A Sea in Flames - Carl Safina [112]
We’re told, “The experts can detect contamination of one part per million. Newer, less experienced state screeners, up to ten parts per million—that’s a single drop in a gallon of water.” We’re told, “You have known experts who are in the room who, in fact, can help direct the trainees towards this sort of smell you should be getting. You might get it in your tongue. You might get it in the back of your nasal cavity. You might feel it right here.”
I feel like I’m back in the Middle Ages. And while we’re sniffing, I’d like to know why we aren’t using dogs. Do we have agency experts sniffing for dope and bombs in airports? Do expert hunters chase rabbits with their expert noses to the ground? C’mon.
We’re told, “NOAA officials are on high alert to prevent any seafood containing oil from being caught and sold.” The professor says, “Believe me, I don’t believe someone would go ahead and attempt to eat something that is tainted, because it is very aromatic and it’s quite unpleasant.”
Really? Is that all you’ve got? Sorry; I have a lot of respect for professors, but I don’t believe her. If tainted food always smelled bad, people wouldn’t get sick from eating tainted food.
We’re told that in addition to using sniffers, the agency sends hundreds of samples to a lab in Seattle for chemical analysis. So far, just one sample came back tainted. That, I believe. I’d reserve small bunny sniffs for detecting, say, carrots.
Despite splotches of brown crude that continue washing up here and there, Louisiana plans an early August opening of state waters east of the Mississippi to catching fish like redfish, mullet, and speckled trout. Shrimping season will begin in mid-August. But oysters and blue crabs will remain off-limits. “I probably would put oysters at the top of the concern list and I don’t think there’s a close second,” says Dauphin Island Sea Lab director George Crozier.
What about seafood in general? The oil contaminants of most health concern, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, or PAHs (which can cause cancer), also show up in other everyday foods, such as grilled meat. A NOAA spokesman says the levels in Gulf seafood “are pretty typical of what we see in other areas.” That’s because they’re common in oil, vehicle exhaust, food grown in polluted soil, tobacco smoke, wood smoke, and meat cooked at high temperatures. NOAA found that Alaskan villagers’ smoked salmon contained far more PAHs than shellfish tainted by the Exxon Valdez spill. Live fish metabolize PAHs rather than store them.
For instance, the highest level of the PAH naphthalene found in fish from recently reopened Florida Panhandle waters was 1.3 parts per billion, well below the federally considered safe limit of 3.3 parts per billion. Federal regulators say they’re sure the fish will be safe. They say that of the more than 3,500 samples taken from the Gulf during the spill, none contained enough oil or dispersant to be harmful to people.
In fact, regulators did not turn up a single piece of seafood that was unsafe to eat—even at the height of the eruption. Unlike certain contaminants, such as mercury, which accumulates in fish, fish quickly metabolize the oil’s most common cancer-causing compounds. Crabs and oysters metabolize these chemicals more slowly. So far, shellfish testing is just beginning, and many shellfish areas remain closed.
It’s not appetizing to think about eating a fish that’s been neutralizing cancer-causing chemicals, no matter how promptly and efficiently. But I’m confident that an occasional meal, or a bit more, would be safe. Safety is a relative term, of course. I drive a car—the most dangerous thing most of us do routinely. We live in a world of hazards, including some pretty awful artificial chemicals and food containing God knows what. On the other hand, we have higher average life expectancies than ever in history, especially if you subtract people who eat too much and who smoke.
So if the feds say the seafood is safe, I would be willing to put a little initial squeamishness