'Common good

Perhaps the greatest shock to many of those who read the headlines was the realization that contaminated food was being sold by the ton despite the vast bureaucratic apparatus of the capitalist state supposedly watching over the 'common good.

Yet both in America and Britain, the mercury contamination caught the authorities completely unawares. Indeed, according to the 'New Scientist', the investigation that triggered the crisis started as a joke!

At the beginning of last December, Professor Bruce McDuffie of the State University of New York at Binghamton took time off from investigating the mercury content of fish from the Susuchana River and -at the suggestion of his students and wife - examined some tinned tuna.

Serious turn

'But what started out as a joke soon took a serious turn when they discovered a mercury conent of over 0.5 parts per million n a can taken from the kitchen Mozambique and Guinea and throughout the British and French neo-colonies of Africa and Asia.

Egypt and other Arab states and his students went on to examine other types of fish, available to the public in large quantities.

They soon discovered that some swordfish steaks notched up a mercury level of 1.3 ppm and the FDA was informed.

Once again the FDA analyses confirmed McDuffe's results.

Consternation Of course, this sudden spate of embarrassing revelations caused some consternation in government circles and the FDA soon announced that everything was under control. There was no danger, you see, provided you didn't eat too much tuna!

Such naïve conclusions are not peculiar to the US.

In Sweden, a 1 ppm level is considered safe, provided fish is not eaten more than once a Despite the fact that 5,000 tons of mercury a year, out of an annual world production of 9,000 tons, finds its way into the oceans, there is relatively little cash spent on relevant research and no internationally accepted occupation and existence is recognized by the Kremlin.

The state with whom, for the sake of managing imperialist investments in reopened canal consuming 0.1 mg of the metal daily-equivalent to a 200 gram can of tuna fish containing 0.5 ppm of mercury!

McDuffie's findings were not altogether unexpected. The major source of imported tuna for both the US and Britain is Japan, where 43 people died from mercury poisoning between 1953 and 1960 and 68 others suffered serious injury from fish contaminated by industrial waste containing the metal.

The fish came from Minamata Bay and subsequent investigations revealed mercury levels of up to 50 times the accepted danger level!

More recently in Sweden there have been cases of mercury poisoning trom eating fish from freshwater lakes heavily polluted by paper and pulp mills.

Such pollution-although understandably heavy in the vicinity neither loses nits tethal Planters powers nor remains localized. Quite the contrary.

The mercury decomposes into the extremely persistent and deadly methyl mercury and finds its way into the natural food chain via the tuna—a deep-sea inhabitant — and other marine life.

Investigations have shown that far from areas of major industry mercury pollution can reach high levels.

Sharks

Apparently levels of 1 ppm are common among tunas and sharks in the Indian Ocean.

It is clear even on the present evidence that only the tip of the iceberg has been revealed.

The extent of food contamination is plainly more widespread than governments would like to admit and manufacturers would care to have revealed.

In the US, the toxic tuna appears to have jolted the administration into introducing certain safety measures a little earlier than planned.

On December 23, Nixon signed an executive order requiring private industry to meet certain standards which will be laid down by the Environmental ProIts final decision on the contaminated tuna even astounded the supermarket chiets, who had removed tinned fish from their shelves in anticipation of the Tories following the US example.

However, despite the detection t mercurs • levels as high as hose found by the FDA, the hsi was proclaimed safe to eat.

Safety

Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries James Prior noted that the levels-between 0.1 and 0.7 ppm - were within the safety limits set in 'some other countries', including Sweden, and that there was no reason why the housewife should not buy it.

In any case, the argument continues, we eat only one-tenth as much tuna as the Americans. mented by other contaminated foods could add up to a dangerous overall mercury level.

All of this does not give much confidence in Prior's assurance that 'intensive monitoring' in future of all possible sources of methyl mercury in all foods will add up to much.

Satisfied with the Tory decision, the supermarkets are now relying on short memories. Said one spokesman: 'Consumers may be affected by the scare for a while, but whether it will be a lasting effect remains to be seen?

One Labour MP- was even heard to say that he could not understand why the Tories had not withdrawn tuna from the shops, unless it regarded profits from sales as more important than human life'.

He could be right!