sounds like an urban legend or could be something else in raw fish like liver parasites or bacteria.
- bobthepanda 8y ago
  It is worth noting that the FDA recommends limiting fish consumption to 12 oz a week for mercury-related reasons: https://www.fda.gov/food/foodborneillnesscontaminants/metals/ucm351781.htm https://www.fda.gov/food/foodborneillnesscontaminants/metals...
- fingerlocks 8y ago
  My doctor claims to have treated several fishermen in the past for mercury toxicity. This doctor has been practicing in what was historically a “fishermen’s neighborhood” for some 30 years (Ballard area of Seattle) so it seemed plausible. I have nothing but this weak anecdote to contribute to the discussion. But I’ll ask the doc for details next time I’m in and report back when the topic comes up again.

gabbygab 8y ago

What does that matter? If we get it from directly from plants we eat or indirectly through meat, you are still getting pesticides.

gpantazes 8y ago
Wouldn't it be interesting if we didn't get the same level of pesticides through meat & dairy? I think it's worthwhile information to point out.
goda90 8y ago
What if we go to regulate pesticides, and through lobbying and special interest groups, animal feed gets less regulation. It'd be good to know that the pesticides can affect people even if their grains and vegetables don't get sprayed.
jdietrich 8y ago
>What does that matter? It's actionable information. If you're worried about ingesting pesticides, you might believe that eating fewer vegetables and more meat would be a safer option. The simple fact of bioaccumulation means that this would be the wrong approach.
devmunchies 8y ago
The amount of plants a cow eats vs a human is a big difference. You'll be exposed to less pesticides if you just eat plants instead of eating the cow and plants. I'm talking about factory farming where the cow is fed large amounts of corn and soy.