I'm still on a quest for guidance on the whole fish topic. The same few questions keep cycling through my head. How often should I eat fish? What kind of fish should I eat? What are the real health dangers surrounding fish consumption? I keep searching for answers. And now and then, I catch some good advice about the topic.

If you find yourself floundering at times, like me, here are seven tips you might find helpful.

• The National Academy of Sciences, the American Heart Association, and the World Health Organization all encourage regular fish consumption. Sure, there are legitimate concerns about environmental issues, but experts still say the benefits of eating a variety of fish far outweigh the risks. Eating fish protects the heart and reduces the risk for Alzheimer's disease, arthritis, strokes, depression, bipolar disorder, and our favorite topic here at this site: cancer.

Ever wonder what fish to eat, what fish to avoid, what fish is healthy, what fish is cancer-causing? I do.

I'm looking into this whole fish thing. And while my search for information is in no way exhaustive and my findings are far from conclusive, I have found some interesting fishy facts and figures.

Think about this:

Fish definitely has health benefits. It's low in fat, high in protein, and rich in omega-3 fatty acids. Americans love this. How do I know? Because on average, each of us eats a record 16.6 pounds of fish every year. Our intake of shrimp and salmon has doubled, in fact, since 1994.

Fish definitely has its drawbacks too. Headlines repeatedly warn us of dangerous contaminants in lakes, rivers, and oceans. Don't forget about mercury, the biggest fish health hazard. It's been linked to neurological problems in developing fetuses and children, making consumption of shark, swordfish, tilefish (aka golden snapper or golden bass), king mackeral, canned albacore tuna, and tuna steaks a no-no for hoards of women and children.

For just about everyone else, the benefits of eating moderate amounts of seafood greatly outweigh the risks. Just watch out for those PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls) -- possible carcinogenic chemical compounds that end up in some seafood.

To avoid PCBs, steer clear of farmed salmon which contains high levels of these compounds or limit your intake to less than one single eight-ounce meal per month. Opt for the wild variety of salmon to avoid this concern altogether. Or take the side of the FDA. Their reports say salmon is a powerhouse when it comes to protecting heart and developing cancer from this source is much lower than the risk of heart disease.

Source: Good Housekeeping, April 2007

Welcome back from the weekend! Here is a review of what we were talking about during the second week in July in our other health blogs.

From The Cardio Blog:

• Bucindolol: experimental heart failure drug.
• Mammograms can find heart health problems.
• Eggs: bad or not bad for heart health -- which is it?
• The clock of life and time of day determines heart health.
• Extreme obesity raises mortality rate in women.
• Austrailian stem cell research innovates new heart treatment.
• Public physical activity program helps weight loss, lower blood pressure.
• Tuna imported from Latin America has highest mercury level.
• Eating less helps slow aging process.
• Teens helped to learn healthy diet habits with household food rules.
• Volunteer work helps seniors stay active and healthy.
• Working overtime worse for womens health.
• Aging and single living combined linked to higher heart disease risk.
• Tubby kids motivated to exercise by reward of TV time.
• Humidity and high temps linked to rise in summer heart attacks.
• Comedian Red Button dies of vascular disease.
• Migraine aura linked to increased heart attack stroke risk.
  

From The Diabetes Blog:

• Martial arts black belt uses youth group to fight diabetes.
• FDA approves GlaxoSmithKline diabetes drug.
• Pink Floyd Syd Barrett dies from diabetes complications.
• Update on fatal NC car crash involving diabetic driver.
• Major study links Type 2 diabetes and glaucoma risk.
• Life insurance industry plays catch-up.
• A1c Champions program trains diabetes mentors.
• Danish study confirms suspected diabetes, multiple sclerosis link.
• Debate continues on virtues, shortcomings of inhalable insulin, Exubera.
• Blogger's advice to T2 diabetics: follow in footsteps of movie producer Weinstein.
• Diabetes, obesity blamed for sky-high US kidney failure rates.
• Canadians await approval of inhalable insulin.
• Lifestyle ed could greatly reduce diabetes onset in older Americans, say researchers.

