national public health institute, finland fish to eat or not to eat; that is the question olli...
TRANSCRIPT
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
FISH To Eat or Not to Eat; that is the question
Olli LeinoNational Public Health Institute
KTL KuopioEKO/WET research seminar, Konnevesi May 7th 2008
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Outline
1. Fish consumption2. Chemical contaminants in fish
3. Beneficial nutrients in fish4. Benefit-Risk comparisons
5. Conclusions
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Fish consumption in Finland
RKTL
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Fish consumption in Europe• Top consumers: Spain, Mediterranian and
Scandinavian countries
• Salmon and herring are particularly popular in the Scandinavian countries
• Other seafood (mollusc, crustaceans) not included
in this presentation
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Chemical contaminants
I Dioxin/PCB
II Mercury
III Other toxins • Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE)• Tributyltin (TBT)• Heavy metals (cadmium, led, and arsenic)
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
I Dioxins and PCBs• Highly toxic (TCDD)
• Very persistent
• Lipid soluble, accumulate in food web
• TCDD a human carcinogen
• Developmental disorders, hormone disruptors, effects on immune system
• Information based mostly on animal studies!
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Domestic cases: River Kymijoki
http://www.kymisun.com
http://www.perho.info
http://www.ymparisto.fi
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Other dioxin cases• Seveso (Italy)
– Explosion in a chemical factory → a massive exposure to the environment
– Increase in cancer incidence was not detected in the
exposed population.- Less boys than girls were born - Dental aberrations
• Viktor Justsenko (Ukraine)– presidential candidate Justsenko was poisonned with dioxin →
chloroacne (very high dose)
© Wikipedia
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Mercury• Found everywhere on the globe• Accumulates in food web, particularly rich in
predatory fish (In Finland e.g. pike, perch, and pike-perch)
• The most toxic form is called methyl mercury- Affects central nervous system (CNS) and the brains - Effects on blood-vascular system - High dose effects:
- Malfunction on limbs - Visual impairment- Hearing and speaking impaired- Insanity, paralysis, coma and death- Cognitive effects to children
© Fish and wildlife research institute, Florida
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Mercury cases• Minamata disease 1956 Japan
– Sewage from a factory contained huge amounts of mercury– Fish, animals, and people were exposed to the extremely high
mercury concentrations– Over 2000 victims, nearly 1000 deaths
• Niigata Minamata disease 1965 Japani– ”crazy cats” – Human symptoms later on
• Iraq 1971 seed grain– 459 casualties, thousands of people with symptoms in CNS
• Extreme global cases: nothing similar to this has happened in Finland– Ecological effects?
© Wikipedia
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Polybrominated flame retardants (PBDE)
• Used widely to coat plastic and rubber• Accumulative• Preliminary human health studies
– Acute toxicity low– Some liver, and nervous system damage in chronic
animal studies. – No proven direct risk to humans found yet
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Health benefits of fish consumption• Omega-3 fatty acids
– EPA, DHA, ALA• Vitamin D
– Fat soluble vitamin– Trough diet, skin can manufacture it with sunlight
(Sunlight in Finland?)– Finns get 50% of vitamin D from fish consumption
• Many other micronutrients
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Other health benefits• Healthy low-fat diet
– Lowers prevalence of national diseases due to overweight (cardiovascular diseases, cancers, diabetes)
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Omega-3 fatty acids• Very beneficial to heart and blood-vascular system
(e.g. coronary heart disease, myocardial infarctions) – Lowers several risk factors (blood pressure,
arrhytmias, liquidity of blood, elasticity of blood veins)
• Several beneficial effects on brains– (antidepressant, vision, IQ, memory,
ADHD, Alzheimer…) – Skin and joints (rheumatism)
www.nu-mega.com
Wikimedia.org
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Health benefits of vitamin D• Contributes to development of bone and muscles • Improves immunesystem and helps fighting
against infections• May prevent/slow down some cancers (prostate,
breast, ovary, colorectal) • Helps preventing diabetes
– Young children in particular need vitamin D
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
How to assess risks/benefits originating from our environment?
• The goal is to serve the decision-making – E.g. fish consumption from the Baltic Sea
• Open Risk Assessment vrt. YVA• Assessing benefits as well is crucial
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Comparing risks and benefits• Difficult if there are no commensurable end points• Easy comparisons e.g.
– Deaths (cancer deaths vs.) avoided coronary heart disease deaths
– IQ points (mercury vs. omega-3)• Difficult e.g.
– Malfunctions of arms vs. decreased prevalence in depression
– Dental aberrations vs. decrease in blood pressure
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Benefit/Risk study on the domestic fish (Leino et al, Risk Analysis 2008)
• Commensurable and relevant end points→ avoided coronary heart disease deaths vs.
cancer deaths– Commensurable = same unit (number of deaths)– Very relevant diseases societally
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Cancer deaths vs. avoided coronary heart disease deaths
Health effects of domestic fish consumption in the Helsinki metropolitan area
Avoided coronary heart disease deaths due to omega-3 from fish
Cancer deaths due to dioxins exposure from fish
+170/year-1/year
Note: Risk estimate was calculated by intentionally using pessimistic assumptions whereas calculation of health benefits relied on the best available knowledge. This was performed not to underestimate the risk.
