Our Mission: We are igniting a movement that inspires parents to protect young children from harmful chemicals. Donate ยป
Charity Navigator 4 Star CharityBlog
Debate Over Mercury in HFCS: Answers to Frequently Asked Questions
Janelle Sorensen
Wednesday, February 04, 2009
As with most exposes revealing new sources of daily contamination or potentially risky health impacts, there’s contention and disagreement (particularly from industry representatives) about the validity of the claims. Thus, the debate begins.
There is one argument in particular that I’m personally tired of hearing: “These exposures are so tiny, there’s nothing for consumers to worry about.”
Here’s my response for this particular situation and in general: Mercury, in any form, is toxic. This exposure may be less consequential for grown men, but for women of childbearing age, pregnant mothers, and small children, it could pose a risk. In addition, this exposure may be small per sample, but cumulatively it could have a significant impact. HFCS is nearly ubiquitous in processed foods and makes up 10% of the average American’s diet. Thus, exposure is regular (not like methylmercury from fish consumption, which is only an occasional exposure for the average consumer). Repeated “tiny” exposures add up quickly over time.
Moreso, we are continually being told that specific exposures to a variety of contaminants and chemicals are so small there’s nothing to worry about. But, what about all of these different tiny exposures added together day after day? What is the impact from an “insignificant” exposure to mercury in HFCS + an “insignificant” exposure to BPA from canned foods + an “insignificant” exposure to phthalates in personal care products + an “insignificant” exposure to pesticides in food + everything else we are exposed to every day?
A doctor wouldn’t prescribe a hundred different medications at the same time without examining how they might interact, so why are we allowing ourselves to regularly ingest, breathe, drink, and absorb so many neurotoxicants, carcinogens, hormone disruptors and who knows what else from everyday products and food? We really don’t know what this chemical soup might do to us, so it only makes sense to reduce whatever “ingredients” we can. Mercury-contaminated HFCS is an easy one to reduce, if not entirely eliminate.
While this exposure may not be the highest priority on the public health agenda, and certainly doesn’t merit mass hysteria, it still deserves attention. The FDA needs to take a serious, unbiased look at the issue. And, until they do, it’s easy enough to at least reduce, if not entirely avoid exposing vulnerable populations to HFCS.
For answers to more of the frequently asked questions regarding the study and report visit IATP.
P.S. The Corn Refiner’s Association hired a consulting firm to assess the mercury study and report. No big surprise - the author, Dennis Paustenbach, refutes just about every word. And, in case you couldn’t guess, he and the firm have represented industry for decades making piles of money from the likes of Exxon and Monsanto.