To your good health! To a great week!

Consumer Reports has completed a review of the FDA testing on mercury levels found in canned tuna and issued new safety concerns. While the focus is on a clear alert for pregnant women and the damage mercury-contaminated tuna can cause to a developing fetus, mercury is also known to have an adverse effect on the immune system of adults. For anyone interested in cancer prevention, a healthy immune system is a vital first-line defense to keeping cancer from developing in the first place. Mercury, once consumed, can stay in the body for years.

Because of the new information provided by Consumer Reports regarding the dangers of canned tuna, and because fish is an excellent cancer prevention food, here is a list of fish that have shown consistently low-levels of mercury during testing and are safe to eat daily. Wild salmon and tilapia can be safely eaten every day. Flounder, sole, mullet, Atlantic mackerel and crab can be safely eaten once a week. In addition, Consumer Reports found fish-oil supplements to be a safe, reliable way to get omega-3 fatty acids. You can check state agencies and the Environmental Protection Agency advisories for contaminant levels of fish caught where you live here.

Last year, ten people took part in an investigative study to test for the presence of toxic chemicals in their body. The Toxic-Free Legacy Coalition took hair, blood, and urine samples and tested for plasticizing chemicals known as phthalates; the flame retardants PBDEs; lead, arsenic, and mercury; perfluorinated chemicals like those used to make Teflon; and pesticides -- including the now banned PCBs and DDT. Many of these are know to increase cancer risks. The purpose of the study was two-fold -- the researchers wanted to know which chemicals are getting into our bodies, at what levels, and to better understand the potential harm posed by poor regulation of chemicals. Second, the researchers hope that by understanding the dangers we face, better solutions can be developed to eliminate the exposures to toxins from the environment. The results shocked and surprised the participants in the study. It might disturb you too, as most of us carry a similar body burden of cancer-causing chemicals.

The results of an Environmental Working Group Body Burden testing program has revealed that mothers and daughters share a common body burden of at least 35 environmental cancer-causing chemicals including phthalate plasticizers, lead, methyl mercury, brominated flame retardants, and Teflon and Scotchgard perfluorochemicals PFOA and PFOS. These pollutants appear to be passed from a mother's placenta or breast milk into her daughter's body. Some of the key findings in this testing program found:

• Daughters tested had more chemicals in common with their mothers than with a group of 16 other women who were tested. This underscores the long-lasting influence of the pollution passed from mother to daughter, and their shared exposures as the child grows up. 
• The chemical burden inherited by daughters at birth will last for decades, some for a lifetime -- and the daughters will pass this same chemical burden on to their children.
• Chemicals that persist in the body were found at higher levels in mothers than daughters, showing how chemicals can build up in the body over a lifetime.
  

According to EWG, the six biomonitoring programs -- conducted between 2000 and 2006 -- revealed a total of 455 different pollutants, pesticides, and industrial chemicals in the bodies or cord blood of 72 different people -- including ten newborn babies with an average of 200 chemicals in each child.

"EPA studies show that children from birth to age two are ten times more sensitive to cancer-causing chemicals than adults," said Jane Houlihan, EWG's vice president for research. "Scientists have found that chemicals toxic effects can be passed down for four generations, by causing permanent genetic changes that can be inherited. A stew of toxic chemicals is not the legacy mothers want to hand down to their children." To read an overview of all results from EWG's Body Burden testing program, go here.

Three days ago, I went all Erin Brockovich about the news that wasn't being reported in the news reports about the Nevada Cancer Institute opening offices in Elko and Fallon. As initially reported by the local Nevada television and print media, this was an effort to help provide outreach, education and support to the projected 11,000 Nevadans who will be diagnosed with cancer this year. At that time, not one of the news reports mentioned anything about the water supply, or the fact that Fallon is classified as a cancer cluster town, or why the offices were being opened. Days later, you can go here, and here, and even here, to be told that University of Arizona scientists think they may have a found the reason for the unusually high number of childhood cancer cases in Sierra Vista and Fallon, Nevada.