|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Join
the Cherab
Foundation's
free email support discussion list: For
information about communication impairments, see Cherab's
partner informational site, Speechville
Express Read more about The Late Talker, a new book for families of children who are late to talk. |
Letter
to the Food and Drug Administration Dr. Marjorie l.
Davidson,
Center for Food Safety and Nutrition Food and Drug Administration Washington, D.C. Dear Dr. Davidson, Please
forgive my unsolicited appeal to you. A recent FDA advisory recommended
limited consumption of specific fish (shark, swordfish, tilefish and
king mackerel) by pregnant women, due to potentially high mercury
levels has relevance for fish oil supplements marketed for their omega-3
oil content. In regard to fish oil supplements, the population at large
does not know that MeHg binds to proteins and therefore it is not of
concern in highly purified fish oils. They also have relevance for fish
consumption decisions of the population at large. These recommendations
come at a time when the American Heart Association recommended the consumption
of two fish meals per week (preferably fatty fish) to the general population
as a
means of omega-3 fatty acid intake and reduction of risks from cardiovascular disease. The FDA recommendations could discourage pregnant women from consuming perfectly healthy oily fish and this could jeopardize their intake of omega-3s, specifically DHA essential for the fetus's brain development and the mental health of the mother. I am asking a simple question. Given that the Omega-3 Research Institute, Inc., (O3RI) has already established a program to provide high quality oils for clinical trials (see http://www.omega3ri.org/), could O3RI be of assistance to the FDA in clarifying the implications of the above FDA recommendations for the general public? For example: through a specific educational program and/or through establishment of a clearinghouse for information on environmental toxins in fatty fish and perhaps fish oil supplements, etc. The public is
reacting in a panic mode, especially because medical professionals,
OBGYNs, pediatricians and cardiologists are discouraging the public
from eating fish. I heard recently a medical call-in radio program in
which a cardiologist, involved with nutrition and physical exercise
was discouraging the listeners from eating fish with the rhetorical
question: "Why would you want to store mercury in your body?" The interviewer's
response to that was: "We should remember that, it is good advice".
It would be very
unfortunate if regulations meant to preserve the health of pregnant
mothers and their developing embryos and fetuses would result in an
aggravated omega-3 essential fatty acid deficiency harming the developing
fetus brain and eye development, the newborn, the developing child and
the mother. In essence it could harm the entire population by endangering
the cardiovascular health of those who are above 40 years of age and
prone to coronary heart disease.
Please let me
know if I can be of any assistance to you in avoiding potential undesirable
side effects to the recent well meaning ruling.
Sincerely, Robert Katz, Ph.D.
Director of Research
Cherab Foundation President Omega-3 Research Institute, Inc. 3 Bethesda Metro Center, #700 Bethesda, MD 20814 Tel: 301-961-1918 Fax: 301-417-9087 E-mail: omega3ri@aol.com Web URL: http://www.omega3ri.org/ |
|
||
|
|
Cherab
Foundation
|
|
|
|
|
|