Leino et al 2007
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Two different consumption scenarios
-1.2 -0.7
-34-9.3
136
174
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
DEROGATION NO DEROGATIONCURRENT
PRACTICE PM EURO IV&V PM
Scenario/decision
Ris
ks
me
an
(de
ath
s=
ne
ga
tiv
e v
alu
es
) a
nd
B
en
efi
ts m
ea
n(a
vo
ide
d d
ea
ths
=p
os
itiv
e
va
lue
s)
Benefits
Risks
-0.7
Leino et al 2008
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Risks
-1.2 -0.7
-34-9.3
136
174
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
DEROGATION NO DEROGATIONCURRENT
PRACTICE PM EURO IV&V PM
Scenario/decision
Ris
ks
me
an
(de
ath
s=
ne
ga
tiv
e v
alu
es
) a
nd
B
en
efi
ts m
ea
n(a
vo
ide
d d
ea
ths
=p
os
itiv
e
va
lue
s)
Benefits
Risks
Cancer deaths in Helsinki due to fish consumption
-0.7
Leino et al 2008
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Risks and benefits
-1.2 -0.7
-34-9.3
136
174
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
DEROGATION NO DEROGATIONCURRENT
PRACTICE PM EURO IV&V PM
Scenario/decision
Ris
ks
me
an
(de
ath
s=
ne
ga
tiv
e v
alu
es
) a
nd
B
en
efi
ts m
ea
n(a
vo
ide
d d
ea
ths
=p
os
itiv
e
va
lue
s)
Benefits
Risks
Cancer deaths in Helsinki due to fish consumption
Avoided coronary heart disease deaths due to omega-3 intake from fish
-0.7
Leino et al 2008
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Lower fish consumption and the effects on human health
-1.2 -0.7
-34-9.3
136
174
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
DEROGATION NO DEROGATIONCURRENT
PRACTICE PM EURO IV&V PM
Scenario/decision
Ris
ks
me
an
(de
ath
s=
ne
ga
tiv
e v
alu
es
) a
nd
B
en
efi
ts m
ea
n(a
vo
ide
d d
ea
ths
=p
os
itiv
e
va
lue
s)
Benefits
Risks
Cancer deaths in Helsinki due to fish consumption
Avoided coronary heart disease deaths due to omega-3 intake from fish
Situation if commerial sale of salmon and herring were banned = Commission Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006
Difference -38
Difference +0.5
Päätös
-0.7
Leino et al 2008
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
In comparison fine particles from heavy-duty vehicles
-1.2 -0.7
-34-9.3
136
174
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
DEROGATION NO DEROGATIONCURRENT
PRACTICE PM EURO IV&V PM
Scenario/decision
Ris
ks
me
an
(de
ath
s=
ne
ga
tiv
e v
alu
es
) a
nd
B
en
efi
ts m
ea
n(a
vo
ide
d d
ea
ths
=p
os
itiv
e
va
lue
s)
Benefits
Risks
In comparison, the annual deaths caused by the fine particles from heavy-duty vehicles alone in Helsinki
Cancer deaths in Helsinki due to fish consumption
Avoided coronary heart disease deaths due to omega-3 intake from fish
Situation after decreased salmon and herring consumption
-0.7-0.7
Leino et al 2008
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Some open questions• Selection of endpoints (cancer deaths for
dioxins, avoided CHDs for omega-3)? • Geographical variation in concentrations in fish?• Exposure-response for nutrients/contaminants?• Imported fish and the effect on health? • Vitamin capsules instead of eating fish?• Sensitive population subgroups (pregnant
women, children)?
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Other comparisons/future studies• Methyl mercury and omega-3 and childs IQ
– Preliminary results show close to zero effect• New methods to assess risks/benefits
– DALY (Disability adjusted life years)– ORA (Open risk assessment)
• Comprehensive benefit/risk study– All fish consumption health endpoints included
(Beneris EU-project)• All end points summarized into one answer using DALYs and
Bayesian Belief Networks (BBN)
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Other studies/literature• Mozaffarian and Rimm. 2006. Journal of the
American Medical Association. • Turunen et al 2008. Manuscript. • Hites et al. 2004. Science. • Tuomisto et al. 2004. Science.
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Conclusion• Fish contains both beneficial and harmfull
ingredients• Assessing risks and benefits is not straightforward• Majoriry of both national and international studies
consider the benefits larger than the risks• The most interesting/challenging step in the future
is an attemp to combine apples and oranges (make risks and benefits commensurable)
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
To eat or not to eat?
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
To eat or not to eat?• Go ahead!
• The official recommendation is 2-3 times a week. It is also advisable to eat various fish species.
• Sensitive population subgroups (pregnant women, young children) should follow special guidelines
National Public Health Institute, Finlandww
w.kt
l.fi
Thank you!
CommentsSuggestionsQuestions
www.cyclesense.co.uk