It is well known that consumption of mercury is unhealthy and the amount ingested should be severely limited. The main source of mercury that the general public is constantly made aware of is fish, so people tend to limit their intake. However, there are many other foods that contain trace amounts of mercury that even their manufacturers do not know about. The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy found that various products that use high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) as a sweetener contain small amounts of mercury as a result of the way the HFCS is manufactured. Many beverages and snack foods in the United States contain high levels of HFCS, and often these products are geared towards children. Mercury is most dangerous for developing brains, as exposure to it may impair learning abilities.
Scientists have determined that there is no safe amount of mercury exposure. Most people, however, continue to eat fish and do not seem to develop severe brain defects. This suggests that more research must be done to determine whether consuming trace amounts of mercury is actually harmful. Regardless, all the minute quantities of mercury ingested still must add up. There are readily available alternatives to HFCS that do not contain mercury that manufacturers should consider. There are also alternative methods of making HFCS that would eliminate mercury from the process. Of course there are always economic costs to making such big changes, but the safety of society should outweigh the cost. It is highly disappointing that the FDA has completely overlooked the presence of mercury in so many products, even though it is fully aware of its presence. Since there are available manufacturing methods of HFCS that do not involve mercury-grade caustic soda, the FDA should outlaw this dangerous process. If no company was allowed to use it, then it would eliminate the competition between them. The government could tax foreign products that might compete with domestic trade. Before any drastic measures are taken, the danger of mercury should be thoroughly studied. Currently, however, all levels of mercury exposure are considered unsafe, so the government should begin the process of outlawing the presence of this toxin in food.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I definitely agree with this post in that the consumption of mercury is not healthy for our bodies. Trace amounts of mercury ingested by us today may be detrimental to our lives in the long run. As we read from the article in class, currently 4 plants across the country utilize mercury cell technology when manufacturing products.
ReplyDeleteHowever, this argument needs to be considered from an economical as well as from a practical standpoint. First off, we still do not know what is the maximum amount of mercury a person can intake without it causing direct harm to the body. What if the threshhold of withstanding the harmful effects of mercury ingestion is so high in our bodies that it would only affect everyone after X amount of years? And what if that X amount is far past our deaths? Then do we really need to worry about this problem? Should we still invest our economic resources to ammend this minor health issue then? Yes, the safety of society should outweigh the cost. But if the society is safe despite ingesting trace amounts of mercury, then what difference does it really make? The cost of converting to mercury-free technology runs in the millions of dollars, as stated in the article. Investing such a high amount into an economy that is currently in a recessionary period would prove to be a foolish plan. If our health is not affected until the late stages of our lives or even beyond that due to the mercury found in HFCS, then no change should be necessary at this point.
But again, Steph is right. More research still needs to be done before drastic measures are taken.