Analysis of the Sierra Club’s Alarmist Claims About the Health Impacts of Mercury

The White Paper:

This White Paper is a service of the Center for Science and Public Policy at www.scienceandpolicy.org 2004.
http://ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/sierra-03-25-04.pdf

Review The Summary and Conclusion of this White Paper:
http://ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/sierra-03-25-04.pdf

The Purpose of this White Paper:
To air the viewpoints of one activist group (Center for Science and Public Policy) about the recent methylmercury public activities of yet other, opposing, activist groups (Sierra Club, Friends of the Earth, and others).

Some Background, Methods, Results, Caveats, and Other Select Points:

• This is not a peer-reviewed, scientific paper.
• This paper was distributed in 2004.
• The paper states that several activist groups - including the Sierra Club and Friends of the Earth - are intentionally exaggerating the risk of methylmercury in fish to the U.S. fish-eating public. The paper continues that these other activist groups offer no convincing scientific evidence to back-up what the paper considers to be their outrageously dramatic claims about how methylmercury in fish is harming the U.S. fish-eating public.
• The paper states that misinformation about the risks of eating fish may harm the U.S. public if the public then eats less fish because fish is such a valuable source of good nutrition for all people.
• The paper states that activist groups’ misguided efforts in the methylmercury-fish eating debate actually harm minorities, the old, the poor, women, and children by scaring these groups of people from eating fish with its good fatty acids.The paper accuses the Sierra Club of contributing to several popular, alarmist, mercury pollution ad campaigns including:
  1. “Zero Mercury Campaign”;
  2. “Out of Control and Close to Home”;
  3. “Cycle of Harm”; and
  4. “Clean the Rain Campaign.”

A Bottom Line:
The paper concludes that the scientifically-questionable accusations in paid advertisements and public policy initiatives by activist groups including the Sierra Club and Friends of the Earth are most likely politically and financially motivated - and have little-to-nothing to do with advancing the public good using peer-reviewed science.

Find This Scientific Paper for Your Review:
Analysis of the Sierra Club’s Alarmist Claims About the Health Impacts of Mercury. 2004.
http://ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/sierra-03-25-04.pdf