|
02-28-2006, 11:08 AM
|
|
Rank: Heavyweight
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,314
|
|
Environmental Defense's survey
Quote:
Environmental Defense contacted 75 companies whose fish oil products are commonly found in supermarkets, pharmacies and health food stores, and asked them (1) whether they purify their fish oil to reduce or remove environmental contaminants; (2) what methods they use to purify their fish oil; and (3) what standards they comply with regarding acceptable levels of contaminants.
Environmental Defense solicited information on mercury, PCBs and dioxins, since these three pollutants comprise the majority of consumption advisories for fish caught in the United States and could also be present in fish used for fish oil supplements. (Generally, fish oil comes from fish that are caught to feed animals, not humans.)
What standards does Environmental Defense consider sufficiently stringent?
There are a variety of standards for allowable limits of contaminants in food (including dietary supplements). For this study, Environmental Defense evaluated standards from the following government agencies: the State of California (Proposition 65), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, and the European Union.
Surprisingly, allowable levels of contaminants vary greatly between agencies, with the FDA's standards being the least stringent. PCB standards vary the most. The FDA's tolerance level for PCBs is 2,000 parts per billion (ppb), while the State of California's limit under Proposition 65 (the most stringent standard) is only 90 ppb, assuming daily consumption of one 1,000 mg fish oil capsule. Similar disparities exist for mercury and dioxins. Since EPA's and California's Proposition 65 limits were the most protective of human health, we used these standards as the baseline for our survey.
In addition, the Council for Responsible Nutrition (listed at right) -- a trade association comprising many of the companies surveyed (see chartfor full results) -- established voluntary standards equal to or more stringent than those set by EPA and California's Proposition 65.
Survey results
Many of the companies contacted provided high-caliber responses, indicating that they take potential health risks from contaminated fish oil supplements seriously. Most companies said they used molecular distillation and steam deodorization technologies to remove environmental pollutants from their fish oil supplements. These highly effective purification processes use a combination of pressure and high temperature to separate pollutants from omega-3 fatty acids.
Overall, more than 80% (61) of the 75 companies contacted verified that they have met the strictest U.S. standards for contaminants. Twenty-one companies' responses were incomplete, and seven companies did not respond (note that 14 companies provided complete information for some products while incomplete for others). One company, Omega Protein, said it complied with the least stringent standards (FDA's) but did not respond to our follow-up inquiries about whether it also adhered to other stricter standards. (See chartfor full results.)
In short, most fish oil supplements appear to be adequately purified and safe. Consumers who take fish oil supplements should consider purchasing them from companies that verified they have met the strictest U.S. standards for contaminants.
|
Taken from here
|