Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by TheGator, Sep 4, 2013.
Should we worry about eating fish from the Pacific? Or for that matter any fish regardless of what ocean it comes from?
Serious question: Does radiation function like mercury, in that it accumulates in organisms as they go up the food chain?
For example, if there is a small amount of mercury in the water, krill and other small organisms accumulate it in their bodies. Small fish that eat krill accumulate that mercury in their bodies. As they go up the food chain to, say for example, tuna or, in the far east, dolphin, there can be a dangerous amount of mercury that is in the fish that is consumed by humans.
Does radiation function the same way? I genuinely don't know and am asking.
Not sure, but we should worry about being tricked into trusting fake news articles...
It depends. Fish are terrible at removing mercury from their bodies, so it accumulates a lot more. Radiation in the body (at least in humans) is more easily reduced over time.
The amount of fish you'd have to eat to get acute radiation poisoning would have to be extremely high just to get sick. And even then you'd probably become ill from a normal infection.
I mean there well may be stomach cancer down the road but you can get that from eating too many good steaks, too.
Let's hope this one is fake too:
I am pretty sure GWB is the culprit here.
That picture looks like a beaching/stranding. Had they died out in the ocean they would have been separated, eaten etc.
And how do they know its radiation?
I actually give money annually to both ocean related and whale related causes so I am one of the most sympathetic people here if this is true, but I didn't get it from that article.
So am I correctly understanding from your comments that mercury poisoning is more likely than radiation poisoning from eating fish?
And thus was born:
As I understand it. This isn't my specialty but as someone who's been lifting weights most of my life (and eating copious amounts of tuna as a result) I've looked into the whole mercury thing before. There's apparently somewhat unique biological circumstances that makes mercury particularly bad with regards to the metabolic functions of fish.
Any high dosage of radiation is bad, obviously, but you're not going to get a lot unless you eat a whale.
...slowly pushing away my whale dinner,,,,,
I think Fappy the Anti-Masturbation Dolphin is a dead giveaway.
So, Fappy wasnt presented the key to the city of Boston? :grin:
On general sanitary principles, you might want to think twice about Talapia raised in China, too. (That is ubiquitous in restaurants nowadays).
Actually, just say no to any food of any kind coming from China. No good.
mercury poisoning is usually limited to top predatory species who build up larger amounts of mercury from eating smaller reef fish. kingfish, barracuda, sharks are typical species where mercury accumulation occurs as I understand it.
Of course, I'm not a big whale eater, but I figured that, if it is a problem for whales, then it is probably also a problem for large pacific fish, such as tuna. Admittedly, that may be an erroneous assumption on my part.
I'm not totally onboard with the story, honestly.
Let's put it this way, if that story is real, it's the only real story on that website.
Poke around their other articles a bit.