ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2015
Fish consumption recommendations to conform to current advice in regard to mercury intake.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Heavy metals and minerals contents in pikeperch (Sander lucioperca), carp (Cyprinus carpio) and flathead grey mullet (Mugil cephalus) from Sidi Salem Reservoir (Tunisia): health risk assessment related to fish consumption.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2017Article
- Risk-Benefit Assessment of Monomethylmercury and Omega-3 Fatty Acid Intake for Ringed Seal Consumption with Particular Emphasis on Vulnerable Populations in the Western Canadian Arctic.Frontiers in nutrition · 2017Article
- Methylmercury and Total Mercury in Eels, Anguilla anguilla, from Lakes in Northeastern Poland: Health Risk Assessment.EcoHealth · 2016Article
- Assessing exposure risks for freshwater tilapia species posed by mercury and methylmercury.Ecotoxicology (London, England) · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article reviews fish consumption data, mercury tolerable intake values, and mercury (Hg) content in fish, based on several reports from the Food and Agriculture Organization and European Union. The study assumptions are valid based on the current established USEPA reference dose (RfD). Combining the number of meals (per week), amount of fish ingested (by meal), and levels of MeHg in fish, this study calculates and presents isocurves indicating the maximum number of fishmeal per week without exceeding the USEPA RfD for methylmercury (MeHg). RfD are assumed to be the "exposure dose that is likely to be without deleterious effect even if continued exposure occurs over a lifetime." The study points out that even considering a single 50-g fish meal per week, the USEPA RfD would be exceeded, triggered by values above 0.84 μg g(-1) of MeHg in fish, and this despite being allowed levels up to 1.0 μg g(-1) of MeHg in fish consumption!-Have we a health risk? Fish consumption is expected to be relatively stable, while anthropogenic mercury emissions are expected to stabilize or even to increase beyond current values. How many meals of fish per week can we have, combining the number of fish meals per week, amount of fish ingested by meal, and levels of MeHg in fish?
Indexed as
Identifiers
25948385What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.